( PDF ) The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah

Download PDF

ads:

THE

LIFE AND TIMES

JESUS THE MESSIAH

ALFRED EDERSHEIM, M.A.Oxon., D.D. Ph.D.

THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS, AND SCHOLARS

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

THESE VOLUMES

ARE RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED

PREFACE

THE FIRST EDITION.

In presenting these volumes to the reader, I must offer an

explanation, - though I would fain hope that such may not be

absolutely necessary. The title of this book must not be understood as

implying any pretence on my part to write a 'Life of Christ' in the

strict sense. To take the lowest view, the materials for it do not

exist. Evidently the Evangelists did not intend to give a full record

of even the outward events in that History; far less could they have

thought of compassing the sphere or sounding the depths of the Life of

Him, Whom they present to us as the God-Man and the Eternal Son of the

Eternal Father. Rather must the Gospels be regarded as four different

aspects in which the Evangelists viewed the historical Jesus of

Nazareth as the fulfilment of the Divine promise of old, the Messiah

of Israel and the Saviour of man, and presented Him to the Jewish and

Gentile world for their acknowledgment as the Sent of God, Who

revealed the Father, and was Himself the Way to Him, the Truth, and

the Life. And this view of the Gospel-narratives underlies the

figurative representation of the Evangelist in Christian

Symbolism.[1]1

In thus guarding my meaning in the choice of the title, I have already

ads:

Livros Grátis

http://www.livrosgratis.com.br

Milhares de livros grátis para download.

indicated my own standpoint in this book. But in another respect I

wish to disclaim having taken any predetermined dogmatic standpoint at

the outset of my investigations. I wished to write, not for a definite

purpose, be it even that of the defence of the faith, - but rather to

let that purpose grow out of the book, as would be pointed out by the

course of independent study, in which arguments on both sides should

be impartially weighed and facts ascertained. In this manner I hoped

best to attain what must be the first object in all research, but

especially in such as the present: to ascertain, as far as we can, the

truth, irrespective of consequences. And thus also I hoped to help

others, by going, as it were, before them, in the path which their

enquires must take, and removing the difficulties and entanglements

which beset it. So might I honestly, confidently, and, in such a

matter, earnestly, ask them to follow me, pointing to the height to

which such enquires must lead up. I know, indeed, that there is

something beyond and apart from this; even the restful sense on that

height, and the happy outlook from it. But this is not within the

province of one man to give to another, nor yet does it come in the

way of study, however earnest and careful; it depends upon, and

implies the existence of a subjective state which comes only by the

direction given to our enquires by the true _djg_z (St John xvi. 13).

This statement of the general object in view will explain the course

pursued in these enquiries. First and foremost, this book was to be

study of the Life of Jesus the Messiah, retaining the general

designation, as best conveying to others the subject to be treated.

But, secondly, since Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew, spoke to, and moved

among Jews, in Palestine, and at a definite period of its history, it

was absolutely necessary to view that Life and Teaching in all its

surroundings of place, society, popular life, and intellectual or

religious development. This would form not only the frame in which to

set the picture of the Christ, but the very background of the picture

itself. It is, indeed, most true that Christ spoke not only to the

Jews, to Palestine, and to that time, but - of which history has given

the evidence - to all men and to all times. Still He spoke first and

directly to the Jews, and His words must have been intelligible to

them, His teaching have reached upwards from their intellectual and

religious standpoint, even although it infinitely extended the horizon

so as, in its full application, to make it wide as the bounds of earth

and time. Nay, to explain the bearing of the religious leaders of

Israel, from the first, towards Jesus, it seemed also necessary to

trace the historical development of thought and religious belief, till

it issued in that system of Traditionalism, which, by an internal

necessity, was irreconcilably antagonistic to the Christ of the

Gospels.

On other grounds also, such a full portraiture of Jewish life,

society, and thinking seemed requisite. It furnishes alike a

vindication and an illustration of the Gospel-narratives. A

vindication - because in measure as we transport ourselves into that

time, we feel that the Gospels present to us a real, historical scene;

that the men and the circumstances to which we are introduced are real

- not a fancy picture, but just such as we know and now recognize

ads:

them, and would expect them to have spoken, or to have been. Again, we

shall thus vividly realise another and most important aspect of the

words of Christ. We shall perceive that their form is wholly of the

times, their cast Jewish - while by the side of this similarity of

form there is not only essential difference but absolute contrariety

of substance and spirit. Jesus spoke as truly a Jew to the Jews, but

He spoke not as they - no, not as their highest and best Teachers

would have spoken. And this contrariety of spirit with manifest

similarity of form is, to my mind, one of the strongest evidences of

the claims of Christ, since it raises the all-important question,

whence the Teacher of Nazareth - or, shall we say, the humble Child of

the Carpenter-home in a far-off little place of Galilee - had drawn

His inspiration? And clearly to set this forth has been the first

object of the detailed Rabbinic quotations in this book.

But their further object, besides this vindication, has been the

illustration of the Gospel-narratives. Even the general reader must be

aware that some knowledge of Jewish life and society at the time is

requisite for the understanding of the Gospel-history. Those who have

consulted the works of Lightfoot, Schöttgen, Meuschen, Wetstein and

Wünsche, or even the extracts from them presented in Commentaries,

know that the help derived from their Jewish references is very great.

And yet, despite the immense learning and industry of these writers,

there are serious drawbacks to their use. Sometimes the references are

critically not quite accurate; sometimes they are derived from works

that should not have been adduced in evidence; occasionally, either

the rendering, or the application of what is separated from its

context, is not reliable. A still more serious objection is, that

these quotations are not unfrequently one sided; but chiefly this -

perhaps, as the necessary consequence of being merely illustrative

notes to certain verses in the Gospels - that they do not present a

full and connected picture. And yet it is this which so often gives

the most varied and welcome illustration of the Gospel-narratives. In

truth, we know not only the leading personages in Church and State in

Palestine at that time, their views, teaching, pursuits, and aims; the

state of parties; the character of popular opinion; the proverbs, the

customs, the daily life of the country - but we can, in imagination,

enter their dwellings, associate with them in familiar intercourse, or

follow them to the Temple, the Synagogue, the Academy, or to the

market-place and the workshop. We know what clothes they wore, what

dishes they ate, what wines they drank, what they produced and what

they imported: nay, the cost of every article of their dress or food,

the price of houses and of living; in short, every detail that can

give vividness to a picture of life.

All this is so important for the understanding of the Gospel-history

as, I hope, to justify the fulness of archæological detail in this

book. And yet I have used only a portion of the materials which I had

collected for the purpose. And here I must frankly own, as another

reason for this fulness of detail, that many erroneous and misleading

statements on this subject, and these even on elementary points, have

of late been made. Supported by references to the labours of truly

learned German writers, they have been sometimes set forth with such

confidence as to impose the laborious and unwelcome duty of carefully

examining and testing them. But to this only the briefest possible

reference has been made, and chiefly in the beginning of these

volumes.

Another explanation seems more necessary in this connection. In

describing the Traditionalism of the time of Christ, I must have said

what, I fear, may, most unwillingly on my part, wound the feelings of

some who still cling, if not to the faith of, yet to what now

represents the ancient Synagogue. But let me appeal to their fairness.

I must needs state what I believe to be the facts; and I could neither

keep them back nor soften them, since it was of the very essence of my

argument to present Christ as both in contact and in contrast with

Jewish Traditionalism. No educated Western Jew would, in these days,

confess himself as occupying the exact standpoint of Rabbinic

Traditionalism. Some will select parts of the system; others will

allegorise, explain, or modify it; very many will, in heart - often

also openly - repudiate the whole. And here it is surely not necessary

for me to rebut or disown those vile falsehoods about the Jews which

ignorance, cupidity, and bigoted hatred have of late again so

strangely raised. But I would go further, and assert that, in

reference to Jesus of Nazareth, no educated Israelite of to-day would

identify himself with the religious leaders of the people eighteen

centuries ago. Yet is not this disclaimer of that Traditionalism which

not only explains the rejection of Jesus, but is the sole logical

raison d'être of the Synagogue, also its condemnation?

I know, indeed, that from this negative there is a vast step in

advance to the positive in the reception of the Gospel, and that many

continue in the Synagogue, because they are not so convinced of the

other as truthfully to profess it. And perhaps the means we have taken

to present it have not always been the wisest. The mere appeal to the

literal fulfilment of certain prophetic passages in the Old Testament

not only leads chiefly to critical discussions, but rests the case on

what is, after all, a secondary line of argumentation. In the New

Testament prophecies are not made to point to facts, but facts to

point back to prophecies. The New Testament presents the fulfilment of

all prophecy rather than of prophecies, and individual predictions

serve as fingerposts to great outstanding facts, which mark where the

roads meet and part. And here, as it seems to me, we are at one with

the ancient Synagogue. In proof, I would call special attention to

Appendix IX., which gives a list of all the Old Testament passages

Messianically applied in Jewish writings. We, as well as they, appeal

to all Scripture, to all prophecy, as that of which the reality is in

the Messiah. But we also appeal to the whole tendency and new

direction which the Gospel presents in opposition to that of

Traditionalism; to the new revelation of the Father, to the new

brotherhood of man, and to the satisfaction of the deepest wants of

the heart, which Christ has brought - in short, to the Scriptural, the

moral, and the spiritual elements; and we would ask whether all this

could have been only the outcome of a Carpenter's Son at Nazareth at

the time, and amidst the surroundings which we so well know.

In seeking to reproduce in detail the life, opinions, and teaching of

the contemporaries of Christ, we have also in great measure addressed

ourselves to what was the third special object in view in this

History. This was to clear the path of difficulties - in other words,

to meet such objections as might be raised to the Gospel-narratives.

And this, as regards principle - not details and minor questions,

which will cause little uneasiness to the thoughtful and calm reader;

quite irrespective also of any theory of inspiration which may be

proposed, and hence of any harmonistic or kindred attempts which may

be made. Broadly speaking, the attacks on the Gospel-narratives may be

grouped under these three particulars: they may be represented as

intentional fraud by the writers, and imposition on the readers; or,

secondly, a rationalistic explanation may be sought of them, showing

how what originally had been quite simple and natural was

misunderstood by ignorance, or perverted by superstition; or, thirdly,

they may be represented as the outcome of ideas and expectations at

the time, which gathered around the beloved Teacher of Nazareth, and,

so to speak, found body in legends that clustered around the Person

and Life of Him Who was regarded as the Messiah. . . . And this is

supposed to account for the preaching of the Apostles, for their

life-witness, for their martyr-death, for the Church, for the course

which history has taken, as well as for the dearest hopes and

experiences of Christian life!

Of the three modes of criticism just indicated, importance attaches

only to the third, which has been broadly designated as the mythical

theory. The fraud-theory seems - as even Strauss admits -

psychologically so incompatible with admitted facts as regards the

early Disciples and the Church, and it does such violence to the first

requirements of historical enquiry, as to make it - at least to me -

difficult to understand how any thoughtful student could be swayed by

objections which too often are merely an appeal to the vulgar,

intellectually and morally, in us. For - to take the historical view

of the question - even if every concession were made to negative

criticism, sufficient would still be left in the Christian documents

to establish a consensus of the earliest belief as to all the great

facts of the Gospel-History, on which both the preaching of the

Apostles and the primitive Church have been historically based. And

with this consensus at least, and its practical outcome, historical

enquiry has to reckon. And here I may take leave to point out the

infinite importance, as regards the very foundation of our faith,

attaching to the historical Church - truly in this also the _kkljs_a

qeo_ z_ntov, st_lov ka_ _dra_wma [columna et fulcrum] t_v _ljqe_av

(the Church of the Living God, the pillar and stay [support] of the

truth).

As regards the second class of interpretation - the rationalistic - it

is altogether so superficial, shadowy and unreal that it can at most

be only regarded as a passing phase of light-minded attempts to set

aside felt difficulties.

But the third mode of explanation, commonly, though perhaps not always

quite fairly, designated as the mythical, deserves and demands, at

least in its sober presentation, the serious consideration of the

historical student. Happily it is also that which, in the nature of

it, is most capable of being subjected to the test of historical

examination. For, as previously stated, we possess ample materials for

ascertaining the state of thought, belief, and expectancy in the time

of Christ, and of His Apostles. And to this aspect of objections to

the Gospels the main line of argumentation in this book has been

addressed. For, if the historical analysis here attempted has any

logical force, it leads up to this conclusion, that Jesus Christ was,

alike in the fundamental direction of His teaching and work, and in

its details, antithetic to the Synagogue in its doctrine, practice,

and expectancies.

But even so, one difficulty - we all feel it - remaineth. It is that

connected with miracles, or rather with the miraculous, since the

designation, and the difficulty to which it points, must not be

limited to outward and tangible phenomena. But herein, I venture to

say, lies also its solution, at least so far as such is possible -

since the difficulty itself, the miraculous, is of the very essence of

our thinking about the Divine, and, therefore one of the conditions of

it: at least, in all religions of which the origin is not from within

us, subjective, but from without us, objective, or, if I may so say,

in all that claim to be universal religions (catholic thinking). But,

to my mind, the evidential value of miracles (as frequently set forth

in these volumes) lies not in what, without intending offence, I may

call their barely super-naturalistic aspect, but in this, that they

are the manifestations of the miraculous, in the widest sense, as the

essential element in revealed religion. Miracles are of chief

evidential value, not in themselves, but as instances and proof of the

direct communication between Heaven and earth. And such direct

communication is, at least, the postulate and first position in all

religions. They all present to the worshipper some medium of personal

communication from Heaven to earth - some prophet or other channel of

the Divine - and some medium for our communication with Heaven. And

this is the fundamental principle of the miraculous as the essential

postulate in all religion that purposes again to bind man to God. It

proceeds on the twofold principle that communication must first come

to man from Heaven, and then that it does so come. Rather, perhaps,

let us say, that all religion turns on these two great factors of our

inner experience: man's felt need and (as implied in it, if we are

God's creatures) his felt expectancy. And in the Christian Church this

is not merely matter of the past - it has attained its fullest

reality, and is a constant present in the indwelling of the Paraclete.

Yet another part of the task in writing this book remains to be

mentioned. In the nature of it, such a book must necessarily have been

more or less of a Commentary on the Gospels. But I have sought to

follow the text of the Gospels throughout, and separately to consider

every passage in them, so that, I hope, I may truthfully designate it

also a Commentary on the Four Gospels - though an informal one. And

here I may be allowed to state that throughout I have had the general

reader in view, reserving for the foot-notes and Appendices what may

be of special interest to students. While thankfully availing myself

of all critical help within my reach - and here I may perhaps take the

liberty of specially singling out Professor Westcott's Commentary on

St. John - I have thought it right to make the sacred text the subject

of fresh and independent study. The conclusions at which I arrived I

would present with the more deference, that, from my isolated

position, I had not, in writing these volumes, the inestimable

advantage of personal contact, on these subjects, with other students

of the sacred text.

It only remains to add a few sentences in regard to other matters -

perhaps of more interest to myself than to the reader. For many years

I had wished and planned writing such a book, and all my previous

studies were really in preparation for this. But the task was actually

undertaken at the request of the Publishers, of whose kindness and

patience I must here make public acknowledgment. For, the original

term fixed for writing it was two or three years. It has taken me

seven years of continual and earnest labour - and, even so, I feel as

if I would fain, and ought to, spend other seven years upon what

could, at most, be touching the fringe of this great subject. What

these seven years have been to me I could not attempt to tell. In a

remote country parish, entirely isolated from all social intercourse,

and amidst not a few trials, parochial duty has been diversified and

relieved by many hours of daily work and of study - delightful in and

for itself. If any point seemed not clear to my own mind, or required

protracted investigation, I could give days of undisturbed work to

what to others might perhaps seem secondary, but was all-important to

me. And so these seven years passed - with no other companion in study

than my daughter, to whom I am indebted, not only for the Index Rerum,

but for much else, especially for a renewed revision, in the

proof-sheets, of the references made throughout these volumes. What

labour and patience this required every reader will perceive -

although even so I cannot hope that no misprint or slip of the pen has

escaped our detection.

And now I part from this book with thankfulness to Almighty God for

sparing me to complete it, with lingering regret that the task is

ended, but also with unfeigned diffidence. I have, indeed, sought to

give my best and most earnest labour to it, and to write what I

believed to be true, irrespective of party or received opinions. This,

in such a book, was only sacred duty. But where study necessarily

extended to so many, and sometimes new, departments, I cannot hope

always to carry the reader with me, or, which is far more serious - to

have escaped all error. My deepest and most earnest prayer is that He,

in Whose Service I have desired to write this book, would graciously

accept the humble service - forgive what is mistaken and bless what is

true. And if anything personal may intrude into these concluding

lines, I would fain also designate what I have written as Apologia pro

vita mea (alike in its fundamental direction and even

ecclesiastically) - if, indeed, that may be called an Apologia which

is the confession of this inmost conviction of mind and heart: 'Lord,

to Whom shall we go? The words of eternal life hast Thou! And we have

believed and know that Thou art the Holy One of God.'

ALFRED EDERSHEIM

8 BRADMORE ROAD, OXFORD:

September 1883

PREFACE

TO THE

SECOND AND THIRD EDITIONS.

IN issuing a new edition of this book I wish, in the first place,

again to record, as the expression of permanent convictions and

feelings, some remarks with which I had prefaced the Second Edition,

although happily they are not at present so urgently called for.

With the feelings of sincere thankfulness for the kindness with which

this book was received by all branches of the Church, only one element

of pain mingled. Although I am well convinced that a careful or

impartial reader could not arrive at any such conclusion, yet it was

suggested that a perverse ingenuity might abuse certain statements and

quotations for what in modern parlance are termed 'Anti-Semitic'

purposes. That any such thoughts could possibly attach to a book

concerning Him, Who was Himself a Jew; Who in the love of His

compassion wept tears of bitter anguish over the Jerusalem that was

about to crucify Him, and Whose first utterance and prayer when nailed

to the Cross was: 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they

do' - would seem terribly incongruous and painful. Nor can it surely

be necessary to point out that the love of Christ, or the

understanding of His Work and Mission, must call forth feelings far

different from those to which reference has been made. To me, indeed,

it is difficult to associate the so-called Anti-Semitic movement with

any but the lowest causes: envy, jealousy, and cupidity on the one

hand; or, on the other, ignorance, prejudice, bigotry, and hatred of

race. But as these are times when it is necessary to speak

unmistakably, I avail myself of the present opportunity to point out

the reasons why any Talmudic quotations, even if fair, can have no

application for 'Anti-Semitic' purposes.

First: It is a mistake to regard everything in Talmudic writings about

'the Gentiles' as presently applying to Christians. Those spoken of

are characterised as 'the worshippers of idols,' 'of stars and

planets,' and by similar designations. That 'the heathens' of those

days and lands should have been suspected of almost any abomination,

deemed capable of any treachery or cruelty towards Israel, - no

student of history can deem strange, especially when the experience of

so many terrible wrongs (would they had been confined to the heathen

and to those times!) would naturally lead to morbidly excited

suspicions and apprehensions.

Secondly: We must remember the times, the education, and the general

standpoint of that period as compared with our own. No one would

measure the belief of Christians by certain statements in the Fathers,

nor judge the moral principles of Roman Catholics by prurient

quotations from the Casuists; nor yet estimate the Lutherans by the

utterances and deeds of the early successors of Luther, nor Calvinists

by the burning of Servetus. In all such cases the general standpoint

of the times has to be first taken into account. And no educated Jew

would share the follies and superstitions, nor yet sympathise with the

suspicions or feelings towards even the most hostile and depraved

heathens, that may be quoted from the Talmud.

Thirdly: Absolutely the contrary of all this has been again and again

set forth by modern Jewish writers. Even their attempts to explain

away certain quotations from the Talmud - unsuccessful though, in my

view, some of them are - afford evidence of their present repudiation

of all such sentiments. I would here specially refer to such work as

Dr. Grünebaum's 'Ethics of Judaism' ('Sittenlehre d. Judenthums') - a

book deeply interesting also as setting forth the modern Jewish view

of Christ and His Teaching, and accordant (though on different

grounds) with some of the conclusions expressed in this book, as

regards certain incidents in the History of Christ. The principles

expressed by Dr. Grünebaum, and other writers, are such as for ever to

give the lie to Anti-Semitic charges. And although he and others, with

quite proper loyalty, labour to explain certain Talmudic citations,

yet it ultimately comes to the admission that Talmudic sayings are not

the criterion and rule of present duty, even as regards the heathen -

still less Christians, to whom they do not apply.

What has just been stated, while it fully disposes of all

'Anti-Semitism,' only the more clearly sets forth the argument which

forms the main proposition of this book. Here also we have the highest

example. None loved Israel so intensely, even unto death, as Jesus of

Nazareth; none made such withering denunciations as He of Jewish

Traditionalism, in all its branches, and of its Representatives. It is

with Traditionalism, not the Jews, that our controversy lies. And here

we cannot speak too plainly nor decidedly. It might, indeed, be

argued, apart from any proposed different applications, that on one or

another point opinions of a different kind may also be adduced from

other Rabbis. Nor is it intended to convey unanimity of opinion on

every subject. For, indeed, such scarcely existed on any one point -

not on matters of fact, nor even often on Halakhic questions. And this

also is characteristic of Rabbinism. But it must be remembered that we

are here dealing with the very text-book of that sacred and Divine

Traditionalism, the basis and substance of Rabbinism, for which such

unlimited authority and absolute submission are claimed; and hence,

that any statement admitted into its pages, even though a different

view were also to be adduced, possesses an authoritative and a

representative character. And this further appears from the fact that

the same statements are often repeated in other documents, besides

that in which they were originally made, and that they are also

supported by other statements, kindred and parallel in spirit.

In truth, it has throughout been my aim to present, not one nor

another isolated statement or aspect of Rabbinism, but its general

teaching and tendency. In so doing I have, however, purposely left

aside certain passages which, while they might have most fully brought

out the sad and strange extravagances to which Rabbinism could go,

would have involved the unnecessary quotation of what is not only very

painful in itself, but might have furnished an occasion to enemies of

Israel. Alike the one and the other it was my most earnest desire to

avoid. And by the side of these extravagances there is so much in

Jewish writings and life - the outcome of Old Testament training -

that is noblest and most touching, especially as regards the social

virtues, such as purity, kindness, and charity, and the acknowledgment

of God in sufferings, as well as their patient endurance. On the other

hand, it is difficult to believe that even the vehement assertions of

partisans on the other side, supported by isolated sayings, sometimes

torn from their context, or by such coincidences as are historically

to be expected, will persuade those who keep in view either the words

of Christ or His history and that of the Apostles, that the relation

between Christianity in its origin, as the fulfilment of the Old

Testament, and Traditionalism, as the externalised development of its

letter, is other than that of which these volumes furnish both the

explanation and the evidence. In point of fact, the attentive student

of history will observe that a similar protest against the bare letter

underlies Alexandrianism and Philo - although there from the side of

reason and apologetically, in the New Testament from the aspect of

spiritual life and for its full presentation.

Thus much - somewhat reluctantly written, because approaching

controversy - seemed necessary by way of explanation. The brief

interval between the First and Second Editions rendered only a

superficial revision possible, as then indicated. For the present

edition the whole work has once more been revised, chiefly with the

view of removing from the numerous marginal Talmudic references such

misprints as were observed. In the text and notes, also, a few errata

have been corrected, or else the meaning rendered more clear. In one

or two places fresh notes have been made; some references have been

struck out, and others added. These notes will furnish evidence that

the literature of the subject, since the first appearance of these

volumes, has not been neglected, although it seemed unnecessary to

swell the 'List of Authorities' by the names of all the books since

published or perused. Life is too busy and too short to be always

going back on one's traces. Nor, indeed, would this be profitable. The

further results of reading and study will best be embodied in further

labours, please God, in continuation of those now completed.

Opportunity may then also occur for the discussion of some questions

which had certainly not been overlooked, although this seemed not the

proper place for them: such as that of the composition of the

Apostolic writings.

And so, with great thankfulness for what service this book has been

already allowed to perform, I would now send it forth on its new

journey, with this as my most earnest hope and desire: that, in

however humble a manner, it may be helpful for the fuller and clearer

setting forth of the Life of Him Who is the Life of all our life.

A. E.

OXFORD: March 1886.

LIST OF AUTHORITIES

CHIEFLY USED IN WRITING THIS BOOK.

Alford: Greek Testament.

Von der Alm: Heidn. u. jüd. Urtheile über Jesu u. die alten Christen.

Altingius: Dissertationes et Orationes.

Apocrypha: S.P.C.K. Commentary on. The Apocryphal Gospels.

Auerbach: Berith Abraham.

Bacher: Die Agada der Babylon. Amoräer.

Bäck: Geschichte des Jüd. Volkes u.seiner Literatur.

Baedeker: Syrien u. Palästina.

Bähr: Gesetz über Falsche Zeugen nach Bible u. Talmud.

Barclay: City of the Great King.

Beer: Leben Abraham's.

Beer: Leben Mosis.

Beer, P.: Geschichte d. relig. Sekten d. Juden.

Bengel: Gnomon Novi Testamenti.

Bengel: Alter der jüdischen Proselytentaufe.

Bergel: Naturwissenschaftliche Kenntnisse d. Talmudisten.

Bergel: Der Himmel u. seine Wunder.

Bergel: Die Eheverhältnisse der alten Juden.

Berliner, Dr. A.: Targum Onkelos.

Bertholdt: Christologie Judæorum. Testaments.

Beyschlag: Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments.

Beyschlag: Zur Johanneischen Frage.

Bickell: Die Entstehung der Liturgie aus der Einsetzungsfeier.

Bleek: Einleitung in dasa Neue Testament. ed. Mangold.

Bleek: Synoptische Erklärung d. drei Evangelien.

Bloch: Studien z. Gesch. der Sammlung d althebr. Literatur.

Bloch: Das Mosaisch-talmud. Polizeirecht.

Bloch: Civilprocess-Ordnung nach Mos. rabb. Rechte.

Bochartus: Hierozoicon.

Bodek: Marcus Aurelius u. R. Jehudah.

Bodenschatz: Kirchliche Verfassung der heutigen Juden.

Böhl: Forschungen nach einer Volks bibel zur Zeit Jesu.

Böhl: Alttestamentliche Citate im N. T.

Bonar: The Land of Promise.

Braun: Die Söhne des Herodes.

Braunius: De Vestitu Hebræorum.

Brecher: DasTranscendentale im Talmud.

Bredow: Rabbinische Mythen, &c.

Brückner: Die Versuchungsgeschichte unseres Herrn Jesu Christi.

Brück: Rabbinische Ceremonialgebräuche.

Brüll: Fremdsprachliche Redensarten im Talmud.

Brüll: Trachten der Juden.

Buber: Pesikta.

Bucher: Des Apostels Johannes Lehre vom Logos.

Burgon: The Last Twelve Verses of St. Mark.

Buxtorf: Exercitationes.

Buxtorf: Synagoga Judaica.

Buxtorf; Lexicon Talmud.

Calvin: Comment. (passim).

Cahen: Repertorium Talmudioum.

Carpzov: Chuppa Hebræorium.

Caspari: Einleitung in das Leben Jesu Christi.

Cassel: Das Buch Kusari.

Cassel: Lehrbuch der Jud. Gesch, u. Literatur.

Castelli: Commento di Sabbatai Donnolo sul libro della Creazione.

Castelli: Il Messia secondo gli Ebrei.

Cavedoni: Biblische Numismatik.

Charteris: Canonicity.

Chasronoth Hashas.

Cheyne: Prophecies of Isaiah.

Chijs: De Herode Magno.

Cohen: Les Déicides.

Commentaries, Speaker's, on the Gospels; Camb. Bible on the Gospels.

Conder: Tent Work in Palestine.

Conder: Handbook to the Bible.

Conforte: Liber Kore ha-Dorot.

Cook: The Rev. Version of the Gospels.

Creizenach: Shulcan Aruch.

Cremer: New Testament Dictionary.

Cureton: Syriac Gospels.

Dähne: Jüdisch-Alex. Religionsphilos.

Davidson: Introduction to the Study of the New Testament.

Davidson: The Last Things.

Dachs: Codex Succa Talmudis Babylonici.

Danko: Historia Revelationis Divinae N. T.

Danko: De Sacra Scriptura ejusque interpretatione Commentarius.

Delaunay: Moines et Sibylles dans l'antiquité Judéo-Grecque.

Delitzsch: Handwerkerleben zur Zeit Jesu.

Delitzsch: Geschichte der jüd. Poesie.

Delitzsch: Durch Krankheit zur Genesung.

Delitzsch: Ein Tag in Capernaum.

Delitzsch: Untersuchungen üb. die Entsteh. u. Anlage d. Matth-Evang.

Delitzsch; Talmudische Studien.

Delitzsch: Jesus und Hillel.

Derenbourg: Essai sur l'Histoire et la Géographie de la Palestine.

Deutsch: Literary Remains.

Deylingius: Observationes Sacræ.

Dillmann: Das Buch Henoch.

Döllinger: Heidenthum und Judenthum.

Drummond: The Jewish Messiah.

Dukes: Zur Rabbinischen Sprachkunde.

Dukes: Rabbinische Blumenlese.

Duschak: Zur Botanik des Talmud.

Duschak: Die Moral der Evangelien und des Talmud.

Duschak: Jüdischer Cultus.

Duschak: Schulgesetzgebung.

Ebrard: Wissenschaftliche Kritik der evangel. Geschichte.

Edersheim: History of the Jewish Nation.

Edersheim: The Temple, its Ministry and its Services.

Edersheim: Sketches of Jewish Social Life.

Ehrmann: Geschichte der Schulen u. der Cultur unter den Juden.

Eisenmenger: Entdecktes Judenthum.

Eisler: Beiträge zur Rabb. Sprach- u. Alterthums-kunde.

Ellicott: New Testament Commentary: Gospels.

Ellicott: Lectures on the Life of our Lord.

Encyclopaedia Britannica (passim).

Etheridge: The Targums on the Pentateuch.

Eusebius: Ecclesiastical History.

Ewald: Abodah Sarah.

Ewald: Geschichte des Volkes Israel.

Ewald: Bibl. Jahrb. (passim).

Fabricius: Codex Pseudepigraphus V.T.

Farrar: Life of Christ.

Farrar: Eternal Hope.

Fassel: Das Mos. rabb. Civilrecht.

Fassel: Gerichts-Verf.

Field: Otium Norvicense.

Filipowski: Liber Juchassin.

Fisher: Beginnings of Christianity.

Frankel: Targum der Proph.

Frankel: Ueb. d. Einfl. d. palast. Exegese auf die Alexandr.

Hermeneutik.

Frankel: Monatschrift fur das Judenthum (passim).

Frankel: Vorstudien zu der Septuaginta.

Frankel: Einleitung in d. Jerusalem Talmud.

Franck: d. Kabbala.

Freudenthal: Hellenistische Studien.

Friedenthal: Jessode haddat weikere Haemuna.

Friedlaender: Sittengeschichte Roms.

Friedlaender: Ben Dosa u. seine Zeit.

Friedlaender: Patristische u. Talmudische Studien.

Friedlieb: Oracula Subyllina.

Friedlieb: Archäologie der Leidensge schichte.

Friedmann: Siphré debe Rab.

Fritzsche u. Grimm: Handbuch zu den Apokryphen.

Fritzsche u. Grimm: Libri V. T. Pseudepigraphi Selecti.

Fuller: Harmony of the Four Gospels.

Fürst: Der Kanon des A. T.

Fürst: Kultur u. Literaturgeschichte der Juden in Asien.

Fürst: Biblioth. Jüd. (passim).

Fürstenthal: Menorath Hammaor.

Fürstenthal: Jessode haddat.

Geier: De Ebraeorum Luctu Lugentiumque Ritibus.

Geiger: Das Judenthum u. seine Geschichte.

Geiger: Beiträge z. Jüd. Literatur-Gesch.

Geiger: Zeitschrift fur Jud. Theol. (passim).

Geiger: Urschrift u. Uebersetzungen der Bibel.

Geikie: Life and Words of Christ.

Gelpke: Die Jugendgesch. des Herrn.

Gerlach: Die Röm. Statthälter in Syrien u Judäa.

Gfrörer: Philo.

Gfrörer: Jahrh. d. Heils.

Ginsburg: Ben Chajim's Introd.

Ginsburg: Massoreth Ha-Massoreth.

Ginsburg: The Essenes.

Ginsburg: The Kabbalah.

Godet: Commentar.

Godet: Bibl. Studies.

Goebel: Die Parabeln Jesu.

Goldberg: The Language of Christ.

Graetz: Geschichte der Juden.

Green: Handbk. to the Grammar of the Grk. Test.

Grimm: Die Samariter.

Grimm: Clavis N. T.

Gronemann: Die Jonathansche Pentateuch-Uebersetzung.

Grünebaum: Sittenlehre des Judenthums.

Guérin: Description de la Palestine et Samarie.

Guillemard: Hebraisms in the Greek Testament.

Günzburg: Beleuchtung des alten Judenthums.

Hamburger: Real Encyklopädie f. Bibel u. Talmud.

Hamelsveia: Dissertatio de aedibus vet. Hebr.

Haneberg: Die relig. Alterth. der Bibel.

Harnoch: De Philonis Judaei Log. Inquisitio.

Hartmann: Die Hebräerin am Putztische u. als Braut.

Hartmann: Die enge Verbindung des A. T. mit dem Neuen.

Hase: Leben Jesu.

Haupt: Die A. T. Citate in den 4 Evangelien.

Hausrath: Neutestamentliche zeitgeschichte.

Herzfeld: Geschichte Israels.

Herzfeld: Handelsgeschichte der Juden des Alterthums.

Herzog: Real-Encyklopädie (passim).

Hildesheimer: Der Herod. Tempel n. d. Talmud u. Josephus.

Hilgenfeld: Jüdische Apokalyptik.

Hirschfeld: Halach. u. Hagad. Exegese.

Hirschfeld: Tractatus Macot. Hitzig: Geschichte des Volkes Israel.

Hoffmann: Leben Jesu.

Hofmann: Schriftbeweis.

Hofmann: Weissagung u. Erfullung.

Hoffmann: Abhandlungen üb. die Pentat. Gesetze.

Holdheim: d. Cerem. Ges.

Hottinger: Juris Hebr. Leges.

Huschke: Ueb. d. Census u. die Steuerverf. d. früh. Röm. Kaiserzeit.

Huschke: Ueb. d. z. Zeit d. Geb. Jesu Christi gehaltenen Census.

Havercamp: Flavius Josephus.

Ideler: Chronologie.

Ikenius: Antiquitates Hebraicæ.

Ikenius: Dissertationes Philologico-theologicæ.

Jellinek: Beth ha-Midrash.

Joel: Blick in d. Religionsgesch. d. 2ten Christlichen Jahrh.

Joel: Religionsphilos. des Sohar.

Jost: Gesch. d. Judenth. u. seiner Sekten.

Jowett: Epistles of St. Paul, Romans, Galatians, Thessalonians.

Josephus Gorionides: ed. Breithaupt.

Juynboll: Comment. in Hist. Gentis Samaritanæ.

Keil: Einl. in. d. Kanon. u. Apokryph. Schriften des A. T.

Keim: Geschichte Jesu von Nazara.

Kennedy: Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Kirchheim: Septem Libri Talmudici parvi Hierosol.

Kirchner: Jud. Passahf.

Kitto: Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature (passim).

Kobut: Jüdische Angelologie u. Daemonologie.

König: Die Menschwerdung Gottes.

Köster: Nachw. d. Spur. einer Trinitätslehre vor Christo.

Krafft: Jüdische Sagen u. Dichtungen.

Krauss: Die Grosse Synode.

Krebs: Decreta Athen in honor Hyrcani P. M. Judæorum.

Krebs: Decreta Roman. pro Judæis.

Krebs: Observationes in Nov. Test.

Kuhn: Städt. u. bürgerl. Verfass d. Röm. Reichs.

Landau: Arukh.

Lange: Bibelwerk (on Gospels).

Langen: Judenthum in Palästina z. Zeit Christi.

Lange: Leben Jesu.

Langfelder: Symbolik des Judenthums.

Lattes: Saggio di Giunte e Correzzioni al Lessico Talmudico.

Lavadeur: Krit. Beleucht. d. jüd Kalenderwesens.

Lenormant: Chaldean Magic.

Levi: Historia Religionis Judæorum.

Levy: Neuhebr. u. Chaldäisch. Wörterbuch.

Levy: Chaldäisch. Wörterb. über die Targumim.

Levy: Gesch. der Jüdisch. Münzen.

Levyssohn: Disputatio de Jud. sub. Cæs. Conditione.

Lewin: Fasti Sacri.

Lewin: Siege of Jerusalem.

Lewyssohn: Zoologie des Talmuds.

Lightfoot: Horæ Hebraicæ et Talmudicæ in 4 Evangel.

Lightfoot: Commentary on Galatians.

Lightfoot: Commentary on Colossians.

Lisco: Die Wunder Jesu Christi.

Low: Beiträge z. jüd Alterthumskunde.

Low: Lebensalter in d. jüd. Literatur.

Löwe: Schulchan Aruch.

Lowy: Biggoreth ha Talmud.

Lucius: Essenismus in sein Verhältn z. Judenth.

Lücke: Johannes (Gospel).

Lundius: Jüdische Heiligthumer.

Luthardt: Johann. Evangelium.

Luthardt: Die modern. Darstell. d. Lebens Jesu.

Lutterbeck: Neutestamentliche Lehrbegriffe.

McLellan: New Testament (Gospels).

Madden: Coins of the Jews.

Maimonides: Yad haChazzakah.

Marcus: Pädagogik des Talmud.

Marquardt: Röm, Staatsverwaltung.

Martinus: Fidei Pugio.

Maybaum: Die Anthropomorph. u. Anthropopath. bei Onkelos.

Megillath Taanith.

Meier: Judaica.

Meuschen: Nov. Test ex Talmude et Joseph.

Meyer: Seder Olam Rabba et Suta.

Meyer: Buch Jezira.

Meyer: Kommentar. (on Gospels).

Meyer: Arbeit u. Handwerk. im Talmud.

Midrash Rabboth.

Midrashim. (See List in Rabb. Abbrev.)

Mill: On the Mythical Interpretation of the Gospels.

Mishnah.

Molitor: Philosophie der Geschichte.

Moscovitor: Het N. T. en de Talmud.

Müller: Mess. Erwart. d. Jud. Philo.

Müller: Zur Johann Frage.

Müller, J.: Massech. Sopher.

Münter: Stern der Weisen

Nanz: Die Besessenen im N. T.

Neander: Life of Christ.

Nebe: Leidensgesch. unser. Herrn Jesu Christi.

Nebe: Auferstehungsgesch. unser. Herrn Jesu Christi.

Neubauer: La Géographie du Talmud.

Neubauer and Driver: Jewish Interpreters of Isaiah. liii.

Neumann: Messian. Erschein. bei d. Juden.

Neumann: Gesch. d. Mess. Weissag. im A. T.

New Testament. Ed. Scrivener. Ed. Westcott and Hort. Ed. Gebhardt.

Nicolai: De Sepulchris Hebræorum.

Nizzachon Vetus. et Toledoth Jeshu.

Nicholson: The Gospel accord. to the Hebrews.

Norris: New Testament (Gospels).

Nork: Rabbinische Quellen u. Parallelen.

Nutt: Samaritan History.

Otho: Lexicon Rabbin. Philolog.

Outram: De Sacrificiis Judæor et Christi.

Othijoth de R. Akiba.

Oxlee: Doc. of Trinity on Princips. of Judaism.

Pagninus: Thesaurus Linguæ Sanctæ.

Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statements (passim).

Perles: Liechenfeierlichk. im Nachbibl, Judenth.

Philippson: Haben wirklich die Jud. Jesum gekreuzigt?

Philippson: Israelit. Religionslehre.

Philo Judæus: Opera.

Pictorial Palestine (passim).

Picturesque Palestine.

Pinner: Berachoth.

Pinner: Compend. des Hieros. u. Babyl. Thalm.

Pirké de R. Elieser.

Plumptre: Comment. on the Gospels.

Plumptre: Bible Educator (passim).

Pocock: Porta Mosis.

Prayer-books, Jewish: i. Arnheim. ii. Mannheimer. iii. Polak

(Frankfort ed.). iv. Friedländer. v. F. A. Euchel. vi. Jacobson. vii.

Pesach Haggadah. viii. Rodelheim ed.

Pressensé: Jesus Christ: His Time, Life, and Works.

Prideaux: Connec. of O. and N.T.

Pusey: What is of Faith as to Everlasting Punishment?

Rabbinowicz: Einleit. in d. Gesetzgeb. u. Medicin d. Talm.

Ravuis: Dissertat. de. aedib. vet. Hebr.

Redslob: Die Kanonisch. Evangelien.

Reland: Antiquit. Sacr. veter. Hebr.

Reland: Palæstina.

Remond: Ausbreit. d. Judenthums.

Renan: L'Antéchrist.

Renan: Vie de Jésus.

Renan: Marc-Auréle.

Rhenferd et Vitringa: De Decem Otiosis Synagogæ.

Riehm: Handwörterb. d. bibl. Alterth. (passim).

Riehm: Lehrbegriff d. Hebraerbriefs.

Riess: Geburtsjahr Christi.

Ritter: Philo u. die Halacha.

Roberts: Discussion on the Gospels.

Robinson: Biblical Researches in Palestine.

Roeth: Epistoia ad Hebraeos.

Rohr: Palästina z. Zeit Christi.

Rönsch: Buch Jubiläen.

Roos: Lehre u. Lebensgesch. Jesu Christi.

Rösch: Jesus-Mythen d. Talmudist.

Rosenmüller: Biblisch. Geographie.

Rossi, Azarjah de: Meor Enajim.

Rossi, Giambernardo de: Della Lingua Propria di Christo.

Sachs: Beiträge z. Sprach u. Alterthumskunde.

Saalschütz: Musik bei d. Hebraern.

Saalschütz: Mos. Recht.

Salvador: Römerherrschaft in Judæa.

Salvador: Gesch. d. Jud. Volkes.

Sammter: Baba Mezia.

Schenkel: Bibel-Lexicon (passim).

Schleusner: Lexicon Gr. Lat. in N.T.

Schmer: De Chuppa Hebræorum.

Schmilg: Der Siegeskalender Megill Taanith.

Schneckenburger: Neutestament. Zeitgeschichte.

Schoettgen: Horæ Hebraicæ et Talmudicæ.

Schreiber: Principien des Judenthums.

Schroederus: Comment. de Vestitu Mulier. Hebr.

Schürer: Neutestam. Zeitgesch.

Schürer: Gemeindeverfass. d. Juden in Rom in d. Kaiserzeit.

Schwab: Le Talmud de Jérusalem.

Schwarz: D. Heilige Land.

Schwarz: Tosifta Shabbath.

Scrivener: Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament.

Seder Hadoroth.

Selden: De Synedriis Ebr.

Selden: De Jure Naturali et Gent. Hebr.

Selden: Uxor Ebraica.

Sepp: Leben Jesu.

Sevin: Chronologie des Lebens Jesu.

Sheringham: Joma.

Siegfried: Philo von Alexandria.

Singer: Onkelos u. seine Verhältn. z. Halacha.

Sion Ledorosh.

Smith: Dictionary of the Bible (passim).

Smith and Wace: Dictionary of Christian Biography (passim).

Sohar.

Tikkuné haSohar.

Saloweyczyk: Bibel, Talmud, u. Evangelium.

Sommer: Mispar haSohar.

Spencer: De Legib. Hebr. Ritual.

Spiess: Das Jerusalem des Josephus.

Spitzer: Das Mahl bei den Hebräern.

Stanley: Sinai and Palestine.

Steinmeyer: Geburt des Herrn u. seinerste Schritte im Leben.

Steinmeyer: Die Parabeln des Herrn

Stein: Schrift des Lebens.

Stern: Die Frau im Talmud.

Stern: Gesch. des Judenthums.

Stier: Reden des Herrn Jesu.

Strack: Pirké Aboth.

Strack: Proleg. Crit. in V.T. Hebr.

Strauss: Leben Jesu.

Supernatural Religion.

Surenhusius: Biblos Katallages.

Surenhusius: Mishnah.

Talmud, Babylon and Jerusalem.

Targum, the Targumim in the Mikraoth gedoloth.

Taylor: Sayings of the Jewish Fathers (Pirqé Ab., &c.), with critical

and illutrative Notes.

Taylor: Great Exemplar.

Tauchuma: Midrash.

Thein: Der Talmud.

Theologische Studien u. Kritiken (passim).

Tholuck: Bergpredigt Christi.

Tholuck: Das Alt. Test. im Neu. Test.

Tischendorf: When were our Gospels written?

Toetterman: R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus.

Traill: Josephus.

Trench: Notes on the Miracles

Trench: Notes on the Parables.

Tristram: Natural History of the Bible.

Tristram: Land of Israel.

Tristram: Land of Moab. d. alt. Hebr.

Trusen: Sitten, Gebräuche u. Krankheiten.

Ugolinus: Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarum (passim).

Unruh: Das alte Jerusalem u. seine Bauwerke.

Vernes: Histoire des Idées Messianiques.

Vitringa: De Synagoga Vetere.

Volkmar: Einleitung in die Apokryphen.

Volkmar: Marcus.

Volkmar: Mose Prophetie u. Himmel fahrt.

Vorstius: De Hebraisms Nov. Test.

Wace: The Gospel and its Witnesses.

Wagenseil: Sota. Wahl: Clavis Nov. Test. Philologica.

Warneck: Pontius Pilatus.

Watkins: Gospel of St. John.

Weber: Johannes der Täufer u. die Parteien seiner Zeit.

Weber: System der altsynagog. paläst. Theologie. B.

Weiss: Lehrb. d. bibl. Theol. des N.T.

Weiss: Mechilta.

Weiss: Siphra B.

Weiss: Matthäusevangelium. B.

Weiss: Leben Jesu.

Weiss: Geschichte. der jüd. Tradition.

Weizsäcker: Untersuch. üb. die evangel. Geschichte.

Wellhausen: Die Pharisäer u. die Sadducäer.

Westcott: Introduction to the Study of the Gospels.

Westcott: On the Canon of the New Testament.

Westcott: Gospel of St. John.

Wetstein: Novum Testamentum Graecum (Gospels).

Wichelhaus: Kommentar zur Leidensgeschichte.

Wieseler: Beiträge zu den Evange. u. der Evangel. Gesch.

Wieseler: Chronol. Synopse der 4 Evangelien.

Wiesner: d. Bann in s. Gesch. Entwickelung.

Winer: Biblisches Realwörterbuch (passim).

Winer: De Onkeloso.

Wilson: Recovery of Jerusalem.

Wittichen: Die Idee des Reiches Gottes.

Wittichen: Leben Jesu.

Wolfius: Bibliotheca Hebræa (passim).

Wordsworth: Commentary (Gospels).

Wunderbar: Bibl. talmud. Medecin.

Wünsche: Die Leiden des Messias.

Wünsche: Neue Beiträge z. Erlaut. der Evangel.

Wünsche: Der Jerusalemische Talmud.

Wünsche: Bibliotheca Rabbinica.

Yalkut Shimeoni.

Yalkut Rubeni.

Young: Christology of the Targums.

Zahn: Forsch. zur Gesch. d. N.T. Kanous.

Zeller: Philosophie der Griechen.

Zemach David.

Zimmermann: Karten u. Pläne z. Topographie des alten Jerusalems.

Zockler: Handb. d. Theol. Wissenschaften.

Zumpt: Geburtsjahr Christi.

Zunz: Zur Geschichte u. Literatur.

Zunz: Die Gottesdienstl. Vortr. d. Juden

Zunz: Synagogale Poesie.

Zunz: Ritus d. Synagogalen-Gottesdienst.

Zuckermandel: Tosephta.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED IN REFERENCE TO

RABBINIC WRITINGS QUOTED IN THIS WORK.

THE Mishnah is always quoted according to Tractate, Chapter (Pereq)

and Paragraph (Mishnah), the Chapter being marked in Roman, the

paragraph in ordinary Numerals. Thus Ber. ii. 4 means the Mishnic

Tractate Berakhoth, second Chapter, fourth Paragraph.

The Jerusalem Talmud is distinguished by the abbreviation Jer. before

the name of the Tractate. Thus, Jer. Ber. is the Jer. Gemara, or

Talmud, of the Tractate Berakhoth. The edition, from which quotations

are made, is that commonly used, Krotoschin, 1866, 1 vol. fol. The

quotations are made either by Chapter and Paragraph (Jer. Ber. ii. 4),

or, in these volumes mostly, by page and column. It ought to be noted

that in Rabbinic writings each page is really a double one,

distinguished respectively as a and b: a being the page to the left

hand of the reader, and b the reverse one (on turning over the page)

to the right hand of the reader. But in the Jerusalem Gemara (and in

Yalkut [see below], as in all works where the page and column (col.)

are mentioned) the quotation is often - in these volumes, mostly -

made by page and column (two columns being on each side of a page).

Thus, while Jer. Ber. ii. 4 would be Chapter II. Par. 4, the

corresponding quotation by page and column would in that instance be,

Jer. Ber. 4 d; d marking that it is the fourth column in b (or the

off-side) of page 4.

The Babyl. Talmud is, in all its editions, equally paged, so that a

quotation made applies to all editions. It is double-paged, and quoted

with the name of the Tractate, the number of the page, and a or b

according as one or another side of the page is referred to. The

quotations are distinguished from those of the Mishnah by this, that

in the Mihnah Roman and ordinary numerals are employed (to mark

Chapters and Paragraphs), while in the Babylon Talmud the name of the

Tractate is followed by an ordinary numeral, indicating the page,

together with a or b, to mark which side of the page is referred to.

Thus Ber. 4 a means: Tractate Berachoth, p. 4, first or left-hand

side of the page.

I have used the Vienna edition, but this, as already explained, is not

a point of any importance. To facilitate the verification of passages

quoted I have in very many instances quoted also the lines, either

from top or bottom.

The abbreviation Tos. (Tosephta, additamentum) before the name of a

Tractate refers to the additions made to the Mishnah after its

redaction. This redaction dates from the third century of our era. The

Tos. extends only over 52 of the Mishnic Tractates. They are inserted

in the Talmud at the end of each Tractate, and are printed on the

double pages in double columns (col. a and b on p. a, col. e and d on

p. b). They are generally quoted by Pereq and Mishnah: thus, Tos.

Gitt. i. 1, or (more rarely) by page and column, Tos. Gitt. p. 150 a.

The ed. Zuckermandel is, when quoted, specially indicated.

Besides, the Tractate Aboth de Rabbi Nathan (Ab. de. R. Math.), and

the smaller Tractates, Sopherim (Sopher), Semachoth (Semach.), Kallah

(Kall. or Chall),[2]2 Derekh Erets (Der Er.), Derekh Erets Zuta

(commonly Der Er. S.), and Pereq Shalom (Per. Shal.) are inserted at

the close of vol. ix. of the Talmud. They are printed in four columns

(on double pages), and quoted by Pereq and Mishnah.

The so-called Septem Libri Talmudici parvi Hierosolymitani are

published separately (ed. Raphael Kirchheim, Fref 1851). They are the

Massecheth Sepher Torah (Mass. Seph. Tor.), Mass. Mezuzah (Mass.

Mesus.), Mass. Tephillin (Mass. Tephill.), Mass. Tsitsith (Mass.

Ziz.), Mass. Abhadim (Mass. Abad.), Mass. Kuthim (Mass. Cuth.), and

Mass. Gerim (Mass. Ger.). They are printed and quoted according to

double pages (a and b).

To these must be added the so-called Chesronoth haShas, a collection

of passages expurgated in the ordinary editions from the various

Tractates of the Talmud. Here we must close, what might else assume

undue proportions, by an alphabeticallist of the abbreviations,

although only of the principal books referred to: -

Ab. Zar.[3]3 The Talmudic Tractate Abhodah Zorah,

on Idolatry.

Ab. The Talmudic Tractate Pirquey

Abohoth, Savings of the Fathers.

Ab. de R Nath. The Tractate Abhoth de Rabbi Nathan at the close of

vol. ix. in the Bab. Talm.

Arakh. The Talmudic Tractate Arakhin, on the

redemption of persons or things consecrated to the Sanctuary.

Bab. K. The Talmudic Tractate Babha Qamma

('First Gate'), the first,

Bab. Mets. [or Mez.] Talmudic Tractate Babha Metsia ('Middle

Gate'), the second,

Bab. B. The Talmudic Tractate Babha Bathra

('Last Gate'), the third of the great Tractates on Common Law.

Bechor. The Talmudic Tractate Bekhoroth, on the

consecration to the Sanctuary of the First-born.

Bemid R. The Midrash (or Commentary) Bemidbar

Rabba, on Numbers.

Ber. The Talmudic Tractate Berakhoth, on

Prayers and Benedictions.

Ber. R. The Midrash (or Commentary) Bereshith

Rabba, on Genesis.

Bets. [or Bez.] The Talmudic Tractate Betsah, laws about an egg laid

on Sabbath and Fast-days, and on similar points connected with the

sanctifying of such seasons.

Biccur. The Talmudic Tractate Bikkurim, on

First-fruits.

Chag. The Talmudic Tractate Chagigah, on the

festive offerings at the three Great Feasts.

Chall. The Talmudic Tractate Challah, on the

first of the dough (Numb. xv. 17).

Chull. The Talmudic Tractate Chullin, the

rubric as to the mode of killing meat and kindred subjects.

Debar R. The Midrash Debharim Rabba, on

Deuteronomy.

Dem. The Talmudic Tractate Demai, regarding

Produce, the tithing of which is not certain.

Ech. R. The Midrash Ekhah Rabbathi, on

Lamentations (also quoted as Mid. on Lament).

Eduy. The Talmudic Tractate Eduyoth

(Testimonies), the legal determinations enacted or confirmed on a

certain occasion, decisive in Jewish History.

Erub. The Talmudic Tractate Erubhin, on the

conjunction of Sabbath boundaries. (See Appendix XVII.)

Midr. Esth. The Midrash on Esther.

Gitt. The Talmudic Tractate Gittin, on

Divorce.

Horay. The Taldmudic Tractate Horayoth

'Decisions' on certain unintentional transgressions.

Jad. [or Yad.] The Taldmudic Tractate Yadayim, on the

Washing of Hands.

Jebam. [or Yebam.] The Taldmudic Tractate Yebhamoth, on the

Levirate.

Jom. [mostly Yom.] The Taldmudic Tractate Yoma, on the Day of

Atonement.

Kel. The Taldmudic Tractate Kelim, on the

purification of furniture and vessels.

Kerith. The Taldmudic Tractate Kerithuth, on

the punishment of 'cutting off.'

Kethub. The Taldmudic Tractate Kethubhoth, on

marriage-contracts.

Kidd. The Taldmudic Tractate Qiddushin, on

Betrothal.

Kil. The Taldmudic Tractate Kilayim, on

the unlawful commixtures (Lev. xix. 19; Deut. xxii. 9-11).

Kinn. The Taldmudic Tractate Qinnim, on the

offering of doves (Lev. v. 1-10; xii. 8).

Midr. Kohel. The Midrash on Qoheleth or Eccles.

Maas. The Talmudic Tractate Maaseroth, on

Levitical Tithes.

Maas Sh. The Talmudic Tractate Maaser Sheni, on

second Tithes (Deut. xiv. 22, &c.).

Machsh. The Talmudic Tractate Makhshirin, on

fluids that may render products 'defiled,' or that leave them

undefiled (Lev. xi. 34, 38).

Makk. [or Macc.] The Talmudic Tractate Makkoth, on the

punishment of Stripes.

Mechil. The Talmudic Tractate Mekhilta, a

Commentary on part of Exodus, dating at the latest from the first half

of the second century.

Megill. The Talmudic Tractate Megillah,

referring to the reading of the ('roll') Book of Esther and on the

Feast of Esther.

Meil. The Talmudic Tractate Meilah, on the

defilement of things consecrated.

Menach. The Talmudic Tractate Menachoth, on

Meat-offerings.

Midd. The Talmudic Tractate Middoth, on the

Temple-measurements and arrangements.

Mikv. The Talmudic Tractate Miqvaoth, on

ablutions and immersions.

Moed K. The Talmudic Tractate Moed Qatan, on

Half-holidays

Naz. The Talmudic Tractate Nazir, on the

Nasirate.

Ned. The Talmudic Tractate Nedarim, on

Vowing.

Neg. The Talmudic Tractate Negaim, on

Leprosy.

Nidd. The Talmudic Tractate Niddah, on

female levitical impurity (menstrua).

Ohol. The Talmudic Tractate Oholoth, on the

defilement of tents and houses, specially by death.

Orl. The Talmudic Tractate Orlah, on the

ordinances connected with Lev. xix. 23.

Par. The Talmudic Tractate Parah, on the

Red Heifer and purification by its ashes.

Peah The Talmudic Tractate Peah, on the

corner to be left for the poor in harvesting.

Pes. The Talmudic Tractate Pesachim, on

the Paschal Feast.

Pesiqta The Book Pesiqta, an exceedingly

interesting series of Meditations or brief discussions and Lectures on

certain portions of the Lectionary for the principal Sabbaths and

Feast Days.

Pirqé de R. Eliez. The Haggadic Pirqé de Rabbi Eliezer, in 54

chapters, a discursive Tractate on the History of Israel from the

creation to the time of Moses, with the insertion of three chapters

(xlix.-li.) on the history of Haman and the future Messianic

deliverance.

Rosh haSh. The Talmudic Tractate Rosh haShanah, on

the Feast of New Year

Sab. The Talmudic Tractate Zabhim, on

certain levitically defiling issues.

Sanh. The Talmudic Tractate Sanhedrin, on

the Sanhedrim and Criminal Jurisprudence.

Sebach. The Talmudic Tractate Zebhachim, on

Sacrifices.

Shabb. The Talmudic Tractate Shabbath, on

Sabbath-observance.

Shebh. The Talmudic Tractate Shebhiith, on the

Sabbatic Year.

Shebu. The Talmudic Tractate Shebhuoth, on

Oaths, &c.

Sheqal. The Talmudic Tractate Sheqalim, on the

Temple-Tribute, &c.

Shem R. The Midrash Shemoth Rabba on Exodus.

Shir haSh R. The Midrash Shir haShirim Rabba, on the

Song of Solomon.

Siphra The ancient Commentary on Leviticus, dating from

the second century.

Siphré The still somewhat older Commentary on Numb. and

Deuter.

Sot. The Talmudic Tractate Sotah, on the

Woman accused of Adultery.

Sukk. The Talmudic Tractate Sukkah, on the

Feast of Tabernacles.

Taan. The Talmudic Tractate Taanith, on

Fasting and Fast-Days.

Tam. The Talmudic Tractate Tamid, on the

daily Service and Sacrifice in the Temple.

Teb. Yom. The Talmudic Tractate Tebhul Yom ('bathed

of the day'), on impurities, where there is immersion on the evening

of the same day.

Tem. The Talmudic Tractate Temurah, on

substitution for things consecrated (Lev. xxvii. 10).

Ter. The Talmudic Tractate Terumoth, on

the priestly dues in produce.

Tohar. The Talmudic Tractate Toharoth, on

minor kinds of defilement.

Tanch. The Midrashic Commentary Tanchuma (or

Yelamdenu), on the Pentateuch.

Ukz. The Talmudic Tractate Uqtsin, on the

defilement of fruits through their envelopes, stalks, &c.

Vayyik R. The Midrash Vayyikra Rabba, on

Leviticus.

Yalk. The great collectaneum: Yalkut

Shimeoni, which is a catena on the whole Old Testament, containing

also quotations from works lost to us.[4]4

Book I.

INTRODUCTORY.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL:

THE JEWISH WORLD IN THE DAYS OF CHRIST

{hebrew}

'All the prophets prophesied not but of the days of the

Messiah.'-Sanh. 99 a

{hebrew}

'The world was not created but only for the Messiah.'-Sanh. 98 b

CHAPTER I.

THE JEWISH WORLD IN THE DAYS OF CHRIST - THE JEWISH DISPERSION IN THE

EAST.

Among the outward means by which the religion of Israel was preserved,

one of the most important was the centralisation and localisation of

its worship in Jerusalem. If to some the ordinances of the Old

Testament may in this respect seem narrow and exclusive, it is at

least doubtful, whether without such a provision Monothsiem itself

could have continued as a creed or a worship. In view of the state of

the ancient world, and of the tendencies of Israel during the earlier

stages of their history, the strictest isolation was necessary in

order to preserve the religion of the Old Testament from that mixture

with foreign elements which would speedily have proved fatal to its

existence. And if one source of that danger had ceased after the

seventy years' exile in Babylonia, the dispersion of the greater part

of the nation among those manners and civilisation would necessarily

influence them, rendered the continuance of this separation of as

great importance as before. In this respect, even traditionalism had

its mission and use, as a hedge around the Law to render its

infringement or modification impossible.

Wherever a Roman, a Greek, or an Asiatic might wander, he could take

his gods with him, or find rites kindred to his own. It was far

otherwise with the Jew. He had only one Temple, that in Jerusalem;

only one God, Him Who had once throned there between the Cherubim, and

Who was still King over Zion. That Temple was the only place where a

God-appointed, pure priesthood could offer acceptable sacrifices,

whether for forgiveness of sin, or for fellowship with God. Here, in

the impenetrable gloom of the innermost sanctuary, which the

High-Priest alone might enter once a year for most solemn expiation,

had stood the Ark, the leader of the people into the Land of Promise,

and the footstool on which the Schechinah had rested. From that golden

altar rose the cloud in incense, symbol of Israel's accepted prayers;

that seven-branched candlestick shed its perpetual light, indicative

of the brightness of God's Covenant Presence; on that table, as it

were before the face of Jehovah, was laid, week by week, 'the Bread of

the Face[5]5,' a constant sacrificial meal which Israel offered unto

God, and wherewith God in turn fed His chosen priesthood. On the great

blood-sprinkled altar of sacrifice smoked the daily and festive

burnt-offerings, brought by all Israel, and for all Israel, wherever

scattered; while the vast courts of the Temple were thronged not only

by native Palestinians, but literally by 'Jews out of every nation

under heaven.' Around this Temple gathered the sacred memories of the

past; to it clung the yet brighter hopes of the future. The history of

Israel and all their prospects were intertwined with their religion;

so that it may be said that without their religion they had no

history, and without their history no religion. Thus, history,

patriotism, religion, and hope alike pointed to Jerusalem and the

Temple as the centre of Israel's unity.

Nor could the depressed state of the nation alter their views or shake

their confidence. What mattered it, that the Idumæan, Herod, had

unsurped the throne of David, expect so far as his own guilt and their

present subjection were concerned? Israel had passed through deeper

waters, and stood triumphant on the other shore. For centuries

seemingly hopeless bondsmen in Egypt, they had not only been

delivered, but had raised the God-inspired morning-song of jubilee, as

they looked back upon the sea cleft for them, and which had buried

their oppressors in their might and pride. Again, for weary years had

their captives hung Zion's harps by the rivers of that city and empire

whose colossal grandeur, wherever they turned, must have carried to

the scattered strangers the desolate feeling of utter hopelessness.

And yet that empire had crumbled into dust, while Israel had again

taken root and sprung up. And now little more than a century and a

half had passed, since a danger greater even than any of these had

threatened the faith and the very existence of Israel. In his daring

madness, the Syrian king, Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes) had forbidden

their religion, sought to destroy their sacred books, with unsparing

ferocity forced on them conformity to heathen rites, desecrated the

Temple by dedicating it to Zeus Olympios, what is translated by

'shewbread.' a constant sacrificial and even reared a heathen altar

upon that of burnt-offering.[6]6 Worst of all, his wicked schemes had

been aided by two apostate High-Priests, who had outvied each other in

buying and then prostituting the sacred office of God's anointed.[7]7

Yet far away in the mountains of Ephraim[8]8 God had raised for them

most unlooked-for and unlikely help. Only three years later, and,

after a series of brilliant victories by undisciplined men over the

flower of the Syrian army, Judas the Maccabee, truly God's Hammer[9]9

had purified the Temple, and restored its altar on the very same

day[10]10 on which the 'abomination of desolation'[11]11 had been set

up in its place. In all their history the darkest hour of their night

had ever preceded the dawn of a morning brighter than any that had yet

broken. It was thus that with one voice all their prophets had bidden

them wait and hope. Their sayings had been more than fulfilled as

regarded the past. Would they not equally become true in reference to

that far more glorious future for Zion and for Israel, which was to be

ushered in by the coming of the Messiah?

Nor were such the feelings of the Palestinian Jews only. These indeed

were now a minority. The majority of the nation constituted what was

known as the dispersion; a term which, however, no longer expressed

its original meaning of banishment by the judgment of God,[12]12 since

absence from Palestine was now entirely voluntary. But all the more

that it referred not to outward suffering,[13]13 did its continued use

indicate a deep feeling of religious sorrow, of social isolation, and

of political strangership[14]14 in the midst of a heathen world. For

although, as Josephus reminded his countrymen,[15]15 there was 'no

nation in the world which had not among them part of the Jewish

people,' since it was 'widely dispersed over all the world among its

inhabitants,'[16]16 yet they had nowhere found a real home. A century

and a half before our era comes to us from Egypt[17]17 - where the

Jews possessed exceptional privileges - professedly from the heathen,

but really from the Jewish[18]18 Sibyl, this lament of Israel -

Crowding with thy numbers every ocean and country -

Yet an offense to all around thy presence and customs![19]19

Sixty years later the Greek geographer and historian Strabo bears the

like witness to their presence in every land, but in language that

shows how true had been the complaint of the Sibyl.[20]20 The reasons

for this state of feeling will by-and-by appear. Suffice it for the

present that, all unconsciously, Philo tells its deepest ground, and

that of Israel's loneliness in the heathen world, when speaking, like

the others, of his countrymen as in 'all the cities of Europe, in the

provinces of Asia and in the islands,' he describes them as, wherever

sojourning, having but one metropolis - not Alexandria, Antioch, or

Rome - but 'the Holy City with its Temple, dedicated to the Most High

God.'[21]21 A nation, the vast majority of which was dispersed over

the whole inhabited earth, had ceased to be a special, and become a

world-nation.[22]22 Yet its heart beat in Jerasulem, and thence the

life-blood passed to its most distant members. And this, indeed, if we

rightly understand it, was the grand object of the 'Jewish dispersion'

throughout the world.

What has been said applies, perhaps, in a special manner, to the

Western, rather than to the Eastern 'dispersion.' The connection of

the latter with Palestine was so close as almost to seem one of

continuity. In the account of the truly representative gathering in

Jerusalem on that ever-memorable Feast of Weeks,[23]23 the division

of the 'dispersion' into two grand sections - the Eastern or

Trans-Euphratic, and the Western or Hellenist - seems clearly

marked.[24]24 In this arrangement the former would include 'the

Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and dwellers in Mesopotamia,' Judæa

standing, so to speak, in the middle, while 'the Bretes and Arabians'

would typically represent the farthest outrunners respectively of the

Western and the Eastern Diaspora. The former, as we know from the New

Testament, commonly bore in Palestine the name of the 'dispersion of

the Greeks,'[25]25 and of 'Hellenists' or 'Grecians.'[26]26 On the

other hand, the Trans-Euphratic Jews, who 'inhabited Babylon and many

of the other satrapies,'[27]27 were included with the Palestinians and

the Syrians under the term 'Hebrews,' from the common language which

they spoke.

But the difference between the 'Grecians' and the 'Hebrews' was far

deeper than merely of language, and extended to the whole direction of

thought. There were mental influences at work in the Greek world from

which, in the nature of things, it was impossible even for Jews to

withdraw themselves, and which, indeed, were as necessary for the

fulfillment of their mission as their isolation from heathenism, and

their connection with Jerusalem. At the same time it was only natural

that the Hellenists, placed as they were in the midst of such hostile

elements, should intensely wish to be Jews, equal to their Eastern

brethren. On the other hand, Pharisaism, in its pride of legal purity

and of the possession of traditional lore, with all that it involved,

made no secret of its contempt for the Hellenists, and openly declared

the Grecian far inferior to the Babylonian 'dispersion.'[28]28 That

such feelings, and the suspicions which they engendered, had struck

deep into the popular mind, appears from the fact, that even in the

Apostolic Church, and that in her earliest days, disputes could break

out between the Hellenists and the Hebrews, arising from suspicion of

unkind and unfair dealings grounded on these sectional

prejudices.[29]29

Far other was the estimate in which the Babylonians were held by the

leaders of Judaism. Indeed, according to one view of it, Babylonia, as

well as 'Syria' as far north as Antioch, was regarded as forming part

of the land of Israel.[30]30 Every other country was considered

outside 'the land,' as Palestine was called, witht the exception of

Babylonia, which was reckoned as part of it.[31]31 For Syria and

Mesopotamia, eastwards to the banks of the Tigris, were supposed to

have been in the territory which King David had conquered, and this

made them ideally for ever like the land of Israel. But it was just

between the Euphrates and the Tigris that the largest and wealthiest

settlements of the Jews were, to such extent that a later writer

actually designated them 'the land of Israel.' Here Nehardaa, on the

Nahar Malka, or royal canal, which passed from the Euphrates to the

Tigris, was the oldest Jewish settlement. It boasted of a Synagogue,

said to have been built by King Jechoniah with stones that had been

brought from the Temple.[32]32 In this fortified city the vast

contributions intended for the Temple were deposited by the Eastern

Jews, and thence conveyed to their destination under escort of

thousands of armed men. Another of these Jewish treasure-cities was

Nisibis, in northern Mesopotamia. Even the fact that wealth, which

must have sorely tempted the cupidity of the heathen, could be safely

stored in these cities and transported to Palestine, shows how large

the Jewish population must have been, and how great their general

influence.

In general, it is of the greatest importance to remember in regard to

this Eastern dispersion, that only a minority of the Jews, consisting

in all of about 50,000, originally returned from Babylon, first under

Zerubbabel and afterwards under Ezra.[33]33 Nor was their inferiority

confined to numbers. The wealthiest and most influential of the Jews

remained behind. According to Josephus,[34]34 with whom Philo

substantially agrees, vast numbers, estimated at millions, inhabited

the Trans-Euphratic provinces. To judge even by the number of those

slain in popular risings (50,000 in Seleucia alone[35]35), these

figures do not seem greatly exaggerated. A later tradition had it,

that so dense was the Jewish population in the Persian Empire, that

Cyrus forbade the further return of the exiles, lest the country

should be depopulated.[36]36 So large and compact a body soon became a

political power. Kindly treated under the Persian monarchy, they were,

after the fall of that empire,[37]37 favoured by the successors of

Alexander. When in turn the Macedono-Syrian rule gave place to the

Parthian Empire,[38]38 the Jews formed, from their national opposition

to Rome, an important element in the East. Such was their influence

that, as late as the year 40 a.d., the Roman legate shrank from

provoking their hostility.[39]39 At the same time it must not be

thought that, even in these favoured regions, they were wholly without

persecution. Here also history records more than one tale of bloody

strife on the part of those among whom they dwelt.[40]40

To the Palestinians, their brethren of the East and of Syria - to

which they had wandered under the fostering rule of the

Macedono-Syrian monarchs (the Seleucidæ) - were indeed pre-eminently

the Golah, or 'dispersion.' To them the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem

intimated by fire-signals from mountain-top to mountain-top the

commencement of each month for the regulation of the festive

calendar,[41]41 even as they afterwards despatched messengers into

Syria for the same purpose.[42]42 In some respects the Eastern

dispersion was placed on the same footing; in others, on even a higher

level than the mother country. Tithes and Terumoth, or first-fruits in

a prepared condition,[43]43 were due from them, while the Bikkurim, or

first-fruits in a fresh state, were to be brought from Syria to

Jerusalem. Unlike the heathen countries, whose very dust defiled, the

soil of Syria was declared clean, like that of Palestine itself.[44]44

So far as purity of descent was concerned, the Babylonians, indeed,

considered themselves superior to their Palestinian brethren. They had

it, that when Ezra took with him those who went to Palestine, he had

left the land behind him as pure as fine flour.[45]45 To express it in

their own fashion: In regard to the genealogical purity of their

Jewish inhabitants, all other countries were, compared to Palestine,

like dough mixed with leaven; but Palestine itself was such by the

side of Babylonia.[46]46 It was even maintained, that the exact

boundaries could be traced in a district, within which the Jewish

population had preserved itself unmixed. Great merit was in this

respect also ascribed to Ezra. In the usual mode of exaggeration, it

was asserted, that, if all the genealogical studies and

researches[47]47 had been put together, they would have amounted to

many hundred camel-loads. There was for it, however, at least this

foundation in truth, that great care and labour were bestowed on

preserving full and accurate records so as to establish purity of

descent. What importance attached to it, we know from the action on

Ezra[48]48 in that respect, and from the stress which Josephus lays on

this point.[49]49 Official records of descent as regarded the

priesthood were kept in the Temple. Besides, the Jewish authorities

seem to have possessed a general official register, which Herod

afterwards ordered to be burnt, from reasons which it is not difficult

to infer. But from that day, laments a Rabbi, the glory of the Jews

decreased![50]50

Nor was it merely purity of descent of which the Eastern dispersion

could boast. In truth, Palestine owed everything to Ezra, the

Babylonian,[51]51 a man so distinguished that, according to tradition,

the Law would have been given by him, if Moses had not previously

obtained that honor. Putting aside the various traditional ordinances

which the Talmud ascribes to him,[52]52 we know from the Scriptures

what his activity for good had been. Altered circumstances had brought

many changes to the new Jewish State. Even the language, spoken and

written, was other than formerly. Instead of the characters anciently

employed, the exiles brought with them, on their return, those now

common, the so-called square Hebrew letters, which gradually came into

general use.[53]53 [54]54 The language spoken by the Jews was no

longer Hebrew, but Aramæan, both in Palestine and in Babylonia;[55]55

in the former the Western, in the latter the Eastern dialect. In fact,

the common people were ignorant of pure Hebrew, which henceforth

became the language of students and of the Synagogue. Even there a

Methurgeman, or interpreter, had to be employed to translate into the

vernacular the portions of Scripture read in the public

services,[56]56 and the addresses delivered by the Rabbis. This was

the origin of the so-called Targumim, or paraphrases of Scripture. In

earliest times, indeed, it was forbidden to the Methurgeman to read

his translation or to write down a Targum, lest the paraphrase should

be regarded as of equal authority with the original. It was said that,

when Jonathan brought out his Targum on the Prophets, a voice from

heaven was heard to utter: 'Who is this that has revealed My secrets

to men?'[57]57 Still, such Targumim seem to have existed from a very

early period, and, amid the varying and often incorrect renderings,

their necessity must have made itself increasingly felt. Accordingly,

their use was authoritatively sanctioned before the end of the second

century after Christ. This is the origin of our two oldest extant

Targumim: that of Onkelos (as it is called), on the Pentateuch; and

that on the Prophets, attributed to Jonathan the son of Uzziel. These

names do not, indeed, accurately represent the authorship of the

oldest Targumim, which may more correctly be regarded as later and

authoritative recensions of what, in some form, had existed before.

But although these works had their origin in Palestine, it is

noteworthy that, in the form in which at present we possess them, they

are the outcome of the schools of Babylon.

But Palestine owed, if possible, a still greater debt to Babylonia.

The new circumstances in which the Jews were placed on their return

seemed to render necessary an adaptation of the Mosaic Law, if not new

legislation. Besides, piety and zeal now attached themselves to the

outward observance and study of the letter of the Law. This is the

origin of the Mishnah, or Second Law, which was intended to explain

and supplement the first. This constituted the only Jewish dogmatics,

in the real sense, in the study of which the sage, Rabbi, scholar,

scribe, and Darshan,[58]58 were engaged. The result of it was the

Midrash, or investigation, a term which afterwards was popularly

applied to commentaries on the Scriptures and preaching. From the

outset, Jewish theology divided into two branches: the Halakhah and

the Haggadah. The former (from halakh, to go) was, so to speak, the

Rule of the Spiritual Road, and, when fixed, had even greater

authority than the Scriptures of the Old Testament, since it explained

and applied them. On the other hand, the Haggadah[59]59 (from nagad,

to tell) was only the personal saying of the teacher, more or less

valuable according to his learning and popularity, or the authorities

which he could quote in his support. Unlike the Halakhah, the Haggadah

had no absolute authority, either as to doctrine practice, or

exegesis. But all the greater would be its popular influence,[60]60

and all the more dangerous the doctrinal license which it allowed. In

fact, strange as it may sound, almost all the doctrinal teaching of

the Synagogue is to be derived from the Haggadah - and this also is

characteristic of Jewish traditionalism. But, alike in Halakhah and

Haggadah, Palestine was under the deepest obligation to Babylonia. For

the father of Halakhic study was Hillel, the Babylonian, and among the

popular Haggadists there is not a name better known than that of

Eleazar the Mede, who flourished in the first century of our era.

After this, it seems almost idle to inquire whether, during the first

period after the return of the exiles from Babylon, there were regular

theological academies in Babylon. Although it is, of course,

impossible to furnish historical proof, we can scarely doubt that a

community so large and so intensely Hebrew would not have been

indifferent to that study, which constituted the main thought and

engagement of their brethren in Palestine. We can understand that,

since the great Sanhedrin in Palestine exercised supreme spiritual

authority, and in that capacity ultimately settled all religious

questions - at least for a time - the study and discussion of these

subjects should also have been chiefly carried on in the schools of

Palestine; and that even the great Hillel himself, when still a poor

and unknown student, should have wandered thither to acquire the

learning and authority, which at that period he could not have found

in his own country. But even this circumstance implies, that such

studies were at least carried on and encouraged in Babylonia. How

rapidly soon afterwards the authority of the Babylonian schools

increased, till they not only overshadowed those of Palestine, but

finally inherited their prerogatives, is well known. However,

therefore, the Palestinians in their pride or jealousy might

sneer,[61]61 that the Babylonians were stupid, proud, and poor ('they

ate bread upon bread'),[62]62 even they had to acknowledge that, 'when

the Law had fallen into oblivion, it was restored by Ezra of Babylon;

when it was a second time forgotten, Hillel the Babylonian came and

recovered it; and when yet a third time it fell into oblivion, Rabbi

Chija came from Babylon and gave it back once more.'[63]63

Such then was that Hebrew dispersion which, from the first,

constituted really the chief part and the strength of the Jewish

nation, and with which its religious future was also to lie. For it is

one of those strangely significant, almost symbolical, facts in

history, that after the destruction of Jerusalem the spiritual

supremacy of Palestine passed to Babylonia, and that Rabbinical

Judaism, under the stress of political adversity, voluntarily

transferred itself to the seats of Israel's ancient dispersion, as if

to ratify by its own act what the judgment of God had formerly

executed. But long before that time the Babylonian 'dispersion' had

already stretched out its hands in every direction. Northwards, it had

spread through Armenia, the Caucasus, and to the shores of the Black

Sea, and through Media to those of the Caspian. Southwards, it had

extended to the Persian Gulf and through the vast extent of Arabia,

although Arabia Felix and the land of the Homerites may have received

their first Jewish colonies from the opposite shores of Ethiopia.

Eastwards it had passed as far as India.[64]64 Everywhere we have

distinct notices of these wanderers, and everywhere they appear as in

closest connection with the Rabbinical hierarchy of Palestine. Thus

the Mishnah, in an extremely curious section,[65]65 tells us how on

Sabbaths the Jewesses of Arabia might wear their long veils, and those

of India the kerchief round the head, customary in those countries,

without incurring the guilt of desecrating the holy day by needlessly

carrying what, in the eyes of the law, would be a burden;[66]66 while

in the rubric for the Day of Atonement we have it noted that the dress

which the High-Priest wore 'between the evenings' of the great fast -

that is, as afternoon darkened into evening - was of most costly

'Indian' stuff.[67]67

That among such a vast community there should have been poverty, and

that at one time, as the Palestinians sneered, learning may have been

left to pine in want, we can readily believe. For, as one of the

Rabbis had it in explanation of Deut. xxx. 13: 'Wisdom is not "beyond

the sea" - that is, it will not be found among traders or

merchants,'[68]68 whose mind must be engrossed by gain. And it was

trade and commerce which procured to the Babylonians their wealth and

influence, although agriculture was not neglected. Their caravans - of

whose camel drivers, by the way, no very flattering account is

given[69]69 - carried the rich carpets and woven stuffs of the East,

as well as its precious spices, to the West: generally through

Palestine to the Phoenician harbours, where a fleet of merchantmen

belonging to Jewish bankers and shippers lay ready to convey them to

every quarter of the world. These merchant princes were keenly alive

to all that passed, not only in the financial, but in the political

world. We know that they were in possession of State secrets, and

entrusted with the intricacies of diplomacy. Yet, whatever its

condition, this Eastern Jewish community was intensely Hebrew. Only

eight days' journey - though, according to Philo's western ideas of

it, by a difficult road[70]70 - separated them from Palestine; and

every pulsation there vibrated in Babylonia. It was in the most

outlying part of that colony, in the wide plains of Arabia, that Saul

of Tarsus spent those three years of silent thought and unknown

labour, which preceded his re-appearance in Jerusalem, when from the

burning longing to labour among his brethren, kindled by long

residence among these Hebrews of the Hebrews, he was directed to that

strange work which was his life's mission.[71]71 And it was among the

same community that Peter wrote and laboured,[72]72 amidst

discouragements of which we can form some conception from the sad

boast of Nehardaa, that up to the end of the third century it had not

numbered among its members any convert to Christianity.[73]73 In what

has been said, no notice has been taken of those wanderers of the ten

tribes, whose trackless footsteps seem as mysterious as their

after-fate. The Talmudists name four countries as their seats. But,

even if we were to attach historic credence to their vague statements,

at least two of these localities cannot with any certainty be

identified.[74]74 Only thus far all agree as to point us northwards,

through India, Armenia, the Kurdish mountains, and the Caucasus. And

with this tallies a curious reference in what is known as IV. Esdras,

which locates them in a land called Arzareth, a term which has, with

some probability, been identified with the land of Ararat.[75]75

Josephus[76]76 describes them as an innumerable multitude, and vaguely

locates them beyond the Euphrates. The Mishnah is silent as to their

seats, but discusses their future restoration; Rabbi Akiba denying and

Rabbi Eliezer anticipating it.[77]77 [78]78 Another Jewish

tradition[79]79 locates them by the fabled river Sabbatyon, which was

supposed to cease its flow on the weekly Sabbath. This, of course, is

an implied admission of ignorance of their seats. Similarly, the

Talmud[80]80 speaks of three localities whither they had been

banished: the district around the river Sabbatyon; Daphne, near

Antioch; while the third was overshadowed and hidden by a cloud.

Later Jewish notices connect the final discovery and the return of the

'lost tribes' with their conversion under that second Messiah who, in

contradistinction to 'the Son of David' is styled 'the Son of Joseph,'

to whom Jewish tradition ascribes what it cannot reconcile with the

royal dignity of 'the Son of David,' and which, if applied to Him,

would almost inevitably lead up to the most wide concessions in the

Christian argument.[81]81 As regards the ten tribes there is this

truth underlying the strange hypothesis, that, as their persistent

apostasy from the God of Israel and His worship had cut them off from

his people, so the fulfilment of the Divine promises to them in the

latter days would imply, as it were, a second birth to make them once

more Israel. Beyond this we are travelling chiefly into the region of

conjecture. Modern investigations have pointed to the

Nestorians,[82]82 and latterly with almost convincing evidence (so far

as such is possible) to the Afghans, as descended from the lost

tribes.[83]83 Such mixture with, and lapse into, Gentile nationalities

seems to have been before the minds of those Rabbis who ordered that,

if at present a non-Jew weds a Jewess, such a union was to be

respected, since the stranger might be a descendant of the ten

tribes.[84]84 Besides, there is reason to believe that part of them,

at least, had coalesced with their brethren of the later exile;[85]85

while we know that individuals who had settled in Palestine and,

presumably, elsewhere, were able to trace descent from them.[86]86

Still the great mass of the ten tribes was in the days of Christ, as

in our own, lost to the Hebrew nation.

CHAPTER II.

THE JEWISH DISPERSION IN THE WEST - THE HELLENISTS - ORIGIN OF

HELLENIST

LITERATURE IN THE GREEK TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE - CHARACTER OF THE

SEPTUAGINT.

When we turn from the Jewish 'dispersion' in the East to that in the

West, we seem to breathe quite a different atmosphere. Despite their

intense nationalism, all unconsciously to themselves, their mental

characteristics and tendencies were in the opposite direction from

those of their brethren. With those of the East rested the future of

Judaism; with them of the West, in a sense, that of the world. The one

represented old Israel, stretching forth its hands to where the dawn

of a new day was about to break. These Jews of the West are known by

the term Hellenists - from _lljn_zein, to conform to the language and

manners of the Greeks.[87]87

Whatever their religious and social isolation, it was, in the nature

of thing, impossible that the Jewish communities in the West should

remains unaffected by Grecian culture and modes of thought; just as,

on the other hand, the Greek world, despite popular hatred and the

contempt of the higher classes, could not wholly withdraw itself from

Jewish influences. Witness here the many converts to Judaism among the

Gentiles;[88]88 witness also the evident preparedness of the lands of

this 'dispersion' for the new doctrine which was to come from Judea.

Many causes contributed to render the Jews of the West accessible to

Greek influences. They had not a long local history to look back upon,

nor did they form a compact body, like their brethren in the East.

They were craftsmen, traders, merchants, settled for a time here or

there - units might combine into communities, but could not form one

people. Then their position was not favourable to the sway of

traditionalism. Their occupations, the very reasons for their being in

a 'strange land,' were purely secular. That lofty absorption of

thought and life in the study of the Law, writtem and oral, which

characterised the East, was to the, something in the dim distance,

sacred, like the soil and the institutions of Palestine, but

unattainable. In Palestine or Babylonia numberless influences from his

earliest years, all that he saw and heard, the very force of

circumstances, would tend to make an earnest Jew a disciple of the

Rabbis; in the West it would lead him to 'hellenise.' It was, so to

speak, 'in the air'; and he could no more shut his mind against Greek

thought than he could withdraw his body from atmospheric influences.

That restless, searching, subtle Greek intellect would penetrate

everywhere, and flash its light into the innermost recesses of his

home and Synagogue.

To be sure, they were intensely Jewish, these communities of

strangers. Like our scattered colonists in distant lands, they would

cling with double affection to the customs of their home, and invest

with the halo of tender memories the sacred traditions of their faith.

The Grecian Jew might well look with contempt, not unmingled with

pity, on the idolatrous rites practised around, from which long ago

the pitiless irony of Isaiah had torn the veil of beauty, to show the

hideousness and unreality beneath. The dissoluteness of public and

private life, the frivolity and aimlessness of their pursuits,

political aspirations, popular assemblies, amusements - in short, the

utter decay of society, in all its phases, would lie open to his gaze.

It is in terms of lofty scorn, not unmingled with indignation, which

only occasionally gives way to the softer mood of warning, or even

invitation, that Jewish Hellenistic literature, whether in the

Apocrypha or in its Apocalyptic utterances, address heathenism.

From that spectacle the Grecian Jew would turn with infinite

satisfaction - not to say, pride - to his own community, to think of

its spiritual enlightenment, and to pass in review its exclusive

privileges.[89]89 It was with no uncertain steps that he would go past

those splendid temples to his own humbler Synagogue, pleased to find

himself there surrounded by those who shared his descent, his faith,

his hopes; and gratified to see their number swelled by many who,

heathens by birth, had learned the error of their ways, and now, so to

speak, humbly stood as suppliant 'strangers of the gate,' to seek

admission into his sanctuary.[90]90 How different were the rites which

he practised, hallowed in their Divine origin, rational in themselves,

and at the same time deeply significant, from the absurd superstitions

around. Who could have compared with the voiceless, meaningless,

blasphemous heathen worship, if it deserved the name, that of the

Synagogue, with its pathetic hymns, its sublime liturgy, its Divine

Scriptures, and those 'stated sermons' which 'instructed in virtue and

piety,' of which not only Philo,[91]91 Agrippa,[92]92 and

Josephus,[93]93 speak as a regular institution, but whose antiquity

and general prevalence is attested in Jewish writings,[94]94 and

nowhere more strongly than in the book of the Acts of the Apostles?

And in these Synagogues, how would 'brotherly love' be called out,

since, if one member suffered, all might soon be affected, and the

danger which threatened one community would, unless averted, ere long

overwhelm the rest. There was little need for the admonition not to

'forget the love of strangers.'[95]95 To entertain them was not merely

a virtue; in the Hellenist dispersion it was a religious necessity.

And by such means not a few whom they would regard as 'heavenly

messengers' might be welcomed. From the Acts of the Apostles we knew

with what eagerness they would receive, and with what readiness they

would invite, the passing Rabbi or teacher, who came from the home of

their faith, to speak, if there were in them a word of comforting

exhortation for the people.[96]96 We can scarcely doubt, considering

the state of things, that this often bore on 'the consolation of

Israel.' But, indeed, all that came from Jerusalem, all that helped

them to realise their living connection with it, or bound it more

closely, was precious. 'Letters out of Judæa,' the tidings which some

one might bring on his return from festive pilgrimage or business

journey, especially about anything connected with that grand

expectation - the star which was to rise on the Eastern sky - would

soon spread, till the Jewish pedlar in his wanderings had carried the

news to the most distant and isolated Jewish home, where he might find

a Sabbath, welcome and Sabbath-rest.

Such undoubtedly was the case. And yet, when the Jew stepped out of

the narrow circle which he had drawn around him, he was confronted on

every side by Grecianism. It was in the forum, in the market, in the

counting house, in the street; in all that he saw, and in all to whom

he spoke. It was refined; it was elegant; it was profound; it was

supremely attractive. He might resist, but he could not push it aside.

Even in resisting, he had already yielded to it. For, once open the

door to the questions which it brought, if it were only to expel, or

repel them, he must give up that principle of simple authority on

which traditionalism as a system rested. Hellenic criticism could not

so be silenced, nor its searching light be extinguished by the breath

of a Rabbi. If he attempted this, the truth would not only be worsted

before its enemies, but suffer detriment in his own eyes. He must meet

argument with argument, and that not only for those who were without,

but in order to be himself quite sure of what he believed. He must be

able to hold it, not only in controversy with others, where pride

might bid him stand fast, but in that much more serious contest

within, where a man meets the old adversary alone in the secret arena

of his own mind, and has to sustain that terrible hand-to-hand fight,

in which he is uncheered by outward help. But why should he shrink

from the contest, when he was sure that his was Divine truth, and that

therefore victory must be on his side? As in our modern conflicts

against the onesided inferences from physical investigations we are

wont to say that the truths of nature cannot contradict those of

revelation, both being of God, and as we are apt to regard as truths

of nature what sometimes are only deductions from partially

ascertained facts, and as truths of revelation what, after all, may be

only our own inferences, sometimes from imperfectly apprehended

premises, so the Hellenist would seek to conciliate the truths of

Divine revelation with those others which, he thought, he recognized

in Hellenism. But what were the truths of Divine revelation? Was it

only the substance of Scripture, or also its form, the truth itself

which was conveyed, or the manner in which it was presented to the

Jews; or, if both, then did the two stand on exactly the same footing?

On the answer to these questions would depend how little or how much

he would 'hellenise.'

One thing at any rate was quite certain. The Old Testament, leastwise,

the Law of Moses, was directly and wholly from God; and if so, then

its form also - its letter - must be authentic and authoritative. Thus

much on the surface, and for all. But the student must search deeper

into it, his senses, as it were, quickened by Greek criticism; he must

'meditate' and penetrate into the Divine mysteries. The Palestinian

also searched into them, and the result was the Midrash. But,

whichever of his methods he had applied - the Peshat, or simple

criticism of the words, the Derush, or search into the possible

applications of the text, what might be 'trodden out' of it; or the

Sod, the hidden, mystical, supranatural bearing of the words - it was

still only the letter of the text that had been studied. There was,

indeed, yet another understanding of the Scriptures, to which St. Paul

directed his disciples: the spiritual bearing of its spiritual truths.

But that needed another qualification, and tended in another direction

from those of which the Jewish student knew. On the other hand, there

was the intellectual view of the Scriptures - their philosophical

understanding, the application to them of the results of Grecian

thought and criticism. It was this which was peculiarly Hellenistic.

Apply that method, and the deeper the explorer proceeded in his

search, the more would he feel himself alone, far from the outside

crowd; but the brighter also would that light of criticism, which he

carried, shine in the growing darkness, or, as he held it up, would

the precious ore, which he laid bare, glitter and sparkle with a

thousand varying hues of brilliancy. What was Jewish, Palestinian,

individual, concrete in the Scriptures, was only the outside - true in

itself, but not the truth. There were depths beneath. Strip these

stories of their nationalism; idealise the individual of the persons

introduced, and you came upon abstract ideas and realities, true to

all time and to all nations. But this deep symbolism was Pythagorean;

this pre-existence of ideas which were the types of all outward

actuality, was Platonism! Broken rays in them, but the focus of truth

in the Scriptures. Yet these were rays, and could only have come from

the Sun. All truth was of God; hence theirs must have been of that

origin. Then were the sages of the heathen also in a sense God-taught

- and God-teaching, or inspiration, was rather a question of degree

than of kind!

One step only remained; and that, as we imagine, if not the easiest,

yet, as we reflect upon it, that which in practice would be most

readily taken. It was simply to advance towards Grecianism; frankly to

recognise truth in the results of Greek thought. There is that within

us, name it mental consciousness, or as you will, which, all unbidden,

rises to answer to the voice of intellectual truth, come whence it

may, just as conscience answers to the cause of moral truth or duty.

But in this case there was more. There was the mighty spell which

Greek philosophy exercised on all kindred minds, and the special

adaptation of the Jewish intellect to such subtle, if not deep,

thinking. And, in general, and more powerful than the rest, because

penetrating everywhere, was the charm of Greek literature, with its

brilliancy; of Greek civilisation and culture, with their polish and

attractiveness; and of what, in one word, we may call the

'time-spirit,' that tyrannos, who rules all in their thinking,

speaking, doing, whether they list or not.

Why, his sway extended even to Palestine itself, and was felt in the

innermost circle of the most exclusive Rabbinism. We are not here

referring to the fact that the very language spoken in Palestine came

to be very largely charged with Greek, and even Latin, words

Hebraised, since this is easily accounted for by the new

circumstances, and the necessities of intercourse with the dominant or

resident foreigners. Nor is it requisite to point out how impossible

it would have been, in presence of so many from the Greek and Roman

world, and after the long and persistent struggle of their rulers to

Grecianise Palestine, nay, even in view of so many magnificent heathen

temples on the very soil of Palestine, to exclude all knowledge of, or

contact with Grecianism. But not to be able to exclude was to have in

sight the dazzle of that unknown, which as such, and in itself, must

have had peculiar attractions to the Jewish mind. It needed stern

principle to repress the curiosity thus awakened. When a young Rabbi,

Ben Dama, asked his uncle whether he might not study Greek philosophy,

since he had mastered the 'Law' in every aspect of it, the older Rabbi

replied by a reference to Josh. i. 8: 'Go and search what is the hour

which is neither of the day nor of the night, and in it thou mayest

study Greek philosophy.'[97]97 Yet even the Jewish patriarch, Gamaliel

II., who may have sat with Saul of Tarsus at the feet of his

grandfather, was said to have busied himself with Greek, as he

certainly held liberal views on many points connected with Grecianism.

To be sure, tradition justified him on the ground that his position

brought him into contact with the ruling powers, and, perhaps, to

further vindicate him, ascribed similar pursuits to the elder

Gamaliel, although groundlessly, to judge from the circumstance that

he was so impressed even with the wrong of possessing a Targum on Job

in Aramæan, that he had it buried deep in the ground.

But all these are indications of a tendency existing. How wide it must

have spread, appears from the fact that the ban had to be pronounced

on all who studied 'Greek wisdom.' One of the greatest Rabbis, Elisha

ben Abujah, seems to have been actually led to apostacy by such

studies. True, he appears as the 'Acher' - the 'other' - in Talmudic

writings, whom it was not proper even to name. But he was not yet an

apostate from the Synagogue when those 'Greek songs' ever flowed from

his lips; and it was in the very Beth-ha-Midrash, or theological

academy, that a multitude of Siphrey Minim (heretical books) flew from

his breast, where they had lain concealed.[98]98 It may be so, that

the expression 'Siphrey Homeros' (Homeric writings), which occur not

only in the Talmud[99]99 but even in the Mishnah[100]100 referred

pre-eminently, if not exclusively, to the religious or semi-religious

Jewish Hellenistic literature, outside even the Apocrypha.[101]101 But

its occurrence proves, at any rate, that the Hellenists were credited

with the study of Greek literature, and that through them, if not more

directly, the Palestinians had become acquainted with it.

This sketch will prepare us for a rapid survey of that Hellenistic

literature which Judæa so much dreaded. Its importance, not only to

the Hellenists but to the world at large, can scarcely be

over-estimated. First and foremost, we have here the Greek translation

of the Old Testament, venerable not only as the oldest, but as that

which at the time of Jesus held the place of our 'Authorized Version,'

and as such is so often, although freely, quoted, in the New

Testament. Nor need we wonder that it should have been the people's

Bible, not merely among the Hellenists, but in Galilee, and even in

Judæa. It was not only, as already explained, that Hebrew was no

longer the 'vulgar tongue' in Palestine, and that written Targumim

were prohibited. But most, if not all - at least in towns - would

understand the Greek version; it might be quoted in intercourse with

Hellenist brethren or with the Gentiles; and, what was perhaps

equally, if not more important, it was the most readily procurable.

From the extreme labour and care bestowed on them, Hebrew manuscripts

of the Bible were enormously dear, as we infer from a curious

Talmudical notice,[102]102 where a common wollen wrap, which of course

was very cheap, a copy of the Psalms, of Job, and torn pieces from

Proverbs, are together valued at five maneh - say, about 19l. Although

this notice dates from the third or fourth century, it is not likely

that the cost of Hebrew Biblical MSS. was much lower at the time of

Jesus. This would, of course, put their possession well nigh out of

common reach. On the other hand, we are able to form an idea of the

cheapness of Greek manuscripts from what we know of the price of books

in Rome at the beginning of our era. Hundreds of slaves were there

engaged copying what one dictated. The result was not only the

publication of as large editions as in our days, but their production

at only about double the cost of what are now known as 'cheap' or

'people's editions.' Probably it would be safe to compute, that as

much matter as would cover sixteen pages of small print might, in such

cases, be sold at the rate of about sixpence, and in that

ratio.[103]103 Accordingly, manuscripts in Greek or Latin, although

often incorrect, must have been easily attainable, and this would have

considerable influence on making the Greek version of the Old

Testament the 'people's Bible.'[104]104

The Greek version, like the Targum of the Palestinians, originated, no

doubt, in the first place, in a felt national want on the part of the

Hellenists, who as a body were ignorant of Hebrew. Hence we find

notices of very early Greek versions of at least parts of the

Pentateuch.[105]105 But this, of course, could not suffice. On the

other hand, there existed, as we may suppose, a natural curiosity on

the part of students, especially in Alexandria, which had so large a

Jewish population, to know the sacred books on which the religion and

history of Israel were founded. Even more than this, we must take into

account the literary tastes of the first three Ptolemies (successors

in Egypt of Alexander the Great), and the exceptional favour which the

Jews for a time enjoyed. Ptolemy I. (Lagi) was a great patron of

learning. He projected the Museum in Alexandria, which was a home for

literature and study, and founded the great library. In these

undertakings Demetrius Phalereus was his chief adviser. The tastes of

the first Ptolemy were inherited by his son, Ptolemy II.

(Philadelphus), who had for two years been co-regent.[106]106 In fact,

ultimately that monarch became literally book-mad, and the sums spent

on rare MSS., which too often proved spurious, almost pass belief. The

same may be said of the third of these monarchs, Ptolemy III.

(Euergetes). It would have been strange, indeed, if these monarchs had

not sought to enrich their library with an authentic rendering of the

Jewish sacred books, or not encouraged such a translation.

These circumstances will account for the different elements which we

can trace in the Greek version of the Old Testament, and explain the

historical, or rather legendary, notices which we have of its

composition. To begin with the latter. Josephus has preserved what, no

doubt in its present form, is a spurious letter from one Aristeas to

his brother Philocrates,[107]107 in which we are told how, by the

advice of his librarian (?), Demetrius Phalereus, Ptolemy II. had sent

by him (Aristeas) and another officer, a letter, with rich presents,

to Eleazar, the High-Priest at Jerusalem; who in turn had selected

seventy-two translators (six out of each tribe), and furnished them

with a most valuable manuscript of the Old Testament. The letter then

gives further details of their splendid reception at the Egyptian

court, and of their sojourn in the island of Pharos, where they

accomplished their work in seventy-two days, when they returned to

Jerusalem laden with rich presents, their translation having received

the formal approval of the Jewish Sanhedrin at Alexandria. From this

account we may at least derive as historical these facts: that the

Pentateuch - for to it only the testimony refers - was translated into

Greek, at the suggestion of Demetrius Phalareus, in the reign and

under the patronage - if not by direction - of Ptolemy II.

(Philadelphus).[108]108 With this the Jewish accounts agree, which

describe the translation of the Pentateuch under Ptolemy - the

Jerusalem Talmud[109]109 in a simpler narrative, the

Babylonian[110]110 with additions apparently derived from the

Alexandrian legends; the former expressly noting thirteen, the latter

marking fifteen, variations from the original text.[111]111

The Pentateuch once translated, whether by one, or more likely by

several persons,[112]112 the other books of the Old Testament would

naturally soon receive the same treatment. They were evidently

rendered by a number of persons, who possessed very different

qualifications for their work - the translation of the Book of Daniel

having been so defective, that in its place another by Theodotion was

afterwards substituted. The version, as a whole, bears the name of the

LXX. - as some have supposed from the number of its translators

according to Aristeas' account - only that in that case it should have

been seventy-two; or from the approval of the Alexandrian

Sannedrin[113]113 - although in that case it should have been

seventy-one; or perhaps because, in the popular idea, the number of

the Gentile nations, of which the Greek (Japheth) was regarded as

typical, was seventy. We have, however, one fixed date by which to

compute the completion of this translation. From the prologue to the

Apocryphal 'Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach,' we learn that in his

days the Canon of Scripture was closed; and that on his arrival, in

his thirty-eighth year.[114]114 In Egypt, which was then under the

rule of Euergetes, he found the so-called LXX. version completed, when

he set himself to a similar translation of the Hebrew work of his

grandfather. But in the 50th chapter of that work we have a

description of the High-Priest Simon, which is evidently written by an

eye-witness. We have therefore as one term the pontificate of Simon,

during which the earlier Jesus lived; and as the other, the reign of

Euergetes, in which the grandson was at Alexandria. Now, although

there were two High-Priests who bore the name Simon, and two Egyptian

kings with the surname Euergetes, yet on purely historical grounds,

and apart from critical prejudices, we conclude that the Simon of

Ecclus. L. was Simon I., the Just, one of the greatest names in Jewish

traditional history; and similarly, that the Euergetes of the younger

Jesus was the first of that name, Ptolemy III., who reigned from 247

to 221 b.c.[115]115 In his reign, therefore, we must regard the LXX.

version as, at least substantially, completed.

From this it would, of course, follow that the Canon of the Old

Testament was then practically fixed in Palestine.[116]116 That Canon

was accepted by the Alexandrian translators, although the more loose

views of the Hellenists on 'inspiration,' and the absence of that

close watchfulness exercised over the text in Palestine, led to

additions and alterations, and ultimately even to the admission of the

Apocrypha into the Greek Bible. Unlike the Hebrew arrangement of the

tex into the Law, the Prophets,[117]117 and the (sacred) Writings, or

Hagiographa, the LXX. arrange them into historical, prophetical, and

poetic books, and count twenty-two, after the Hebrew alphabet, instead

of twenty-four, as the Hebrews. But perhaps both these may have been

later arrangements, since Philo evidently knew the Jewish order of the

books.[118]118 What text the translators may have used we can only

conjecture. It differs in almost innumerable instances from our own,

though the more important deviations are comparatively few.[119]119 In

the great majority of the lesser variations our Hebrew must be

regarded as the correct text.[120]120

Putting aside clerical mistakes and misreadings, and making allowance

for errors of translation, ignorance, and haste, we note certain

outstanding facts as characteristic of the Greek version. It bears

evident marks of its origin in Egypt in its use of Egyptian words and

references, and equally evident traces of its Jewish composition. By

the side of slavish and false literalism there is great liberty, if

not licence, in handling the original; gross mistakes occur along with

happy renderings of very difficult passages, suggesting the aid of

some able scholars. Distinct Jewish elements are undeniably there,

which can only be explained by reference to Jewish tradition, although

they are much fewer than some critics have supposed.[121]121 This we

can easily understand, since only those traditions would find a place

which at that early time were not only received, but in general

circulation. The distinctively Grecian elements, however, are at

present of chief interest to us. They consist of allusions to Greek

mythological terms, and adaptations of Greek philosophical ideas.

However few,[122]122 even one well-authenticated instance would lead

us to suspect others, and in general give to the version the character

of Jewish Hellenising. In the same class we reckon what constitutes

the prominent characteristic of the LXX. version, which, for want of

better terms, we would designate as rationalistic and apologetic.

Difficulties - or what seemed such - are removed by the most bold

methods, and by free handling of the text; it need scarcely be said,

often very unsatisfactorily. More especially a strenuous effort is

made to banish all anthropomorphisms, as inconsistent with their ideas

of the Deity. The superficial observer might be tempted to regard this

as not strictly Hellenistic, since the same may be noted, and indeed

is much more consistently carried out, in the Targum of Onkelos.

Perhaps such alterations had even been introduced into the Hebrew text

itself.[123]123 But there is this vital difference between

Palestinianism and Alexandrianism, that, broadly speaking, the Hebrew

avoidance of anthropomorphisms depends on objective - theological and

dogmatic - the Hellenistic on subjective - philosophical and

apologetic - grounds. The Hebrew avoids them as he does what seems to

him inconsistent with the dignity of Biblical heroes and of Israel.

'Great is the power of the prophets,' he writes, 'who liken the

Creator to the creature;' or else[124]124 'a thing is written only to

break it to the ear' - to adapt it to our human modes of speaking and

understanding; and again,[125]125 the 'words of the Torah are like the

speech of the children of men.' But for this very purpose the words of

Scripture may be presented in another form, if need be even modified,

so as to obviate possible misunderstanding, or dogmatic error. The

Alexandrians arrived at the same conclusion, but from an opposite

direction. They had not theological but philosophical axioms in their

minds - truths which the highest truth could not, and, as they held,

did not contravene. Only dig deeper; get beyond the letter to that to

which it pointed; divest abstract truth of its concrete, national,

Judaistic envelope - penetrate through the dim porch into the temple,

and you were surrounded by a blaze of light, of which, as its portals

had been thrown open, single rays had fallen into the night of

heathendom. And so the truth would appear glorious - more than

vindicated in their own sight, triumphant in that of others!

In such manner the LXX. version became really the people's Bible to

that large Jewish world through which Christianity was afterwards to

address itself to mankind. It was part of the case, that this

translation should be regarded by the Hellenists as inspired like the

original. Otherwise it would have been impossible to make final appeal

to the very words of the Greek; still less, to find in them a mystical

and allegorical meaning. Only that we must not regard their views of

inspiration - except as applying to Moses, and even there only

partially - as identical with ours. To their minds inspiration

differed quantitatively, not qualitatively, from what the rapt soul

might at any time experience, so that even heathen philosophers might

ultimately be regarded as at times inspired. So far as the version of

the Bible was concerned (and probably on like grounds), similar views

obtained at a later period even in Hebrew circles, where it was laid

down that the Chaldee Targum on the Pentateuch had been originally

spoken to Moses on Sinai,[126]126 though afterwards forgotten, till

restored and re-introduced.[127]127

Whether or not the LXX. was read in the Hellenist Synagogues, and the

worship conducted, wholly or partly, in Greek, must be matter of

conjecture. We find, however, a significant notice[128]128 to the

effect that among those who spoke a barbarous language (not Hebrew -

the term referring specially to Greek), it was the custom for one

person to read the whole Parashah (or lesson for the day), while among

the Hebrew-speaking Jews this was done by seven persons, successively

called up. This seems to imply that either the Greek text alone was

read, or that it followed a Hebrew reading, like the Targum of the

Easterns. More probably, however, the former would be the case, since

both Hebrew manuscripts, and persons qualified to read them, would be

difficult to procure. At any rate, we know that the Greek Scriptures

were authoritatively acknowledged in Palestine,[129]129 and that the

ordinary daily prayers might be said in Greek.[130]130 The LXX.

deserved this distinction from its general faithfulness - at least, in

regard to the Pentateuch - and from its preservation of ancient

doctrine. Thus, without further referring to its full acknowledgment

of the doctrine of Angels (comp. Deut. xxxii. 8, xxxiii. 2), we

specially mark that is preserved the Messianic interpretation of Gen.

xlix. 10, and Numb. xxiv. 7, 17, 23, bringing us evidence of what had

been the generally received view two and a half centuries before the

birth of Jesus. It must have been on the ground of the use made of the

LXX. in argument, that later voices in the Synagogue declared this

version to have been as great calamity to Israel as the making of the

golden calf,[131]131 and that is completion had been followed by the

terrible omen of an eclipse, that lasted three days.[132]132 For the

Rabbis declared that upon investigation it had been found that the

Torah could be adequately translated only into Greek, and they are

most extravagant in their praise of the Greek version of Akylas, or

Aquila, the proselyte, which was made to counteract the influence of

the LXX.[133]133 But in Egypt the anniversary of the completion of the

LXX. was celebrated by a feast in the island of Pharos, in which

ultimately even heathens seem to have taken part.[134]134

CHAPTER III.

THE OLD FAITH PREPARING FOR THE NEW - DEVELOPMENT OF HELLENIST

THEOLOGY: THE

APOCRYPHA, ARISTEAS, ARISTOBULUS, AND THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHIC WRITINGS.

The translation of the Old Testament into Greek may be regarded as the

starting-point of Hellenism. It rendered possible the hope that what

in its original form had been confined to the few, might become

accessible to the world at large.[135]135 But much yet remained to be

done. If the religion of the Old Testament had been brought near to

the Grecian world of thought, the latter had still to be brought near

to Judaism. Some intermediate stage must be found; some common ground

on which the two might meet; some original kindredness of spirit to

which their later divergences might be carried back, and where they

might finally be reconciled. As the first attempt in this direction -

first in order, if not always in time - we mark the so-called

Apocryphal literature, most of which was either written in Greek, or

is the product of Hellenising Jews.[136]136 Its general object was

twofold. First, of course, it was apologetic - intended to fill gaps

in Jewish history or thought, but especially to strengthen the Jewish

mind against attacks from without, and generally to extol the dignity

of Israel. Thus, more withering sarcasm could scarcely be poured on

heathenism than in the apocryphal story of 'Bel and the Dragon,' or in

the so-called 'Epistle of Jeremy,' with which the Book of 'Baruch'

closes. The same strain, only in more lofty tones, resounds through

the Book of the 'Wisdom of Solomon,'[137]137 along with the constantly

implied contrast between the righteous, or Israel, and sinners, or the

heathen. But the next object was to show that the deeper and purer

thinking of heathenism in its highest philosophy supported - nay, in

some respects, was identical with - the fundamental teaching of the

Old Testament. This, of course, was apologetic of the Old Testament,

but it also prepared the way for a reconciliation with Greek

philosophy. We notice this especially in the so-called Fourth Book of

Maccabees, so long erroneously attributed to Josephus,[138]138 and in

the 'Wisdom of Solomon.' The first postulate here would be the

acknowledgment of truth among the Gentiles, which was the outcome of

Wisdom - and Wisdom was the revelation of God. This seems already

implied in so thoroughly Jewish a book as that of Jesus the Son of

Sirach.[139]139 Of course there could be no alliance with

Epicureanism, which was at the opposite pole of the Old Testament. But

the brilliancy of Plato's speculations would charm, while the stern

self-abnegation of Stoicism would prove almost equally attractive. The

one would show why they believed, the other why they lived, as they

did. Thus the theology of the Old Testament would find a rational

basis in the ontology of Plato, and its ethics in the moral philosophy

of the Stoics. Indeed, this is the very line of argument which

Josephus follows in the conclusion of his treatise against

Apion.[140]140 This, then, was an unassailable position to take:

contempt poured on heathenism as such,[141]141 and a rational

philosophical basis for Judaism. They were not deep, only acute

thinkers, these Alexandrians, and the result of their speculations was

a curious Eclecticism, in which Platonism and Stoicism are found,

often heterogeneously, side by side. Thus, without further details, it

may be said that the Fourth Book of Maccabees is a Jewish Stoical

treatise on the Stoical theme of 'the supremacy of reason,' the

proposition, stated at the outset, that 'pious reason bears absolute

sway over the passions,' being illustrated by the story of the

martyrdom of Eleazar, and of the mother and her seven sons.[142]142 On

the other hand, that sublime work, the 'Wisdom of Solomon,' contains

Platonic and Stoic elements[143]143 - chiefly perhaps the latter - the

two occurring side by side. Thus[144]144 'Wisdom,' which is so

concretely presented as to be almost hypostatised,[145]145 is first

described in the language of Stoicism,[146]146 and afterwards set

forth, in that of Platonism,[147]147 as 'the breath of the power of

God;' as 'a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty;'

'the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the

power of God, and the image of His goodness.' Similarly, we

have[148]148 a Stoical enumeration of the four cardinal virtues,

temperance, prudence, justice, and fortitude, and close by it the

Platonic idea of the soul's pre-existence,[149]149 and of earth and

matter pressing it down.[150]150 How such views would point in the

direction of the need of a perfect revelation from on high, as in the

Bible, and of its rational possibility, need scarcely be shown.

But how did Eastern Judaism bear itself towards this Apocryphal

literature? We find it described by a term which seems to correspond

to our 'Apocrypha,' as 'Sepharim Genuzim,' 'hidden books,' i.e.,

either such whose origin was hidden, or, more likely, books withdrawn

from common or congregational use. Although they were, of course,

carefully distinguished from the canonical Scriptures, as not being

sacred, their use was not only allowed, but many of them are quoted in

Talmudical writings.[151]151 In this respect they are placed on a very

different footing from the so-called Sepharim Chitsonim, or 'outside

books,' which probably included both the products of a certain class

of Jewish Hellenistic literature, and the Siphrey Minim, or writings

of the heretics. Against these Rabbinism can scarcely find terms of

sufficient violence, even debarring from share in the world to come

those who read them.[152]152 This, not only because they were used in

controversy, but because their secret influence on orthodox Judaism

was dreaded. For similar reasons, later Judaism forbade the use of the

Apocrypha in the same manner as that of the Sepharim Chitsonim. But

their influence had already made itself felt. The Apocrypha, the more

greedily perused, not only for their glorification of Judaism, but

that they were, so to speak, doubtful reading, which yet afforded a

glimpse into that forbidden Greek world, opened the way for other

Hellenistic literature, of which unacknowledged but frequent traces

occur in Talmudical writings.[153]153

To those who thus sought to weld Grecian thought with Hebrew

revelation, two objects would naturally present themselves. They must

try to connect their Greek philosophers with the Bible, and they must

find beneath the letter of Scripture a deeper meaning, which would

accord with philosophic truth. So far as the text of Scripture was

concerned, they had a method ready to hand. The Stoic philosophers had

busied themselves in finding a deeper allegorical meaning, especially

in the writings of Homer. By applying it to mythical stories, or to

the popular beliefs, and by tracing the supposed symbolical meaning of

names, numbers, &c., it became easy to prove almost anything, or to

extract from these philosophical truths ethical principles, and even

the later results of natural science.[154]154 Such a process was

peculiarly pleasing to the imagination, and the results alike

astounding and satisfactory, since as they could not be proved, so

neither could they be disproved. This allegorical method[155]155 was

the welcome key by which the Hellenists might unlock the hidden

treasury of Scripture. In point of fact, we find it applied so early

as in the 'Wisdom of Solomon.'[156]156

But as yet Hellenism had scarcely left the domain of sober

interpretation. it is otherwise in the letter of the Pseudo-Aristeas,

to which reference has already been made.[157]157 Here the wildest

symbolism is put into the mouth of the High-Priest Eleazar, to

convince Aristeas and his fellow-ambassador that the Mosaic ordinances

concerning food had not only a political reason - to keep Israel

separate from impious nations - and a sanitary one, but chiefly a

mystical meaning. The birds allowed for food were all tame and pure,

and they fed on corn or vegetable products, the opposite being the

case with those forbidden. The first lesson which this was intended to

teach was, that Israel must be just, and not seek to obtain aught from

others by violence; but, so to speak, imitate the habits of those

birds which were allowed them. The next lesson would be, that each

must learn to govern his passions and inclinations. Similarly, the

direction about cloven hoofs pointed to the need of making separation

- that is, between good and evil; and that about chewing the cud to

the need of remembering, viz. God and His will.[158]158 In such

manner, according to Aristeas, did the High Priest go through the

catalogue of things forbidden, and of animals to be sacrificed,

showing from their 'hidden meaning' the majesty and sanctity of the

Law.[159]159

This was an important line to take, and it differed in principle from

the allegorical method adopted by the Eastern Jews. Not only the

Dorshey Reshumoth,[160]160 or searches out of the subleties of

Scripture, of their indications, but even the ordinary Haggadist

employed, indeed, allegoric interpretations. Thereby Akiba vindicated

for the 'Song of Songs' its place in the Canon. Did not Scripture say:

'One thing spake God, twofold is what I heard,'[161]161 and did not

this imply a twofold meaning; nay, could not the Torah be explained by

many different methods?[162]162 What, for example, was the water which

Israel sought in the wilderness, or the bread and raiment which Jacob

asked in Bethel, but the Torah and the dignity which it conferred? But

in all these, and innumerable similar instances, the allegorical

interpretation was only an application of Scripture for homiletical

purposes, not a searching into a rationale beneath, such as that of

the Hellenists. The latter the Rabbis would have utterly repudiated,

on their express principle that 'Scripture goes not beyond its plain

meaning.'[163]163 They sternly insisted, that we ought not to search

into the ulterior object and rationale of a law, but simply obey it.

But it was this very rationale of the Law which the Alexandrians

sought to find under its letter. It was in this sense that

Aristobulus, a Hellenist Jew of Alexandria,[164]164 sought to explain

Scripture. Only a fragment of his work, which seems to have been a

Commentary on the Pentateuch, dedicated to King Ptolemy (Philometor),

has been preserved to us (by Clement of Alexandria, and by

Eusebius[165]165). According to Clement of Alexandria, his aim was,

'to bring the Peripatetic philosophy out of the law of Moses, and out

of the other prophets.' Thus, when we read that God stood, it meant

the stable order of the world; that He created the world in six days,

the orderly succession of time; the rest of the Sabbath, the

preservation of what was created. And in such manner could the whole

system of Aristole be found in the Bible. But how was this to be

accounted for? Of course, the Bible had not learned from Aristole, but

he and all the other philosphers had learned from the Bible. Thus,

according to Aristobulus, Pythagoras, Plato, and all the other sages

had really learned from Moses, and the broken rays found in their

writings were united in all their glory in the Torah.

It was a tempting path on which to enter, and one on which there was

no standing still. It only remained to give fixedness to the

allegorical method by reducing it to certain principles, or canons of

criticism, and to form the heterogeneous mass of Grecian philosophemes

and Jewish theologumena into a compact, if not homogeneous system.

This was the work of Philo of Alexandria, born about 20 b.c. It

concerns us not here to inquire what were the intermediate links

between Aristobulus and Philo. Another and more important point claims

our attention. If ancient Greek philosophy knew the teaching of Moses,

where was the historic evidence for it? If such did not exist, it must

somehow be invented. Orpheus was a name which had always lent itself

to literary fraud,[166]166 and so Aristobulus boldly produces (whether

of his own or of others' making) a number of spurious citations from

Hesiod, Homer, Linus, but especially from Orpheus, all Biblical and

Jewish in their cast. Aristobulus was neither the first nor the last

to commit such fraud. The Jewish Sibyl boldly, and, as we shall see,

successfully personated the heathen oracles. And this opens,

generally, quite a vista of Jewish-Grecia literature. In the second,

and even in the third century before Christ, there were Hellenist

historians, such as Eupolemus, Artapanus, Demetrius, and Aristeas;

tragic and epic poets, such as Ezekiel, Pseudo-Philo, and Theodotus,

who, after the manner of the ancient classical writers, but for their

own purposes, described certain periods of Jewish history, or sang of

such themes as the Exodus, Jerusalem, or the rape of Dinah.

The mention of these spurious quotations naturally leads us to another

class of spurious literature, which, although not Hellenistic, has

many elements in common with it, and, even when originating with

Palestinian Jews is not Palestinian, nor yet has been preserved in its

language. We allude to what are known as the Pseudepigraphic, or

Pseudonymic Writings, so called because, with one exception, they bear

false names of authorship. It is difficult to arrange them otherwise

than chronologically - and even here the greatest difference of

opinions prevails. Their general character (with one exception) may be

described as anti-heathen, perhaps missionary, but chiefly as

Apocalyptic. They are attempts at taking up the key-note struck in the

prophecies of Daniel; rather, we should say, to lift the veil only

partially raised by him, and to point - alike as concerned Israel, and

the kingdoms of the world - to the past, the present, and the future,

in the light of the Kingship of the Messiah. Here, if anywhere, we

might expect to find traces of New Testament teaching; and yet, side

by side with frequent similarity of form, the greatest difference - we

had almost said contrast - in spirit, prevails.

Many of these works must have perished. In one of the latest of

them[167]167 they are put down at seventy, probably a round number,

having reference to the supposed number of the nations of the earth,

or to every possible mode of interpreting Scripture. They are

described as intended for 'the wise among the people,' probably those

whom St. Paul, in the Christian sense, designates as 'knowing the

time'[168]168 [169]169 of the Advent of the Messiah. Viewed in this

light, they embody the ardent aspirataions and the inmost

hopes[170]170 of those who longed for the 'consolation of Israel,' as

they understood it. Nor should we judge their personations of

authorship according to our Western ideas.[171]171 Pseudonymic

writings were common in that age, and a Jew might perhaps plead that,

even in the Old Testament, books had been headed by names which

confessedly were not those of their authors (such as Samuel, Ruth,

Esther). If those inspired poets who sang in the spirit, and echoed

the strains, of Asaph, adopted that designation, and the sons of Korah

preferred to be known by that title, might not they, who could no

longer claim the authority of inspiration seek attention for their

utterances by adopting the names of those in whose spirit they

professed to write?

The most interesting as well as the oldest of these books are those

known as the Book of Enoch, the Sibylline Oracles, the Psalter of

Solomon, and the Book of Jubilees, or Little Genesis. Only the

briefest notice of them can here find a place.[172]172

The Book of Enoch, the oldest parts of which date a century and a half

before Christ, comes to us from Palestine. It professes to be a vision

vouchsafed to that Patriacrch, and tells of the fall of the Angels and

its consequences, and of what he saw and heard in his rapt journeys

through heaven and earth. Of deepest, though often sad, interest, is

what it says of the Kingdom of Heaven, of the advent of Messiah and

His Kingdom, and of the last things.

On the other hand, the Sibylline Oracles, of which the oldest portions

date from about 160 b.c., come to us from Egypt. It is to the latter

only that we here refer. Their most interesting parts are also the

most characteristic. In them the ancient heathen myths of the first

ages of man are welded together with Old Testament notices, while the

heathen Theogony is recast in a Jewish mould. Thus Noah becomes

Uranos, Shem Saturn, Ham Titan, and Japheth Japetus. Similarly, we

have fragments of ancient heathen oracles, so to speak, recast in a

Jewish edition. The strangest circumstance is, that the utterances of

this Judaising and Jewish Sibyl seem to have passed as the oracles of

the ancient Erythraean, which had predicted the fall of Troy, and as

those of the Sibyl of Cumae, which, in the infancy of Rome, Tarquinius

Superbus had deposited in the Capitol.

The collection of eighteen hymns known as the Psalter of Solomon dates

from more than half a century before our era. No doubt the original

was Hebrew, though they breathe a somewhat Hellenistic spirit. They

express ardent Messianic aspirations, and a firm faith in the

Resurrection, and in eternal rewards and punishments.

Different in character from the preceding works is The Book of

Jubilees - so called from its chronological arrangement into

'Jubilee-periods' - or 'Little Genesis.' It is chiefly a kind of

legendary supplement to the Book of Genesis, intended to explain some

of its historic difficulties, and to fill up its historic lacunæ. It

was probably written about the time of Christ - and this gives it a

special interest - by a Palestinian, and in Hebrew, or rather Aramæan.

But, like the rest of the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic literature

which comes from Palestine, or was originally written in Hebrew, we

posses it no longer in that language, but only in translation.

If from this brief review of Hellenist and Pseudepigraphic literature

we turn to take a retrospect, we can scarcely fail to perceive, on the

one hand, the development of the old, and on the other the preparation

for the new - in other words, the grand expectancy awakened, and the

grand preparation made. One step only remained to complete what

Hellenism had already begun. That completion came through one who,

although himself untouched by the Gospel, perhaps more than any other

prepared alike his co-religionists the Jews, and his countrymen the

Greeks, for the new teaching, which, indeed, was presented by many of

its early advocates in the forms which they had learned from him. That

man was Philo the Jew, of Alexandria.

CHAPTER IV.

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA, THE RABBIS, AND THE GOSPELS - THE FINAL

DEVELOPMENT OF

HELLENISM IN ITS RELATION TO RABBINISM AND THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO

ST. JOHN.

It is strange how little we know of the personal history of the

greatest of uninspired Jewish writers of old, though he occupied so

prominent a position in his time.[173]173 Philo was born in

Alexandria, about the year 20 before Christ. He was a descendant of

Aaron, and belonged to one of the wealthiest and most influential

families among the Jewish merchant-princes of Egypt. His brother was

the political head of that community in Alexandria, and he himself on

one occasion represented his co-religionists, though unsuccessfully,

at Rome,[174]174 as the head of an embassy to entreat the Emperior

Caligula for protection from the persecutions consequent on the Jewish

resistance to placing statues of the Emperor in their Synagogues. But

it is not with Philo, the wealthy aristocratic Jew of Alexandria, but

with the great writer and thinker who, so to speak, completed Jewish

Hellenism, that we have here to do. Let us see what was his relation

alike to heathen philosophy and to the Jewish faith, of both of which

he was the ardent advocate, and how in his system he combined the

teaching of the two.

To begin with, Philo united in rare measure Greek learning with Jewish

enthusiasm. In his writings he very frequently uses classical modes of

expression;[175]175 he names not fewer than sixty-four Greek

writers;[176]176 and he either alludes to, or quotes frequently from,

such sources as Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, Solon, the great Greek

tragedians, Plato, and others. But to him these men were scarcely

'heathen.' He had sat at their feet, and learned to weave a system

from Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. The gatherings of

these philosophers were 'holy,' and Plato was 'the great.' But holier

than all was the gathering of the true Israel; and incomparably

greater than any, Moses. From him had all sages learned, and with him

alone was all truth to be found - not, indeed, in the letter, but

under the letter, of Holy Scripture. If in Numb. xxiii. 19 we read

'God is not a man,' and in Deut. i. 31 that the Lord was 'as a man,'

did it not imply, on the one hand, the revelation of absolute truth by

God, and, on the other, accommodation to those who were weak? Here,

then, was the principle of a twofold interpretation of the Word of God

- the literal and the allegorical. The letter of the text must be held

fast; and Biblical personages and histories were real. But only

narrow-minded slaves of the letter would stop here; the more so, as

sometimes the literal meaning alone would be tame, even absurd; while

the allegorical interpretation gave the true sense, even though it

might occassionally run counter to the letter. Thus, the patriarchs

represented states of the soul; and, whatever the letter might bear,

Joseph represented one given to the fleshly, whom his brothers rightly

hated; Simeon the soul aiming after the higher; the killing of the

Egyptian by Moses, the subjugation of passion, and so on. But this

allegorical interpretation - by the side of the literal (the Peshat of

the Palestinians) - though only for the few, was not arbitrary. It had

its 'laws,' and 'canons' - some of which excluded the literal

interpretation, while others admitted it by the side of the higher

meaning.[177]177

To begin with the former: the literal sense must be wholly set aside,

when it implied anything unworthy of the Deity, anything unmeaning,

impossible, or contrary to reason. Manifestly, this canon, if strictly

applied, would do away not only with all anthropomorphisms, but cut

the knot wherever difficulties seemed insuperable. Again, Philo would

find an allegorical, along with the literal, interpretation indicated

in the reduplication of a word, and in seemingly superfluous words,

particles, or expressions.[178]178 These could, of course, only bear

such a meaning on Philo's assumption of the actual inspiration of the

LXX. version. Similarly, in exact accordance with a Talmudical

canon,[179]179 any repetition of what had been already stated would

point to something new. These were comparatively sober rules of

exegesis. Not so the licence which he claimed of freely altering the

punctuation[180]180 of sentences, and his notion that, if one from

among several synonymous words was chosen in a passage, this pointed

to some special meaning attaching to it. Even more extravagant was the

idea, that a word which occurred in the LXX. might be interpreted

according to every shade of meaning which it bore in the Greek, and

that even another meaning might be given it by slightly altering the

letters. However, like other of Philo's allegorical canons, these were

also adopted by the Rabbis, and Haggadic interpretations were

frequently prefaced by: 'Read not thus - but thus.' If such violence

might be done to the text, we need not wonder at interpretations based

on a play upon words, or even upon parts of a word. Of course, all

seemingly strange or peculiar modes of expression, or of designation,

occurring in Scripture, must have their special meaning, and so also

every particle, adverb, or preposition. Again, the position of a

verse, its succession by another, the apparently unaccountable

presence or absence of a word, might furnish hints for some deeper

meaning, and so would an unexpected singular for a plural, or vice

versâ, the use of a tense, even the gender of a word. Most serious of

all, an allegorical interpretation might be again employed as the

basis of another.[181]181

We repeat, that these allegorical canons of Philo are essentially the

same as those of Jewish traditionalism in the Haggadah,[182]182 only

the latter were not rationalising, and far more brilliant in their

application.[183]183 In another respect also the Palestinian had the

advantage of the Alexandrian exegesis. Reverently and cautiously it

indicated what might be omitted in public reading, and why; what

expressions of the original might be modified by the Meturgeman, and

how; so as to avoid alike one danger by giving a passage in its

literality, and another by adding to the sacred text, or conveying a

wrong impression of the Divine Being, or else giving occasion to the

unlearned and unwary of becoming entangled in dangerous speculations.

Jewish tradition here lays down some principles which would be of

great practical use. Thus we are told,[184]184 that Scripture uses the

modes of expression common among men. This would, of course, include

all anthropomorphisms. Again, sometimes with considerable ingenuity, a

suggestion is taken from a word, such as that Moses knew the Serpent

was to be made of brass from the similarity of the two words (nachash,

a serpent, and nechosheth, brass.)[185]185 Similarly, it is noted that

Scripture uses euphemistic language, so as to preserve the greatest

delicacy.[186]186 These instances might be multiplied, but the above

will suffice.

In his symbolical interpretations Philo only partially took the same

road as the Rabbis. The symbolism of numbers and, so far as the

Sanctuary was concerned, that of colours, and even materials, may,

indeed, be said to have its foundation in the Old Testament itself.

The same remark applies partially to that of names. The Rabbis

certainly so interpreted them.[187]187 But the application which Philo

made of this symbolism was very different. Everything became

symbolical in his hands, if it suited his purpose: numbers (in a very

arbitrary manner), beasts, birds, fowls, creeping things, plants,

stones, elements, substances, conditions, even sex - and so a term or

an expression might even have several and contradictory meanings, from

which the interpreter was at liberty to choose.

From the consideration of the method by which Philo derived from

Scriptures his theological views, we turn to a brief analysis of these

views.[188]188

1. Theology. - In reference to God, we find, side by side, the

apparently contradictory views of the Platonic and the Stoic schools.

Following the former, the sharpest distinction was drawn between God

and the world. God existed neither in space, nor in time; He had

neither human qualities nor affections; in fact, He was without any

qualities (_poiov), and even without any name (___jtov) ; hence,

wholly uncognisable by man (_kat_ljptov). Thus, changing the

punctuation and the accents, the LXX. of Gen. iii. 9 was made to read:

'Adam, thou art somewhere;' but God had no somewhere, as Adam seemed

to think when he hid himself from Him. In the above sense, also, Ex.

iii. 14, and vi. 3, were explained, and the two names Elohim and

Jehovah belonged really to the two supreme Divine 'Potencies,' while

the fact of God's being uncognisable appeared from Ex. xx. 21.

But side by side with this we have, to save the Jewish, or rather Old

Testament, idea of creation and providence, the Stoic notion of God as

immanent in the world - in fact, as that alone which is real in it, as

always working: in short, to use his own Pantheistic expression, as

'Himself one and the all' (e_v ka_ t_ p_n). Chief in His Being is His

goodness, the forthgoing of which was the ground of creation. Only the

good comes from Him. With matter He can have nothing to do - hence the

plural number in the account of creation. God only created the soul,

and that only of the good. In the sense of being 'immanent,' God is

everywhere - nay, all things are really only in Him, or rather He is

the real in all. But chiefly is God the wellspring and the light of

the soul - its 'Saviour' from the 'Egypt' of passion. Two things

follow. With Philo's ideas of the sepration between God and matter, it

was impossible always to account for miracles or interpositions.

Accordingly, these are sometimes allegorised, sometimes

rationalistically explained. Further, the God of Philo, whatever he

might say to the contrary, was not the God of that Israel which was

His chosen people.

2. Intermediary Beings. - Potencies (dun_meiv, l_goi). If, in what has

preceded, we have once and again noticed a remarkable similarity

between Philo and the Rabbis, there is a still more curious analogy

between his teaching and that of Jewish Mysticism, as ultimately fully

developed in the 'Kabbalah.' The very term Kabbalah (from qibbel, to

hand down) seems to point out not only its descent by oral tradition,

but also its ascent to ancient sources.[189]189 Its existence is

presupposed, and its leading ideas are sketched in the

Mishnah.[190]190 The Targums also bear at least one remarkable trace

of it. May it not be, that as Philo frequently refers to ancient

tradition, so both Eastern and Western Judaism may here have drawn

from one and the same source - we will not venture to suggest, how

high up - while each made such use of it as suited their distinctive

tendencies? At any rate the Kabbalah also, likening Scripture to a

person, compares those who study merely the letter, to them who attend

only to the dress; those who consider the moral of a fact, to them who

attend to the body; while the initiated alone, who regard the hidden

meaning, are those who attend to the soul. Again, as Philo, so the

oldest part of the Mishnah[191]191 designates God as Maqom - 'the

place' - the t_pov, the all-comprehending, what the Kabbalists called

the EnSoph, 'the boundless,' that God, without any quality, Who

becomes cognisable only by His manifestations.[192]192

The manifestations of God! But neither Eastern mystical Judaism, nor

the philosophy of Philo, could admit of any direct contact between God

and creation. The Kabbalah solved the difficulty by their

Sephiroth,[193]193 or emanations from God, through which this contact

was ultimately brought about, and of which the EnSoph, or crown, was

the spring: 'the source from which the infinite light issued.' If

Philo found greater difficulties, he had also more ready help from the

philosophical systems to hand. His Sephiroth were 'Potencies'

(dun_meiv), 'Words' (l_goi), intermediate powers. 'Potencies,' as we

imagine, when viewed Godwards; 'Words,' as viewed creationwards. They

were not emanations, but, according to Plato, 'archetypal ideas,' on

the model of which all that exists was formed; and also, according to

the Stoic idea, the cause of all, pervading all, forming all, and

sustaining all. Thus these 'Potencies' were wholly in God, and yet

wholly out of God. If we divest all this of its philosophical

colouring, did not Eastern Judaism also teach that there was a

distinction between the Unapproachable God, and God manifest?[194]194

Another remark will show the parallelism between Philo and

Rabbinism.[195]195 As the latter speaks of the two qualities (Middoth)

of Mercy and Judgment in the Divine Being,[196]196 and distinguishes

between Elohim as the God of Justice, and Jehovah as the God of Mercy

and Grace, so Philo places next to the Divine Word (qe_ov l_gov),

Goodness (_gaqotjv), as the Creative Potency (poijtik_ d_namiv), and

Power (_xousia), as the Ruling Potency (basilik_ d_namiv), proving

this by a curious etymological derivation of the words for 'God' and

'Lord' (Qe_v and k_riov) - apparently unconscious that the LXX., in

direct contradiction, translated Jehovah by Lord (k_riov), and Elohim

by God (Qe_v)! These two potencies of goodness and power, Philo sees

in the two Cherubim, and in the two 'Angels' which accompanied God

(the Divine Word), when on his way to destroy the cities of the plain.

But there were more than these two Potencies. In one place Philo

enumerates six, according to the number of the cities of refuge. The

Potencies issued from God as the beams from the light, as the waters

from the spring, as the breath from a person; they were immanent in

God, and yet also without Him - motions on the part of God, and yet

independent beings. They were the ideal world, which in its impulse

outwards, meeting matter, produced this material world of ours. They

were also the angels of God - His messengers to man, the media through

whom He reveled Himself.[197]197

3. The Logos. - Viewed in its bearing on New Testament teaching, this

part of Philo's system raises the most interesting questions. But it

is just here that our difficulties are greatest. We can understand the

Platonic conception of the Logos as the 'archetypal idea,' and that of

the Stoics as the 'world-reason' pervading matter. Similarly, we can

perceive, how the Apocrypha - especially the Book of Wisdom -

following up the Old Testament typical truth concerning 'Wisdom' (as

specially set forth in the Book of Proverbs) almost arrived so far as

to present 'Wisdom' as a special 'Subsistence' (hypostatising it).

More than this, in Talmudical writings, we find mention not only of

the Shem, or 'Name,'[198]198 but also of the 'Shekhinah,' God as

manifest and present, which is sometimes also presented as the Ruach

ha Qodesh, of Holy Spirit.[199]199 But in the Targumim we get yet

another expression, which, strange to say, never occurs in the

Talmud.[200]200 It is that of the Memra, Logos, or 'Word.' Not that

the term is exclusively applied to the Divine Logos.[201]201 But it

stands out as perhaps the most remarkable fact in this literature,

that God - not as in His permanent manifestation, or manifest Presence

- but as revealing Himself, is designated Memra. Altogether that term,

as applied to God, occurs in the Targum Onkelos 179 times, in the

so-called Jerusalem Targum 99 times, and in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan

321 times. A critical analysis shows that in 82 instances in Onkelos,

in 71 instances in the Jerusalem Targum, and in 213 instances in the

Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, the designation Memra is not only

distinguished from God, but evidently refers to God as revealing

Himself.[202]202 But what does this imply? The distinction between God

and the Memra of Jehovah is marked in many passages.[203]203

Similarly, the Memra of Jehovah is distinguished from the

Shekhinah.[204]204 Nor is the term used instead of the sacred word

Jehovah;[205]205 nor for the well-known Old Testament expression 'the

Angel of the Lord;'[206]206 nor yet for the Metatron of the Targum

Pseudo-Jonathan and of the Talmud.[207]207 Does it then represent an

older tradition underlying all these?[208]208 Beyond this Rabbinic

theology has not preserved to us the doctrine of Personal distinctions

in the Godhead. And yet, if words have any meaning, the Memra is a

hypostasis, though the distinction of permanent, personal Subsistence

is not marked. Nor yet, to complete this subject, is the Memra

identified with the Messiah. In the Targum Onkelos distinct mention is

twice made of Him,[209]209 while in the other Targumim no fewer than

seventy-one Biblical passages are rendered with explicit reference to

Him.

If we now turn to the views expressed by Philo about the Logos we find

that they are hesitating, and even contradictory. One thing, however,

is plain: the Logos of Philo is not the Memra of the Targumim. For,

the expression Memra ultimately rests on theological, that of Logos on

philosophical grounds. Again, the Logos of Philo approximates more

closely to the Metatron of the Talmud and Kabbalah. As they speak of

him as the 'Prince of the Face,' who bore the name of his Lord, so

Philo represents the Logos as 'the eldest Angel,' 'the many-named

Archangel,' in accordance with the Jewish view that the name JeHoVaH

unfolded its meaning in seventy names for the Godhead.[210]210 As they

speak of the 'Adam Qadmon,' so Philo of the Logos as the human

reflection of the eternal God. And in both these respects, it is

worthy of notice that he appeals to ancient teaching.[211]211

What, then, is the Logos of Philo? Not a concrete personality, and

yet, from another point of view, not strictly impersonal, nor merely a

property of the Deity, but the shadow, as it were, which the light of

God casts - and if Himself light, only the manifested reflection of

God, His spiritual, even as the world is His material, habitation.

Moreover, the Logos is 'the image of God' (e_k_n) upon which man was

made,[212]212 or, to use the platonic term, 'the archetypal idea.' As

regards the relation between the Logos and the two fundamental

Potencies (from which all others issue), the latter are variously

represented - on the one hand, as proceeding from the Logos; and on

the other, as themselves constituting the Logos. As regards the world,

the Logos is its real being. He is also its archetype; moreover the

instrument (_rganon) through Whom God created all things. If the Logos

separates between God and the world, it is rather as intermediary; He

separates, but He also unites. But chiefly does this hold true as

regards the relation between God and man. The Logos announces and

interprets to man the will and mind of God (_rmjne_v ka_ prof_tjv); He

acts as mediator; He is the real High-Priest, and as such by His

purity takes away the sins of man, and by His intercession procures

for us the mercy of God. Hence Philo designates Him not only as the

High-Priest, but as the 'Paraclete.' He is also the sun whose rays

enlighten man, the medium of Divine revelation to the soul; the Manna,

or support of spiritual life; He Who dwells in the soul. And so the

Logos is, in the fullest sense, Melchisedek, the priest of the most

high God, the king of righteousness (basile_v d_kaiov), and the king

of Salem (basile_v e_r_njv), Who brings righteousness and peace to the

soul.[213]213 But the Logos 'does not come into any soul that is dead

in sin.' That there is close similarity of form between these

Alexandrian views and much in the argumentation of the Epistle to the

Hebrews, must be evident to all - no less than that there is the

widest possible divergence in substance and spirit.[214]214 The Logos

of Philo is shadowy, unreal, not a Person;[215]215 there is no need of

an atonement; the High-Priest intercedes, but has no sacrifice to

offer as the basis of His intercession, least of all that of Himself;

the old Testament types are only typical ideas, not typical facts;

they point to a Prototypal Idea in the eternal past, not to an

Antitypal Person and Fact in history; there is no cleansing of the

soul by blood, no sprinkling of the Mercy Seat, no access for all

through the rent veil into the immediate Presence of God; nor yet a

quickening of the soul from dead works to serve the living God. If the

argumentation of the Epistle to the Hebrews is Alexandrian, it is an

Alexandrianism which is overcome and past, which only furnishes the

form, not the substance, the vessel, not its contents. The closer

therefore the outward similarity, the greater is the contrast in

substance.

The vast difference between Alexandrianism and the New Testament will

appear still more clearly in the views of Philo on Cosmology and

Anthropology. In regard to the former, his results in some respects

run parallel to those of the students of mysticism in the Talmud, and

of the Kabbalists. Together with the Stoic view, which represented God

as 'the active cause' of this world, and matter as 'the passive,'

Philo holds the Platonic idea, that matter was something existent, and

that is resisted God.[216]216 Such speculations must have been current

among the Jews long before, to judge by certain warning given by the

Son of Sirach.[217]217 [218]218 And Stoic views of the origin of the

world seem implied even in the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon (i. 7;

vii. 24; viii. 1; xii. 1).[219]219 The mystics in the Talmud arrived

at similar conclusions, not through Greek, but through Persian

teaching. Their speculations[220]220 boldly entered on the dangerous

ground,[221]221 forbidden to the many, scarcely allowed to the

few,[222]222 where such deep questions as the origin of our world and

its connection with God were discussed. It was, perhaps, only a

beautiful poetic figure that God had taken of the dust under the

throne of His glory, and cast it upon the waters, which thus became

earth.[223]223 But so far did isolated teachers become

intoxicated[224]224 by the new wine of these strange speculations,

that they whispered it to one another that water was the original

element of the world,[225]225 which had successively been hardened

into snow and then into earth.[226]226 [227]227 Other and later

teachers fixed upon the air or the fire as the original element,

arguing the pre-existence of matter from the use of the word 'made' in

Gen. i. 7. instead of 'created.' Some modified this view, and

suggested that God had originally created the three elements of water,

air or spirit, and fire, from which all else was developed.[228]228

Traces also occur of the doctrine of the pre-existence of things, in a

sense similar to that of Plato.[229]229

Like Plato and the Stoics, Philo regarded matter as devoid of all

quality, and even form. Matter in itself was dead - more than that, it

was evil. This matter, which was already existing, God formed (not

made), like an architect who uses his materials according to a

pre-existing plan - which in this case was the archetypal world.

This was creation, or rather formation, brought about not by God

Himself, but by the Potencies, especially by the Logos, Who was the

connecting bond of all. As for God, His only direct work was the soul,

and that only of the good, not of the evil. Man's immaterial part had

a twofold aspect: earthwards, as Sensuousness (a_sqjsiv); and

heavenwards, as Reason (no_v). The sensuous part of the soul was

connected with the body. It had no heavenly past, and would have no

future. But 'Reason' (no_v) was that breath of true life which God had

breathed into man (pne_ma) whereby the earthy became the higher,

living spirit, with its various faculties. Before time began the soul

was without body, an archetype, the 'heavenly man,' pure spirit in

Paradise (virtue), yet even so longing after its ultimate archetype,

God. Some of these pure spirits descended into bodies and so lost

their purity. Or else, the union was brought about by God and by

powers lower than God (dæmons, djmiourgo_). To the latter is due our

earthly part. God breathed on the formation, and the 'earthly Reason'

became 'intelligent' 'spiritual' soul (yuc_ noer_). Our earthly part

alone is the seat of sin.[230]230

This leads us to the great question of Original Sin. Here the views of

Philo are those of the Eastern Rabbis. But both are entirely different

from those on which the argument in the Epistle to the Romans turns.

It was neither at the feet of Gamaliel, nor yet from Jewish Hellenism,

that Saul of Tarsus learned the doctrine of original sin. The

statement that as in Adam all spiritually died, so in Messiah all

should be made alive,[231]231 finds absolutely no parallel in Jewish

writings.[232]232 What may be called the starting point of Christian

theology, the doctrine of hereditary guilt and sin, through the fall

of Adam, and of the consequent entire and helplesss corruption of our

nature, is entirely unknown to Rabbinical Judaism. The reign of

physical death was indeed traced to the sin of our first

parents.[233]233 But the Talmud expressly teaches,[234]234 that God

originally created man with two propensities,[235]235 one to good and

one to evil (Yetser tobh, and Yetser hara[236]236). The evil impulse

began immediately after birth.[237]237 [238]238 But it was within the

power of man to vanquish sin, and to attain perfect righteousness; in

fact, this stage had actually been attained.[239]239

Similarly, Philo regarded the soul of the child as 'naked' (Adam and

Eve), a sort of tabula rasa, as wax which God would fain form and

mould. But this state ceased when 'affection' presented itself to

reason, and thus sensuous lust arose, which was the spring of all sin.

The grand task, then, was to get rid of the sensuous, and to rise to

the spiritual. In this, the ethical part of his system, Philo was most

under the influence of Stoic philosophy. We might almost say, it is no

longer the Hebrew who Hellenises, but the Hellene who Hebraises. And

yet it is here also that the most ingenious and wide reaching

allegorisms of Scripture are introduced. It is scarcely possible to

convey an idea of how brilliant this method becomes in the hands of

Philo, how universal its application, or how captivating it must have

proved. Philo describes man's state as, first one of sensuousness, but

also of unrest, misery and unsatisfied longing. If persisted in, it

would end in complete spiritual insensibility.[240]240 But from this

state the soul must pass to one of devotion to reason.[241]241 This

change might be accomplished in one of three ways: first, by study -

of which physical was the lowest; next, that which embraced the

ordinary circle of knowledge; and lastly, the highest, that of Divine

philosophy. The second method was Askesis: discipline, or practice,

when the soul turned from the lower to the higher. But the best of all

was the third way: the free unfolding of that spiritual life which

cometh neither from study nor discipline, but from a natural good

disposition. And in that state the soul had true rest[242]242 and

joy.[243]243

Here we must for the present pause.[244]244 Brief as this sketch of

Hellenism has been, it must have brought the question vividly before

the mind, whether and how far certain parts of the New Testament,

especially the fourth Gospel,[245]245 are connected with the direction

of thought described in the preceding pages. Without yielding to that

school of critics, whose perverse ingenuity discerns everywhere a

sinister motive or tendency in the Evangelic writers,[246]246 it is

evident that each of them had a special object in view in constructing

his narrative of the One Life; and primarily addressed himself to a

special audience. If, without entering into elaborate discussion, we

might, according to St. Luke i. 2, regard the narrative of St. Mark as

the grand representative of that authentic 'narration' (di_gjsiv),

though not by Apostles,[247]247 which was in circulation, and the

Gospel by St. Matthew as representing the 'tradition' handed down (the

par_dosiv), by the Apostolic eye-witnesses and ministers of the

Word,[248]248 we should reach the following results. Our oldest

Gospel-narrative is that by St. Mark, which, addressing itself to no

class in particular, sketches in rapid outlines the picture of Jesus

as the Messiah, alike for all men. Next in order of time comes our

present Gospel by St. Matthew. It goes a step further back than that

by St. Mark, and gives not only the genealogy, but the history of the

miraculous birth of Jesus. Even if we had not the consensus of

tradition every one must feel that this Gospel is Hebrew in its cast,

in its citations from the Old Testament, and in its whole bearing.

Taking its key-note from the Book of Daniel, that grand Messianic

text-book of Eastern Judaism at the time, and as re-echoed in the Book

of Enoch - which expresses the popular apprehension of Daniel's

Messianic idea - it presents the Messiah chiefly as 'the Son of Man,'

'the Son of David,' 'the Son of God.' We have here the fulfilment of

Old Testament law and prophecy; the realisation of Old Testament life,

faith, and hope. Third in point of time is the Gospel by St. Luke,

which, passing back another step, gives us not only the history of the

birth of Jesus, but also that of John, 'the preparer of the way.' It

is Pauline, and addresses itself, or rather, we should say, presents

the Person of the Messiah, it may be 'to the Jew first,' but certainly

'also to the Greek.' The term which St. Luke, alone of all Gospel

writers,[249]249 applies to Jesus, is that of the pa_v or 'servant' of

God, in the sense in which Isaiah has spoken of the Messiah as the

'Ebhed Jehovah,' 'servant of the Lord.' St. Luke's is, so to speak,

the Isaiah-Gospel, presenting the Christ in His bearing on the history

of God's Kingdom and of the world - as God's Elect Servant in Whom He

delighted. In the Old Testament, to adopt a beautiful figure,[250]250

the idea of the Servant of the Lord is set before us like a pyramid:

at its base it is all Israel, at its central section Israel after the

Spirit (the circumcised in heart), represented by David, the man after

God's own heart; while at its apex it is the 'Elect' Servant, the

Messiah.[251]251 And these three ideas, with their sequences, are

presented in the third Gospel as centring in Jesus the Messiah. By the

side of this pyramid is the other: the Son of Man, the Son of David,

the Son of God. The Servant of the Lord of Isaiah and of Luke is the

Enlightener, the Consoler, the victorious Deliverer; the Messiah or

Anointed: the Prophet, the Priest, the King.

Yet another tendency - shall we say, want? - remained, so to speak,

unmet and unsatisfied. That large world of latest and most promising

Jewish thought, whose task it seemed to bridge over the chasm between

heathenism and Judaism - the Western Jewish world, must have the

Christ presented to them. For in every direction is He the Christ. And

not only they, but that larger Greek world, so far as Jewish Hellenism

could bring it to the threshold of the Church. This Hellenistic and

Hellenic world now stood in waiting to enter it, though as it were by

its northern porch, and to be baptized at its font. All this must have

forced itself on the mind of St. John, residing in the midst of them

at Ephesus, even as St. Paul's Epistles contain almost as many

allusions to Hellenism as to Rabbinism.[252]252 And so the fourth

Gospel became, not the supplement, but the complement, of the other

three.[253]253 There is no other Gospel more Palestinian than this in

its modes of expression, allusions, and references. Yet we must all

feel how thoroughly Hellenistic it also is in its cast,[254]254 in

what it reports and what it omits - in short, in its whole aim; how

adapted to Hellenist wants its presentation of deep central truths;

how suitably, in the report of His Discourses - even so far as their

form is concerned - the promise was here fulfilled, of bringing all

things to remembrance whatsoever He had said.[255]255 It is the true

Light which shineth, of which the full meridian-blaze lies on the

Hellenist and Hellenic world. There is Alexandrian form of thought not

only in the whole conception, but in the Logos,[256]256 and in His

presentation as the Light, the Life, the Wellspring of the

world.[257]257 But these forms are filled in the fourth Gospel with

quite other substance. God is not afar off, uncognisable by man,

without properties, without name. He is the Father. Instead of a

nebulous reflection of the Deity we have the Person of the Logos; not

a Logos with the two potencies of goodness and power, but full of

grace and truth. The Gospel of St. John also begins with a 'Bereshith'

- but it is the theological, not the cosmic Bereshith, when the Logos

was with God and was God. Matter is not pre-existent; far less is it

evil. St. John strikes the pen through Alexandrianism when he lays it

down as the fundamental fact of New Testament history that 'the Logos

was made flesh,' just as St. Paul does when he proclaims the great

mystery of 'God manifest in the flesh.' Best of all, it is not by a

long course of study, nor by wearing discipline, least of all by an

inborn good disposition, that the soul attains the new life, but by a

birth from above, by the Holy Ghost, and by simple faith which is

brought within reach of the fallen and the lost.[258]258

Philo had no successor. In him Hellenism had completed its cycle. Its

message and its mission were ended. Henceforth it needed, like

Apollos, its great representative in the Christian Church, two things:

the baptism of John to the knowledge of sin and need, and to have the

way of God more perfectly expounded.[259]259 On the other hand,

Eastern Judaism had entered with Hillel on a new stage. This direction

led farther and farther away from that which the New Testament had

taken in following up and unfolding the spiritual elements of the Old.

That development was incapable of transformation or renovation. It

must go on to its final completion, and be either true, or else be

swept away and destroyed.

CHAPTER V.

ALEXANDRIA AND ROME - THE JEWISH COMMUNITIES IN THE CAPITALS OF

WESTERN

CIVILISATION.

We have spoken of Alexandria as the capital of the Jewish world in the

West. Antioch was, indeed, nearer to Palestine, and its Jewish

population - including the floating part of it - as numerous as that

of Alexandria. But the wealth, the thought, and the influence of

Western Judaism centred in the modern capital of the land of the

Pharaohs. In those days Greece was the land of the past, to which the

student might resort as the home of beauty and of art, the time

hallowed temple of thought and of poetry. But it was also the land of

desolateness and of ruins, where fields of corn waved over the remains

of classic antiquity. The ancient Greeks had in great measure sunk to

a nation of traders, in keen competition with the Jews. Indeed, Roman

sway had levelled the ancient world, and buried its national

characteristics. It was otherwise in the far East; it was otherwise

also in Egypt. Egypt was not a land to be largely inhabited, or to be

'civilised' in the then sense of the term: soil, climate, history,

nature forbade it. Still, as now, and even more than now, was it the

dream-land of untold attractions to the traveller. The ancient,

mysterious Nile still rolled its healing waters out into the blue sea,

where (so it was supposed) they changed its taste within a radius

farther than the eye could reach. To be gently borne in bark or ship

on its waters, to watch the strange vegetation and fauna of its banks;

to gaze beyond, where they merged into the trackless desert; to wander

under the shade of its gigantic monuments, or within the wierd avenues

of its colossal temples, to see the scroll of mysterious

hieroglyphics; to note the sameness of manner and of people as of old,

and to watch the unique rites of its ancient religion - this was

indeed to be again in the old far-away world, and that amidst a

dreaminess bewitching the senses, and a gorgeousness dazzling the

imagination.[260]260

We are still far out at sea, making for the port of Alexandria - the

only safe shelter all along the coast of Asia and Africa. Quite thirty

miles out the silver sheen of the lighthouse on the island of

Pharos[261]261 - connected by a mole with Alexandria - is burning like

a star on the edge of the horizon. Now we catch sight of the

palmgroves of Pharos; presently the anchor rattles and grates on the

sand, and we are ashore. What crowd of vessels of all sizes, shapes

and nationalities; what a multitude of busy people; what a very Babel

of languages; what a commingling of old and new world civilisation;

and what a variety of wares piled up, loading or unloading!

Alexandria itself was not an old Egyptian, but a comparatively modern,

city; in Egypt and yet not of Egypt. Everything was in character - the

city, its inhabitants, public life, art, literature, study,

amusements, the very aspect of the place. Nothing original anywhere,

but combination of all that had been in the ancient world, or that was

at the time - most fitting place therefore to be the capital of Jewish

Hellenism.

As its name indicates, the city was founded by Alexander the Great. It

was built in the form of an open fan, or rather, of the outspread

cloak of a Macedonian horseman. Altogether, it measured (16,360 paces)

3,160 paces more than Rome; but its houses were neither so crowded nor

so many-storied. It had been a large city when Rome was still

inconsiderable, and to the last held the second place in the Empire.

One of the five quarters into which the city was divided, and which

were named according to the first letters of the alphabet, was wholly

covered by the royal palaces, with their gardens, and similar

buildings, including the royal mausoleum, where the body of Alexander

the Great, preserved in honey, was kept in a glass coffin. But these,

and its three miles of colonnades along the principal highway, were

only some of the magnificent architectural adornments of a city full

of palaces. The population amounted, probably, to nearly a million,

drawn from the East and West by trade, the attractions of wealth, the

facilities for study, or the amusements of a singularly frivolous

city. A strange mixture of elements among the people, combining the

quickness and versatility of the Greek with the gravity, the

conservatism, the dream-grandeur, and the luxury of the Eastern.

Three worlds met in Alexandria: Europe, Asia, and Africa; and brought

to it, or fetched from it, their treasures. Above all, it was a

commercial city, furnished with an excellent harbour - or rather with

five harbours. A special fleet carried, as tribute, from Alexandria to

Italy, two-tenths of the corn produce of Egypt, which sufficed to feed

the capital for four months of the year. A magnificent fleet it was,

from the light quick sailer to those immense corn-ships which hoisted

a special flag, and whose early arrival was awaited at Puteoli[262]262

with more eagerness than that of any modern ocean-steamer.[263]263 The

commerce of India was in the hands of the Alexandrian

shippers.[264]264 Since the days of the Ptolemies the Indian trade

alone had increased sixfold.[265]265 Nor was the native industry

inconsiderable. Linen goods, to suit the tastes or costumes of all

countries; woolen stuffs of every hue, some curiously wrought with

figures, and even scenes; glass of every shade and in every shape;

paper from the thinnest sheet to the coarsest packing paper; essences,

perfumeries - such were the native products. However idly or

luxuriously inclined, still every one seemed busy, in a city where (as

the Emperor Hadrian expressed it) 'money was the people's god;' and

every one seemed well-to-do in his own way, from the waif in the

streets, who with little trouble to himself could pick up sufficient

to go to the restaurant and enjoy a comfortable dinner of fresh or

smoked fish with garlic, and his pudding, washed down with the

favourite Egyptian barley beer, up to the millionaire banker, who

owned a palace in the city and a villa by the canal that connected

Alexandria with Canobus. What a jostling crowd of all nations in the

streets, in the market (where, according to the joke of a

contemporary, anything might be got except snow), or by the harbours;

what cool shades, delicious retreats, vast halls, magnificent

libraries, where the savants of Alexandria assembled and taught every

conceivable branch of learning, and its far-famed physicians

prescribed for the poor consumptive patients sent thither from all

parts of Italy! What bustle and noise among that ever excitable,

chatty conceited, vain, pleasure-loving multitude, whose highest

enjoyment was the theatre and singers; what scenes on that long canal

to Canobus, lined with luxurious inns, where barks full of

pleasure-seekers revelled in the cool shade of the banks, or sped to

Canobus, that scene of all dissipation and luxury, proverbial even in

those days! And yet, close by, on the shores of Lake Mareotis, as if

in grim contrast, were the chosen retreats of that sternly ascetic

Jewish party, the Therapeutæ,[266]266 whose views and practices in so

many points were kindred to those of the Essenes in Palestine!

This sketch of Alexandria will help us to understand the surroundings

of the large mass of Jews settled in the Egyptian capital. Altogether

more than an eighth of the population of the country (one million in

7,800,000) was Jewish. Whether or not a Jewish colony had gone into

Egypt at the time of Nebuchadnezzar, or even earlier, the great mass

of its residents had been attracted by Alexander the Great,[267]267

who had granted the Jews equally exceptional privileges with the

Macedonians. The later troubles of Palestine under the Syrian kings

greatly swelled their number, the more so that the Ptolemies, with one

exception, favoured them. Originally a special quarter had been

assigned to the Jews in the city - the 'Delta' by the eastern harbour

and the Canobus canal - probably alike to keep the community separate,

and from its convenience for commercial purposes. The priveleges which

the Ptolemies had accorded to the Jews were confirmed, and even

enlarged, by Julius Cæsar. The export trade in grain was now in their

hands, and the harbour and river police committed to their charge. Two

quarters in the city are named as specially Jewish - not, however, in

the sense of their being confined to them. Their Synagogues,

surrounded by shady trees, stood in all parts of the city. But the

chief glory of the Jewish community in Egypt, of which even the

Palestinians boasted, was the great central Synagogue, built in the

shape of a basilica, with double colonnade, and so large that it

needed a signal for those most distant to know the proper moment for

the responses. The different trade guilds sat there together, so that

a stranger would at once know where to find Jewish employers or

fellow-workmen.[268]268 In the choir of this Jewish cathedral stood

seventy chairs of state, encrusted with precious stones, for the

seventy elders who constituted the eldership of Alexandria, on the

model of the great Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.

It is a strange, almost inexplicable fact, that the Egyptian Jews had

actually built a schismatic Temple. During the terrible Syrian

persecutions in Palestine Onias, the son of the murdered High-Priest

Onias III., had sought safety in Egypt. Ptolemy Philometor not only

received him kindly, but gave a disused heathen temple in the town of

Leontopolis for a Jewish sanctuary. Here a new Aaronic priesthood

ministered, their support being derived from the revenues of the

district around. The new Temple, however, resembled not that of

Jerusalem either in outward appearance nor in all its internal

fittings.[269]269 At first the Egyptian Jews were very proud of their

new sanctuary, and professed to see in it the fulfilment of the

prediction,[270]270 that five cities in the land of Egypt should speak

the language of Canaan, of which one was to be called Ir-ha-Heres,

which the LXX. (in their original form, or by some later emendation)

altered into 'the city of righteousness.' This temple continued from

about 160 b.c. to shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem. It could

scarcely be called a rival to that on Mount Moriah, since the Egyptian

Jews also owned that of Jerusalem as their central sanctuary, to which

they made pilgrimages and brought their contributions,[271]271 while

the priests at Leontopolis, before marrying, always consulted the

official archives in Jerusalem to ascertain the purity of descent of

their intended wives.[272]272 The Palestinians designated it

contemptuously as 'the house of Chonyi' (Onias), and declared the

priesthood of Leontopolis incapable of serving in Jerusalem, although

on a par with those who were disqualified only by some bodily defect.

Offerings brought in Leontopolis were considered null, unless in the

case of vows to which the name of this Temple had been expressly

attached.[273]273 This qualified condemnation seems, however,

strangely mild, except on the supposition that the statements we have

quoted only date from a time when both Temples had long passed away.

Nor were such feelings unreasonable. The Egyptian Jews had spread on

all sides - southward to Abyssinia and Ethiopia, and westward to, and

beyond, the province of Cyrene. In the city of that name they formed

one of the four classes into which its inhabitants were

divided.[274]274 A Jewish inscription at Berenice, apparently dating

from the year 13 b.c., shows that the Cyrenian Jews formed a distinct

community under nine 'rulers' of their own, who no doubt attended to

the communal affairs - not always an easy matter, since the Cyrenian

Jews were noted, if not for turbulence, yet for strong anti-Roman

feeling, which more than once was cruelly quenched in blood.[275]275

Other inscriptions prove,[276]276 that in other places of their

dispersion also the Jews had their own Archontes or 'rulers,' while

the special direction of public worship was always entrusted to the

Archisynagogos, or 'chief ruler of the Synagogue,' both titles

occurring side by side.[277]277 It is, to say the least, very

doubtful, whether the High-Priest at Leontopolis was ever regarded as,

in any real sense, the head of the Jewish community in Egypt.[278]278

In Alexandria, the Jews were under the rule of a Jewish

Ethnarch,[279]279 whose authority was similar to that of 'the Archon'

of independent cities.[280]280 But his authority[281]281 was

transferred, by Augustus, to the whole 'eldership.'[282]282 Another,

probably Roman, office, though for obvious reasons often filled by

Jews, was that of the Alabarch, or rather Arabarch, who was set over

the Arab population.[283]283 Among others, Alexander, the brother of

Philo, held this post. If we may judge of the position of the wealthy

Jewish families in Alexandria by that of this Alabarch, their

influence must have been very great. The firm of Alexander was

probably as rich as the great Jewish banking and shipping house of

Saramalla in Antioch.[284]284 Its chief was entrusted with the

management of the affairs of Antonia, the much respected sister-in-law

of the Emperor Tiberius.[285]285 It was a small thing for such a man

to lend King Agrippa, when his fortunes were very low, a sum of about

7,000l. with which to resort to Italy,[286]286 since he advanced it on

the guarantee of Agrippa's wife, whom he highly esteemed, and at the

same time made provision that the money should not be all spent before

the Prince met the Emperor. Besides, he had his own plans in the

matter. Two of his sons married daughters of King Agrippa; while a

third, at the price of apostasy, rose successively to the posts of

Procurator of Palestine, and finally of Governor of Egypt.[287]287 The

Temple at Jerusalem bore evidence of the wealth and munificence of

this Jewish millionaire. The gold and silver with which the nine

massive gates were covered, which led into the Temple, were the gift

of the great Alexandrian banker.

The possession of such wealth, coupled no doubt with pride and

self-assertion, and openly spoken contempt of the superstitions

around,[288]288 would naturally excite the hatred of the Alexandria

populace against the Jews. The greater number of those silly stories

about the origin, early history, and religion of the Jews, which even

the philosophers and historians of Rome record as genuine, originated

in Egypt. A whole series of writers, beginning with Manetho,[289]289

made it their business to give a kind of historical travesty of the

events recorded in the books of Moses. The boldest of these scribblers

was Apion, to whom Josephus replied - a world-famed charlatan and

liar, who wrote or lectured, with equal presumption and falseness, on

every conceivable object. He was just the man to suit the

Alexandrians, on whom his unblushing assurance imposed. In Rome he

soon found his level, and the Emperor Tiberius well characterised the

irrepressible boastful talker as the 'tinkling cymbal of the world.'

He had studied, seen, and heard everything - even, on three occasions,

the mysterious sound on the Colossus of Memnon, as the sun rose upon

it! At least, so he graved upon the Colossus itself, for the

information of all generations.[290]290 Such was the man on whom the

Alexandrians conferred the freedom of their city, to whom they

entrusted their most important affairs, and whom they extolled as the

victorious, the laborious, the new Homer.[291]291 There can be little

doubt, that the popular favour was partly due to Apion's virulent

attacks upon the Jews. His grotesque accounts of their history and

religion held them up to contempt. But his real object was to rouse

the fanaticism of the populace against the Jews. Every year, so he

told them, it was the practice of the Jews to get hold of some

unfortunate Hellene, whom ill-chance might bring into their hands, to

fatten him for the year, and then to sacrifice him, partaking of his

entrials, and burying the body, while during these horrible rites they

took a fearful oath of perpetual enmity to the Greeks. These were the

people who battened on the wealth of Alexandria, who had usurped

quarters of the city to which they had no right, and claimed

exceptional privileges; a people who had proved traitors to, and the

ruin of every one who had trusted them. 'If the Jews,' he exclaimed,

'are citizens of Alexandria, why do they not worship the same gods as

the Alexandrians?' And, if they wished to enjoy the protection of the

Cæsars, why did they not erect statues, and pay Divine honor to

them?[292]292 There is nothing strange in these appeals to the

fanaticism of mankind. In one form or another, they have only too

often been repeated in all lands and ages, and, alas! by the

representatives of all creeds. Well might the Jews, as Philo

mourns,[293]293 wish no better for themselves than to be treated like

other men!

We have already seen, that the ideas entertained in Rome about the

Jews were chiefly derived from Alexandrian sources. But it is not easy

to understand, how a Tacitus, Cicero, or Pliny could have credited

such absurdities as that the Jews had come from Crete (Mount Ida -

Idæi = Judæi), been expelled on account of leprosy from Egypt, and

emigrated under an apostate priest, Moses; or that the Sabbath-rest

originated in sores, which had obliged the wanderers to stop short on

the seventh day; or that the Jews worshipped the head of an ass, or

else Bacchus; that their abstinence from swine's flesh was due to

remembrance and fear of leprosy, or else to the worship of that animal

- and other puerilities of the like kind.[294]294 The educated Roman

regarded the Jew with a mixture of contempt and anger, all the more

keen that, according to his notions, the Jew had, since his subjection

to Rome, no longer a right to his religion; and all the more bitter

that, do what he might, that despised race confronted him everywhere,

with a religion so uncompromising as to form a wall of separation, and

with rites so exclusive as to make them not only strangers, but

enemies. Such a phenomenon was nowhere else to be encountered. The

Romans were intensely practical. In their view, political life and

religion were not only intertwined, but the one formed part of the

other. A religion apart from a political organisation, or which

offered not, as a quid pro quo, some direct return from the Deity to

his votaries, seemed utterly inconceivable. Every country has its own

religion, argued Cicero, in his appeal for Flaccus. So long as

Jerusalem was unvaquished, Judaism might claim toleration; but had not

the immortal gods shown what they thought of it, when the Jewish race

was conquered? This was a kind of logic that appealed to the humblest

in the crowd, which thronged to hear the great orator defending his

client, among others, against the charge of preventing the transport

from Asia to Jerusalem of the annual Temple-tribute. This was not a

popular accusation to bring against a man in such an assembly. And as

the Jews - who, to create a distrubance, had (we are told) distributed

themselves among the audience in such numbers, that Cicero somewhat

rhetorically declared, he would fain have spoken with bated breath, so

as to be only audible to the judges - listened to the great orator,

they must have felt a keen pang shoot to their hearts while he held

them up to the scorn of the heathen, and touched, with rough finger,

their open sore, as he urged the ruin of their nation as the one

unanswerable argument, which Materialism could bring against the

religion of the Unseen.

And that religion - was it not, in the words of Cicero, a 'barbarous

superstition,' and were not its adherents, as Pliny had it,[295]295 'a

race distinguished for its contempt of the gods?' To begin with their

theology. The Roman philosopher would sympathise with disbelief of all

spiritual realities, as, on the other hand, he could understand the

popular modes of worship and superstition. But what was to be said for

a worship of something quite unseen, an adoration, as it seemed to

him, of the clouds and of the sky, without any visible symbol,

conjoined with an utter rejection of every other form of religion -

Asiatic, Egyptian, Greek, Roman - and the refusal even to pay the

customary Divine honor to the Cæsars, as the incarnation of Roman

power? Next, as to their rites. Foremost among them was the initiatory

rite of circumcision, a constant subject for coarse jests. What could

be the meaning of it; or of what seemed like some ancestral veneration

for the pig, or dread of it, since they made it a religious duty not

to partake of its flesh? Their Sabbath-observance, however it had

originated, was merely an indulgence in idleness. The fast young Roman

literati would find their amusement in wandering on the Sabbath-eve

through the tangled, narrow streets of the Ghetto, watching how the

dim lamp within shed its unsavory light, while the inmates mumbled

prayers 'with blanched lips;'[296]296 or they would, like Ovid, seek

in the Synagogue occasion for their dissolute amusements. The Thursday

fast was another target for their wit. In short, at the best, the Jew

was a constant theme of popular merriment, and the theatre would

resound with laughter as his religion was lampooned, no matter how

absurd the stories, or how poor the punning.[297]297

And then, as the proud Roman passed on the Sabbath through the

streets, Judaism would obtrude itself upon his notice, by the shops

that were shut, and by the strange figures that idly moved about in

holiday attire. They were strangers in a strange land, not only

without sympathy with what passed around, but with marked contempt and

abhorrence of it, while there was that about their whole bearing,

which expressed the unspoken feeling, that the time of Rome's fall,

and of their own supremacy, was at hand. To put the general feeling in

the words of Tacitus, the Jews kept close together, and were ever most

liberal to one another; but they were filled with bitter hatred of all

others. They would neither eat nor sleep with strangers; and the first

thing which they taught their proselytes was to despise the gods, to

renounce their own country, and to rend the bonds which had bound them

to parents, children or kindred. To be sure, there was some ground of

distorted truth in these charges. For, the Jew, as such, was only

intended for Palestine. By a necessity, not of his own making, he was

now, so to speak, the negative element in the heathen world; yet one

which, do what he might, would always obtrude itself upon public

notice. But the Roman satirists went further. They accused the Jews of

such hatred of all other religionists, that they would not even show

the way to any who worshipped otherwise, nor point out the cooling

spring to the thirsty.[298]298 According to Tacitus, there was a

political and religious reason for this. In order to keep the Jews

separate from all other nations, Moses had given them rites, contrary

to those of any other race, that they might regard as unholy what was

sacred to others, and as lawful what they held in abomination.[299]299

Such a people deserved neither consideration nor pity; and when the

historian tells how thousands of their number had been banished by

Tiberius to Sardinia, he dismisses the probability of their perishing

in that severe climate with the cynical remark, that it entailed a

'poor loss'[300]300 (vile damnum).

Still, the Jew was there in the midst of them. It is impossible to fix

the date when the first Jewish wanderers found their way to the

capital of the world. We know, that in the wars under Pompey, Cassius,

and Antonius, many were brought captive to Rome, and sold as slaves.

In general, the Republican party was hostile, the Cæsars were

friendly, to the Jews. The Jewish slaves in Rome proved an

unprofitable and troublesome acquisition. They clung so tenaciously to

their ancestral customs, that it was impossible to make them conform

to the ways of heathen households.[301]301 How far they would carry

their passive resistance, appears from a story told by

Josephus,[302]302 about some Jewish priests of his acquaintance, who,

during their captivity in Rome, refused to eat anything but figs and

nuts, so as to avoid the defilement of Gentile food.[303]303 Their

Roman masters deemed it prudent to give their Jewish slaves their

freedom, either at a small ransom, or even without it. These freedmen

(liberti) formed the nucleus of the Jewish community in Rome, and in

great measure determined its social character. Of course they were, as

always, industrious, sober, pushing. In course of time many of them

acquired wealth. By-and-by Jewish immigrants of greater distinction

swelled their number. Still their social position was inferior to that

of their co-religionists in other lands. A Jewish population so large

as 40,000 in the time of Augustus, and 60,000 in that of Tiberius,

would naturally included all ranks - merchants, bankers, literati,

even actors.[304]304 In a city which offered such temptations, they

would number among them those of every degree of religious profession;

nay, some who would not only imitate the habits of those around, but

try to outdo their gross licentiousness.[305]305 Yet, even so, they

would vainly endeavor to efface the hateful mark of being Jews.

Augustus had assigned to the Jews as their special quarter the

'fourteenth region' across the Tiber, which stretched from the slope

of the Vatican onwards and across the Tiber-island, where the boats

from Ostia were wont to unload. This seems to have been their poor

quarter, chiefly inhabited by hawkers, sellers of matches,[306]306

glass, old clothes and second-hand wares. The Jewish burying-ground in

that quarter[307]307 gives evidence of their condition. The whole

appointments and the graves are mean. There is neither marble nor any

trace of painting, unless it be a rough representation of the

seven-branched candlestick in red coloring. Another Jewish quarter was

by the Porta Capena, where the Appian Way entered the city. Close by,

the ancient sanctuary of Egeria was utilized at the time of

Juvenal[308]308 as a Jewish hawking place. But there must have been

richer Jews also in that neighborhood, since the burying-place there

discovered has paintings - some even of mythological figures, of which

the meaning has not yet been ascertained. A third Jewish

burying-ground was near the ancient Christian catacombs.

But indeed, the Jewish residents in Rome must have spread over every

quarter of the city - even the best - to judge by the location of

their Synagogues. From inscriptions, we have been made acquainted not

only with the existence, but with the names, of not fewer than seven

of these Synagogues. Three of them respectively bear the names of

Augustus, Agrippa, and Volumnius, either as their patrons, or because

the worshippers were chiefly their attendants and clients; while two

of them derived their names from the Campus Martius, and the quarter

Subura in which they stood.[309]309 The 'Synagoge Elaias' may have

been so called from bearing on its front the device of an olive-tree,

a favourite, and in Rome specially significant, emblem of Israel,

whose fruit, crushed beneath heavy weight, would yield the precious

oil by which the Divine light would shed its brightness through the

night of heathendom.[310]310 Of course, there must have been other

Synagogues besides those whose names have been discovered.

One other mode of tracking the footsteps of Israel's wanderings seems

strangely significant. It is by tracing their records among the dead,

reading them on broken tombstones, and in ruined monuments. They are

rude, and the inscriptions - most of them in bad Greek, or still worse

Latin, none in Hebrew - are like the stammering of strangers. Yet what

a contrast between the simple faith and earnest hope which they

express, and the grim proclamation of utter disbelief in any future to

the soul, not unmixed with language of coarsest materialism, on the

graves of so many of the polished Romans ! Truly the pen of God in

history has, as so often, ratified the sentence which a nation had

pronounced upon itself. That civilisation was doomed which could

inscribe over its dead such words as: 'To eternal sleep;' 'To

perpetual rest;' or more coarsely express it thus, 'I was not, and I

became; I was, and am no more. Thus much is true; who says other,

lies; for I shall not be,' adding, as it were by way of moral, 'And

thou who livest, drink, play, come.' Not so did God teach His people;

and, as we pick our way among these broken stones, we can understand

how a religion, which proclaimed a hope so different, must have spoken

to the hearts of many even at Rome, and much more, how that blessed

assurance of life and immortality, which Christianity afterwards

brought, could win its thousands, though it were at the cost of

poverty, shame, torture, and the arena.

Wandering from graveyard to graveyard, and deciphering the records of

the dead, we can almost read the history of Israel in the days of the

Cæsars, or when Paul the prisoner set foot on the soil of Italy. When

St. Paul, on the journey of the 'Castor and Pollux,' touched at

Syracuse, he would, during his stay of three days, find himself in the

midst of a Jewish community, as we learn from an inscription. When he

disembarked at Puteoli, he was in the oldest Jewish settlement next to

that of Rome,[311]311 where the loving hospitality of Christian

Israelites constrained him to tarry over a Sabbath. As he 'went

towards Rome,' and reached Capua, he would meet Jews there, as we

infer from the tombstone of one 'Alfius Juda,' who had been 'Archon'

of the Jews, and 'Archisynagogus' in Capua. As he neared the city, he

found in Anxur (Terracina) a Synagogue.[312]312 In Rome itself the

Jewish community was organized as in other places.[313]313 It sounds

strange, as after these many centuries we again read the names of the

Archons of their various Synagogues, all Roman, such as Claudius,

Asteris, Julian (who was Archon alike of the Campesian and the

Agrippesian Synagogue priest, the son of Julian the Archisynagogus, or

chief of the eldership of the Augustesian Synagogue). And so in other

places. On these tombstones we find names of Jewish

Synagogue-dignitaries, in every centre of population, in Pompeii, in

Venusia, the birthplace of Horace; in Jewish catacombs; and similarly

Jewish inscriptions in Africa, in Asia, in the islands of the

Mediterranean, in Ægina, in Patræ, in Athens. Even where as yet

records of their early settlements have not been discovered, we still

infer their presence, as we remember the almost incredible extent of

Roman commerce, which led to such large settlements in Britain, or as

we discover among the tombstones those of 'Syrian' merchants, as in

Spain (where St. Paul hoped to preach, no doubt, also to his own

countrymen), throughout Gaul, and even in the remotest parts of

Germany.[314]314 Thus the statements of Josephus and of Philo, as to

the dispersion of Israel throughout all lands of the known world, are

fully borne out.

But the special importance of the Jewish community in Rome lay in its

contiguity to the seat of the government of the world, where every

movement could be watched and influenced, and where it could lend

support to the wants and wishes of that compact body which, however

widely scattered, was one in heart and feeling, in thought and

purpose, in faith and practice, in suffering and in

prosperity.[315]315 Thus, when upon the death of Herod a deputation

from Palestine appeared in the capital to seek the restoration of

their Theocracy under a Roman protectorate,[316]316 no less than 8,000

of the Roman Jews joined it. And in case of need they could find

powerful friends, not only among the Herodian princes, but among court

favourites who were Jews, like the actor of whom Josephus

speaks;[317]317 among those who were inclined towards Judaism, like

Poppæa, the dissolute wife of Nero, whose coffin as that of a Jewess

was laid among the urns of the emperors;[318]318 or among real

proselytes, like those of all ranks who, from superstition or

conviction, had identified themselves with the Synagogue.[319]319

In truth, there was no law to prevent the spread of Judaism. Excepting

the brief period when Tiberius[320]320 banished the Jews from Rome and

sent 4,000 of their number to fight the banditti in Sardinia, the Jews

enjoyed not only perfect liberty, but exceptional privileges. In the

reign of Cæsar and of Augustus we have quite a series of edicts, which

secured the full exercise of their religion and their communal

rights.[321]321 In virtue of these they were not to be disturbed in

their religious ceremonies, nor in the observance of their sabbaths

and feasts. The annual Temple-tribute was allowed to be transported to

Jerusalem, and the alienation of these funds by the civil magistrates

treated as sacrilege. As the Jews objected to bear arms, or march, on

the Sabbath, they were freed from military service. On similar

grounds, they were not obliged to appear in courts of law on their

holy days. Augustus even ordered that, when the public distribution of

corn or of money among the citizens fell on a Sabbath, the Jews were

to receive their share on the following day. In a similar spirit the

Roman authorities confirmed a decree by which the founder of Antioch,

Seleucus I. (Nicator),[322]322 had granted the Jews the right of

citizenship in all the cities of Asia Minor and Syria which he had

built, and the privilege of receiving, instead of the oil that was

distributed, which their religion forbade them to use,[323]323 an

equivalent in money.[324]324 These rights were maintained by Vespasian

and Titus even after the last Jewish war, notwithstanding the earnest

remonstrances of these cities. No wonder, that at the death of

Cæsar[325]325 the Jews of Rome gathered for many nights, waking

strange feelings of awe in the city, as they chanted in mournful

melodies their Psalms around the pyre on which the body of their

benefactor had been burnt, and raised their pathetic dirges.[326]326

The measures of Sejanus, and ceased with his sway. Besides, they were

the outcome of public feeling at the time against all foreign rites,

which had been roused by the vile conduct of the priests of Isis

towards a Roman matron, and was again provoked by a gross imposture

upon Fulvia, a noble Roman proselyte, on the part of some vagabond

Rabbis. But even so, there is no reason to believe that literally all

Jews had left Rome. Many would find means to remain secretly behind.

At any rate, twenty years afterwards Philo found a large community

there, ready to support him in his mission on behalf of his Egyptian

countrymen. Any temporary measures against the Jews can, therefore,

scarcely be regarded as a serious interference with their privileges,

or a cessation of the Imperial favour shown to them.

CHAPTER VI.

POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS LIFE OF THE JEWISH DISPERSION IN THE WEST -

THEIR

UNION IN THE GREAT HOPE OF THE COMING DELIVERER.

It was not only in the capital of the Empire that the Jews enjoyed the

rights of Roman citizenship. Many in Asia Minor could boast of the

same privilege.[327]327 The Seleucidic rulers of Syria had previously

bestowed kindred privileges on the Jews in many places. Thus, they

possessed in some cities twofold rights: the status of Roman and the

privileges of Asiatic, citizenship. Those who enjoyed the former were

entitled to a civil government of their own, under archons of their

choosing, quite independent of the rule and tribunals of the cities in

which they lived. As instances, we may mention the Jews of Sardis,

Ephesus, Delos, and apparently also of Antioch. But, whether legally

entitled to it or not, they probably everywhere claimed the right of

self-government, and exercised it, except in times of persecution.

But, as already stated, they also possessed, besides this, at least in

many places, the privileges of Asiatic citizenship, to the same extent

as their heathen fellow-citizens. This twofold status and jurisdiction

might have led to serious complications, if the archons had not

confined their authority to strictly communal interests,[328]328

without interfering with the ordinary administration of justice, and

the Jews willingly submitted to the sentences pronounced by their own

tribunals.

But, in truth, they enjoyed even more than religious liberty and

communal privileges. It was quite in the spirit of the times, that

potentates friendly to Israel bestowed largesses alike on the Temple

in Jerusalem, and on the Synagogues in the provinces. The magnificent

porch of the Temple was 'adorned' with many such 'dedicated gifts.'

Thus, we read of repeated costly offerings by the Ptolemies, of a

golden wreath which Sosius offered after he had taken Jerusalem in

conjunction with Herod, and of rich flagons which Augustus and his

wife had given to the Sanctuary.[329]329 And, although this same

Emperor praised his grandson for leaving Jerusalem unvisited on his

journey from Egypt to Syria, yet he himself made provision for a daily

sacrifice on his behalf, which only ceased when the last war against

Rome was proclaimed.[330]330 Even the circumstance that there was a

'Court of the Gentiles,' with marble screen beautifully ornamented,

bearing tablets which, in Latin and Greek, warned Gentiles not to

proceed further,[331]331 proves that the Sanctuary was largely

attended by others than Jews, or, in the words of Josephus, that 'it

was held in reverence by nations from the ends of the earth.'[332]332

In Syria also, where, according to Josephus, the largest number of

Jews lived,[333]333 they experienced special favour. In Antioch their

rights and immunities were recorded on tables of brass.[334]334

But, indeed, the capital of Syria was one of their favourite resorts.

It will be remembered what importance attached to it in the early

history of the Christian Church. Antioch was the third city of the

Empire, and lay just outside what the Rabbinists designated as 'Syria'

and still regarded as holy ground. Thus it formed, so to speak, an

advanced post between the Palestinian and the Gentile world. Its chief

Synagogue was a magnificent building, to which the successors of

Antiochus Epiphanes had given the spoils which that monarch had

brought from the Temple. The connection between Jerusalem and Antioch

was very close. All that occurred in that city was eagerly watched in

the Jewish capital. The spread of Christianity there must have excited

deep concern. Careful as the Talmud is not to afford unwelcome

information, which might have led to further mischief, we know that

three of the principal Rabbis went thither on a mission - we can

scarcely doubt for the purpose of arresting the progress of

Christianity. Again, we find at a later period a record of religious

controversy in Antioch between Rabbis and Christians.[335]335 Yet the

Jews of Antioch were strictly Hellenistic, and on one occasion a great

Rabbi was unable to find among them a copy of even the Book of Esther

in Hebrew, which, accordingly, he had to write out from memory for his

use in their Synagogue. A fit place this great border-city, crowded by

Hellenists, in close connection with Jerusalem, to be the birthplace

of the name 'Christian,' to send forth a Paul on his mission to the

Gentile world, and to obtain for it a charter of citizenship far

nobler than that of which the record was graven on tablets of brass.

But, whatever privileges Israel might enjoy, history records an almost

continuous series of attempts, on the part of the communities among

whom they lived, to deprive them not only of their immunities, but

even of their common rights. Foremost among the reasons of this

antagonism we place the absolute contrariety between heathenism and

the Synagogue, and the social isolation which Judaism rendered

necessary. It was avowedly unlawful for the Jew even 'to keep company,

or come unto one of another nation.'[336]336 To quarrel with this, was

to find fault with the law and the religion which made him a Jew. But

besides, there was that pride of descent, creed, enlightenment, and

national privileges, which St. Paul so graphically sums up as 'making

boast of God and of the law.'[337]337 However differently they might

have expressed it, Philo and Hillel would have been at one as to the

absolute superiority of the Jew as such. Pretensions of this kind must

have been the more provocative, that the populace at any rate envied

the prosperity which Jewish industry, talent, and capital everywhere

secured. Why should that close, foreign corporation possess every

civic right, and yet be free from many of its burdens? Why should

their meetings be excepted from the 'collegia illicita?' why should

they alone be allowed to export part of the national wealth, to

dedicate it to their superstition in Jerusalem? The Jew could not well

feign any real interest in what gave its greatness to Ephesus, it

attractiveness to Corinth, its influence to Athens. He was ready to

profit by it; but his inmost thought must have been contempt, and all

he wanted was quietness and protection in his own pursuits. What

concern had he with those petty squabbles, ambitions, or designs,

which agitated the turbulent populace in those Grecian cities? What

cared he for their popular meetings and noisy discussions? The

recognition of the fact that, as Jews, they were strangers in a

strange land, made them so loyal to the ruling powers, and procured

them the protection of kings and Cæsars. But it also roused the hatred

of the populace.

That such should have been the case, and these widely scattered

members have been united in one body, is a unique fact in history. Its

only true explanation must be sought in a higher Divine impulse. The

links which bound them together were: a common creed, a common life, a

common centre, and a common hope.

Wherever the Jew sojourned, or however he might differ from his

brethern, Monotheism, the Divine mission of Moses, and the authority

of the Old Testament, were equally to all unquestioned articles of

belief. It may well have been that the Hellenistic Jew, living in the

midst of a hostile, curious, and scurrilous population, did not care

to exhibit over his house and doorposts, at the right of the entrance,

the Mezuzah,[338]338 which enclosed the folded parchment that, on

twenty-two lines, bore the words from Deut. iv. 4-9 and xi. 13-21, or

to call attention by their breadth to the Tephillin,[339]339 or

phylacteries on his left arm and forehead, or even to make observable

the Tsitsith,[340]340 or fringes on the borders of his

garments.[341]341 Perhaps, indeed, all these observances may at that

time not have been deemed incumbent on every Jew.[342]342 At any rate,

we do not find mention of them in heathen writers. Similarly, they

could easily keep out of view, or they may not have had conveniences

for, their prescribed purifications. But in every place, as we have

abundant evidence, where there were at least ten Batlanim - male

householders who had leisure to give themselves to regular attendance

- they had, from ancient times,[343]343 one, and, if possible, more

Synagogues.[344]344 Where there was no Synagogue there was at least a

Proseuche,[345]345 [346]346 open sky, after the form of a theatre,

generally outside the town, near a river or the sea, for the sake of

lustrations. These, as we know from classical writers, were well known

to the heathen, and even frequented by them. Their Sabbath observance,

their fasting on Thursdays, their Day of Atonement, their laws

relating to food, and their pilgrimages to Jerusalem - all found

sympathisers among Judaising Gentiles.[347]347 They even watched to

see, how the Sabbath lamp was kindled, and the solemn prayers spoken

which marked the beginning of the Sabbath.[348]348 But to the Jew the

Synagogue was the bond of union throughout the world. There, on

Sabbath and feast days they met to read, from the same Lectionary, the

same Scripture-lessons which their brethren read throughout the world,

and to say, in the words of the same liturgy, their common prayers,

catching echoes of the gorgeous Temple-services in Jerusalem. The

heathen must have been struck with awe as they listened, and watched

in the gloom of the Synagogue the mysterious light at the far

curtained end, where the sacred oracles were reverently kept, wrapped

in costly coverings. Here the stranger Jew also would find himself at

home: the same arrangements as in his own land, and the well-known

services and prayers. A hospitable welcome at the Sabbath-meal, and in

many a home, would be pressed on him, and ready aid be proffered in

work or trial.

For, deepest of all convictions was that of their common centre;

strongest of all feelings was the love which bound them to Palestine

and to Jerusalem, the city of God, the joy of all the earth, the glory

of His people Israel. 'If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right

hand forget her cunning; let my tongue cleave to the roof of my

mouth,' Hellenist and Eastern equally realised this. As the soil of

his native land, the deeds of his people, or the graves of his fathers

draw the far-off wanderer to the home of his childhood, or fill the

mountaineer in his exile with irrepressible longing, so the sounds

which the Jew heard in his Synagogue, and the observances which he

kept. Nor was it with him merely matter of patriotism, of history, or

of association. It was a religious principle, a spiritual hope. No

truth more firmly rooted in the consciousness of all, than that in

Jerusalem alone men could truly worship.[349]349 As Daniel of old had

in his hour of worship turned towards the Holy City, so in the

Synagogue and in his prayers every Jew turned towards Jerusalem; and

anything that might imply want of reverence, when looking in that

direction, was considered a grievous sin. From every Synagogue in the

Diaspora the annual Temple-tribute went up to Jerusalem,[350]350 no

doubt often accompanied by rich votive offerings. Few, who could

undertake or afford the journey, but had at some time or other gone up

to the Holy City to attend one of the great feasts.[351]351 Philo, who

was held by the same spell as the most bigoted Rabbinist, had himself

been one of those deputed by his fellow-citizens to offer prayers and

sacrifices in the great Sanctuary.[352]352 Views and feelings of this

kind help us to understand, how, on some great feast, as Josephus

states on sufficient authority, the population of Jerusalem - within

its ecclesiastical boundaries - could have swelled to the enormous

number of nearly three millions.[353]353

And still, there was an even stronger bond in their common hope. That

hope pointed them all, wherever scattered, back to Palestine. To them

the coming of the Messiah undoubtedly implied the restoration of

Israel's kingdom, and, as a first part in it, the return of 'the

dispersed.'[354]354 Indeed, every devout Jew prayed, day by day:

'Proclaim by Thy loud trumpet our deliverance, and raise up a banner

to gather our dispersed, and gather us together from the four ends of

the earth. Blessed be Thou, O Lord! Who gatherest the outcasts of Thy

people Israel.'[355]355 That prayer included in its generality also

the lost ten tribes. So, for example, the prophecy[356]356 was

rendered: 'They hasten hither, like a bird out of Egypt,' - referring

to Israel of old; 'and like a dove out of the land of Assyria' -

referring to the ten tribes.[357]357 [358]358 And thus even these

wanderers, so long lost, were to be reckoned in the field of the Good

Shepherd.[359]359

It is worth while to trace, how universally and warmly both Eastern

and Western Judaism cherished this hope of all Israel's return to

their own land. The Targumim bear repeated reference to it;[360]360

and although there may be question as to the exact date of these

paraphrases, it cannot be doubted, that in this respect they

represented the views of the Synagogue at the time of Jesus. For the

same reason we may gather from the Talmud and earliest commentaries,

what Israel's hope was in regard to the return of the

'dispersed.'[361]361 It was a beautiful idea to liken Israel to the

olive-tree, which is never stripped of its leaves.[362]362 The storm

of trial that had swept over it was, indeed, sent in judgment, but not

to destroy, only to purify. Even so, Israel's persecutions had served

to keep them from becoming mixed with the Gentiles. Heaven and earth

might be destroyed, but not Israel; and their final deliverance would

far outstrip in marvellousness that from Egypt. The winds would blow

to bring together the dispersed; nay, if there were a single Israelite

in a land, however distant, he would be restored. With every honour

would the nations bring them back. The patriarchs and all the just

would rise to share in the joys Patræ of the new possession of their

land; new hymns as well as the old ones would rise to the praise of

God. Nay, the bounds of the land would be extended far beyond what

they had ever been, and made as wide as originally promised to

Abraham. Nor would that possession be ever taken from them, nor those

joys be ever succeeded by sorrows.[363]363 In view of such general

expectations we cannot fail to mark with what wonderful sobriety the

Apostles put the question to Jesus: 'Wilt Thou at this time restore

the kingdom to Israel?'[364]364

Hopes and expectations such as these are expressed not only in

Talmudical writings. We find them throughout that very interesting

Apocalyptic class of literature, the Pseudepigrapha, to which

reference has already been made. The two earliest of them, the Book of

Enoch and the Sibylline Oracles, are equally emphatic on this subject.

The seer in the Book of Enoch beholds Israel in the Messianic time as

coming in carriages, and as borne on the wings of the wind from East,

and West, and South.[365]365 Fuller details of that happy event are

furnished by the Jewish Sibyl. In her utterances these three events

are connected together: the coming of the Messiah, the rebuilding of

the Temple,[366]366 and the restoration of the dispersed,[367]367 when

all nations would bring their wealth to the House of God.[368]368

[369]369 The latter trait specially reminds us of their Hellenistic

origin. A century later the same joyous confidence, only perhaps more

clearly worded, appears in the so-called 'Psalter of Solomon.' Thus

the seventeenth Psalm bursts into this strain: 'Blessed are they who

shall live in those days - in the reunion of the tribes, which God

brings about.'[370]370 And no wonder, since they are the days when

'the King, the Son of David,'[371]371 having purged Jerusalem[372]372

and destroyed the heathen by the word of His mouth,[373]373 would

gather together a holy people which He would rule with justice, and

judge the tribes of His people,[374]374 'dividing them over the land

according to tribes;' when 'no stranger would any longer dwell among

them.'[375]375

Another pause, and we reach the time when Jesus the Messiah appeared.

Knowing the characteristics of that time, we scarcely wonder that the

Book of Jubilees, which dates from that period, should have been

Rabbinic in its cast rather than Apocalyptic. Yet even there the

reference to the future glory is distinct. Thus we are told, that,

though for its wickedness Israel had been scattered, God would 'gather

them all from the midst of the heathen,' 'build among them His

Sanctuary, and dwell with them.' That Sanctuary was to 'be for ever

and ever, and God would appear to the eye of every one, and every one

acknowledge that He was the God of Israel, and the Father of all the

Children of Jacob, and King upon Mount Zion, from everlasting to

everlasting. And Zion and Jerusalem shall be holy.'[376]376 When

listening to this language of, perhaps, a contemporary of Jesus, we

can in some measure understand the popular indignation which such a

charge would call forth, as that the Man of Nazareth had proposed to

destroy the Temple,[377]377 or that he thought merely of the children

of Jacob.

There is an ominous pause of a century before we come to the next work

of this class, which bears the title of the Fourth Book of Esdras.

That century had been decisive in the history of Israel. Jesus had

lived and died; His Apostles had gone forth to bear the tidings of the

new Kingdom of God; the Church had been founded and separated from the

Synagogue; and the Temple had been destroyed, the Holy City laid

waste, and Israel undergone sufferings, compared with which the former

troubles might almost be forgotten. But already the new doctrine had

struck its roots deep alike in Eastern and in Hellenistic soil. It

were strange indeed if, in such circumstances, this book should not

have been different from any that had preceded it; stranger still, if

earnest Jewish minds and ardent Jewish hearts had remained wholly

unaffected by the new teaching, even though the doctrine of the Cross

still continued a stumbling-block, and the Gospel announcement a rock

of offence. But perhaps we could scarcely have been prepared to find,

as in the Fourth Book of Esdras, doctrinal views which were wholly

foreign to Judaism, and evidently derived from the New Testament, and

which, in logical consistency, would seem to lead up to it.[378]378

The greater part of the book may be described as restless tossing, the

seer being agitated by the problem and the consequences of sin, which

here for the first and only time is presented as in the New Testament;

by the question, why there are so few who are saved; and especially by

what to a Jew must have seemed the inscrutable, terrible mystery of

Israel's sufferings and banishment.[379]379 Yet, so far as we can see,

no other way of salvation is indicated than that by works and personal

righteousness. Throughout there is a tone of deep sadness and intense

earnestness. It almost seems sometimes, as if one heard the wind of

the new dispensation sweeping before it the withered leaves of

Israel's autumn. Thus far for the principal portion of the book. The

second, or Apocalyptic, part, endeavors to solve the mystery of

Israel's state by foretelling their future. Here also there are echoes

of New Testament utterances. What the end is to be, we are told in

unmistakable language. His 'Son,' Whom the Highest has for a long time

preserved, to deliver 'the creature' by Him, is suddenly to appear in

the form of a Man. From His mouth shall proceed alike woe, fire, and

storm, which are the tribulations of the last days. And as they shall

gather for war against Him, He shall stand on Mount Zion, and the Holy

City shall come down from heaven, prepared and ready, and He shall

destroy all His enemies. But a peaceable multitude shall now be

gathered to Him. These are the ten tribes, who, to separate themselves

from the ways of the heathen, had wandered far away, miraculously

helped, a journey of one and a half years, and who were now similarly

restored by God to their own land. But as for the 'Son,' or those who

accompanied him, no one on earth would be able to see or know them,

till the day of His appearing.[380]380 [381]381

It seems scarcely necessary to complete the series of testimony by

referring in detail to a book, called 'The Prophecy and Assumption of

Moses,' and to what is known as the Apocalypse of Baruch, the servant

of Jeremiah. Both date from probably a somewhat later period than the

Fourth Book of Esdras, and both are fragmentary. The one distinctly

anticipates the return of the ten tribes;[382]382 the other, in the

letter to the nine and a half tribes, far beyond the

Euphrates,[383]383 with which the book closes, preserves an ominous

silence on that point, or rather alludes to it in language which so

strongly reminds us of the adverse opinion expressed in the Talmud,

that we cannot help suspecting some internal connection between the

two.[384]384

The writings to which we have referred have all a decidedly

Hellenistic tinge of thought.[385]385 Still they are not the outcome

of pure Hellenism. It is therefore with peculiar interest that we turn

to Philo, the great representative of that direction, to see whether

he would admit an idea so purely national and, as it might seem,

exclusive. Nor are we here left in doubt. So universal was this

belief, so deep-seated the conviction, not only in the mind, but in

the heart of Israel, that we could scarcely find it more distinctly

expressed than by the great Alexandrian. However low the condition of

Israel might be, he tells us,[386]386 or however scattered the people

to the ends of the earth, the banished would, on a given sign, be set

free in one day. In consistency with his system, he traces this

wondrous event to their sudden conversion to virtue, which would make

their masters ashamed to hold any longer in bondage those who were so

much better than themselves. Then, gathering as by one impulse, the

dispersed would return from Hellas, from the lands of the barbarians,

from the isles, and from the continents, led by a Divine, superhuman

apparition invisible to others, and visible only to themselves. On

their arrival in Palestine the waste places and the wilderness would

be inhabited, and the barren land transformed into fruitfulness.

Whatever shades of difference, then, we may note in the expression of

these views, all anticipate the deliverance of Israel, their

restoration, and future pre-eminent glory, and they all connect these

events with the coming of the Messiah. This was 'the promise' unto

which, in their 'instant service night and day, the twelve tribes,'

however grievously oppressed, hoped to come.[387]387 To this 'sure

word of prophecy' 'the strangers scattered' throughout all lands would

'take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place,' until the

day dawned, and the day-star rose in their hearts.[388]388 It was this

which gave meaning to their worship, filled them with patience in

suffering, kept them separate from the nations around, and ever fixed

their hearts and thoughts upon Jerusalem. For the 'Jerusalem' which

was above was 'the mother' of them all. Yet a little while, and He

that would come should come, and not tarry - and then all the blessing

and glory would be theirs. At any moment the gladsome tidings might

burst upon them, that He had come, when their glory would shine out

from one end of the heavens to the other. All the signs of His Advent

had come to pass. Perhaps, indeed, the Messiah might even now be

there, ready to manifest Himself, so soon as the voice of Israel's

repentance called Him from His hiding. Any hour might that banner be

planted on the top of the mountains; that glittering sword be

unsheathed; that trumpet sound. Closer then, and still closer, must be

their connection with Jerusalem, as their salvation drew nigh; more

earnest their longing, and more eager their gaze, till the dawn of

that long expected day tinged the Eastern sky with its brightness.

CHAPTER VII.

IN PALESTINE - JEWS AND GENTILES IN 'THE LAND' - THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONS

AND

FEELINGS - 'THE WALL OF SEPARATION.'

THE pilgrim who, leaving other countries, entered Palestine, must have

felt as if he had crossed the threshold of another world. Manners,

customs, institutions, law, life, nay, the very intercourse between

man and man, were quite different. All was dominated by the one

all-absorbing idea of religion. It penetrated every relation of life.

Moreover, it was inseparably connected with the soil, as well as the

people of Palestine, at least so long as the Temple stood. Nowhere

else could the Shekhinah dwell or manifest itself; nor could, unless

under exceptional circumstances, and for 'the merit of the fathers,'

the spirit of prophecy be granted outside its bounds. To the orthodox

Jew the mental and spiritual horizon was bounded by Palestine. It was

'the land'; all the rest of the world, except Babylonia, was 'outside

the land.' No need to designate it specially as 'holy;' for all here

bore the impress of sanctity, as he understood it. Not that the soil

itself, irrespective of the people, was holy; it was Israel that made

it such. For, had not God given so many commandments and ordinances,

some of them apparently needless, simply to call forth the

righteousness of Israel;[389]389 did not Israel possess the merits of

'the fathers,'[390]390 and specially that of Abraham, itself so

valuable that, even if his descendants had, morally speaking, been as

a dead body, his merit would have been imputed to them?[391]391 More

than that, God had created the world on account of Israel,[392]392 and

for their merit, making preparation for them long before their

appearance on the scene, just as a king who foresees the birth of his

son; nay, Israel had been in God's thoughts not only before anything

had actually been created, but even before every other creative

thought.[393]393 If these distinctions seem excessive, they were, at

least, not out of proportion to the estimate formed of Israel's

merits. In theory, the latter might be supposed to flow from 'good

works,' of course, including the strict practice of legal piety, and

from 'study of the law.' But in reality it was 'study' alone to which

such supreme merit attached. Practice required knowledge for its

direction; such as the Am-ha-arets ('country people,' plebeians, in

the Jewish sense of being unlearned) could not possess,[394]394 who

had bartered away the highest crown for a spade with which to dig. And

'the school of Arum' - the sages - the 'great ones of the world' had

long settled it, that study was before works.[395]395 And how could it

well be otherwise, since the studies, which engaged His chosen

children on earth, equally occupied their Almighty Father in

heaven?[396]396 Could anything, then, be higher than the peculiar

calling of Israel, or better qualify them for being the sons of God?

It is necessary to transport oneself into this atmosphere to

understand the views entertained at the time of Jesus, or to form any

conception of their infinite contrast in spirit to the new doctrine.

The abhorrence, not unmingled with contempt, of all Gentile ways,

thoughts and associations; the worship of the letter of the Law; the

self-righteousness, and pride of descent, and still more of knowledge,

become thus intelligible to us, and, equally so, the absolute

antagonism to the claims of a Messiah, so unlike themselves and their

own ideal. His first announcement might, indeed, excite hope, soon

felt to have been vain; and His miracles might startle for a time. But

the boundary lines of the Kingdom which He traced were essentially

different from those which they had fixed, and within which they had

arranged everything, alike for the present and the future. Had He been

content to step within them, to complete and realise what they had

indicated, it might have been different. Nay, once admit their

fundamental ideas, and there was much that was beautiful, true, and

even grand in the details. But it was exactly in the former that the

divergence lay. Nor was there any possibility of reform or progress

here. The past, the present, and the future, alike as regarded the

Gentile world and Israel, were irrevocably fixed; or rather, it might

almost be said, there were not such - all continuing as they had been

from the creation of the world, nay, long before it. The Torah had

really existed 2,000 years before Creation;[397]397 the patriarchs had

had their Academies of study, and they had known and observed all the

ordinances; and traditionalism had the same origin, both as to time

and authority, as the Law itself. As for the heathen nations, the Law

had been offered by God to them, but refused, and even their after

repentance would prove hypocritical, as all their excuses would be

shown to be futile. But as for Israel, even though their good deeds

should be few, yet, by cumulating them from among all the people, they

would appear great in the end, and God would exact payment for their

sins as a man does from his friends, taking little sums at a time. It

was in this sense, that the Rabbis employed that sublime figure,

representing the Church as one body, of which all the members suffered

and joyed together, which St. Paul adopted and applied in a vastly

different and spiritual sense.[398]398

If, on the one hand, the pre-eminence of Israel depended on the Land,

and, on the other, that of the Land on the presence of Israel in it,

the Rabbinical complaint was, indeed, well grounded, that its

'boundaries were becoming narrow.' We can scarcely expect any accurate

demarcation of them, since the question, what belonged to it, was

determined by ritual and theological, not by geographical

considerations. Not only the immediate neighborhood (as in the case of

Ascalon), but the very wall of a city (as of Acco and of Cæsarea)

might be Palestinian, and yet the city itself be regarded as 'outside'

the sacred limits. All depended on who had originally possessed, and

now held a place, and hence what ritual obligations lay upon it.

Ideally, as we may say, 'the land of promise' included all which God

had covenanted to give to Israel, although never yet actually

possessed by them. Then, in a more restricted sense, the 'land'

comprised what 'they who came up from Egypt took possession of, from

Chezib [about three hours north of Acre] and unto the river

[Euphrates], and unto Amanah.' This included, of course, the conquests

made by David in the most prosperous times of the Jewish commonwealth,

supposed to have extended over Mesopotamia, Syria, Zobah, Achlah, &c.

To all these districts the general name of Soria, or Syria, was

afterwards given. This formed, at the time of which we write, a sort

of inner band around 'the land,' in its narrowest and only real sense;

just as the countries in which Israel was specially interested, such

as Egypt, Babylon, Ammon, and Moab, formed an outer band. These lands

were heathen, and yet not quite heathen, since the dedication of the

so-called Terumoth, or first-fruits in a prepared state, was expected

from them, while Soria shared almost all the obligations of Palestine,

except those of the 'second tithes,' and the fourth year's product of

plants.[399]399 But the wavesheaf at the Paschal Feast, and the two

loaves at Pentecost, could only be brought from what had grown on the

holy soil itself. This latter was roughly defined, as 'all which they

who came up from Babylon took possession of, in the land of Israel,

and unto Chezib.' Viewed in this light, there was a special

significance in the fact that Antioch, where the name 'Christian'

first marked the new 'Sect' which had sprung up in Palestine,[400]400

and where the first Gentile Church was formed,[401]401 lay just

outside the northern boundary of 'the land.' Similarly, we understand,

why those Jewish zealots who would fain have imposed on the new Church

the yoke of the Law,[402]402 concentrated their first efforts on that

Syria which was regarded as a kind of outer Palestine.

But, even so, there was a gradation of sanctity in the Holy Land

itself, in accordance with ritual distinctions. Ten degrees are here

enumerated, beginning with the bare soil of Palestine, and culminating

in the Most Holy Place in the Temple - each implying some ritual

distinction, which did not attach to a lower degree. And yet, although

the very dust of heathen soil was supposed to carry defilement, like

corruption or the grave, the spots most sacred were everywhere

surrounded by heathenism; nay, its traces were visible in Jerusalem

itself. The reasons of this are to be sought in the political

circumstances of Palestine, and in the persistent endeavour of its

rulers - with the exception of a very brief period under the Maccabees

- to Grecianise the country, so as to eradicate that Jewish

particularism which must always be antagonistic to every foreign

element. In general, Palestine might be divided into the strictly

Jewish territory, and the so-called Hellenic cities. The latter had

been built at different periods, and were politically constituted

after the model of the Greek cities, having their own senates

(generally consisting of several hundred persons) and magistrates,

each city with its adjoining territory forming a sort of commonwealth

of its own. But it must not be imagined, that these districts were

inhabited exclusively, or even chiefly, by Greeks. One of these

groups, that towards Peræa, was really Syrian, and formed part of

Syria Decapolis;[403]403 while the other, along the coast of the

Mediterranean, was Phoenician. Thus 'the land' was hemmed in, east and

west, within its own borders, while south and north stretched heathen

or semi-heathen districts. The strictly Jewish territory consisted of

Judæa proper, to which Galilee, Samaria and Peræa were joined as

Toparchies. These Toparchies consisted of a group of townships, under

a Metropolis. The villages and townships themselves had neither

magistrates of their own, nor civic constitution, nor lawful popular

assemblies. Such civil adminstration as they required devolved on

'Scribes' (the so-called kwmogrammate_v or topogrammate_v). Thus

Jerusalem was really, as well as nominally, the capital of the whole

land. Judæa itself was arranged into eleven, or rather, more exactly,

into nine Toparchies, of which Jerusalem was the chief. While,

therefore, the Hellenic cities were each independent of the other, the

whole Jewish territory formed only one 'Civitas.' Rule, government,

tribute - in short, political life - centred in Jerusalem.

But this is not all. From motives similar to those which led to the

founding of other Hellenic cities, Herod the Great and his immediate

successors built a number of towns, which were inhabited chiefly by

Gentiles, and had independent constitutions, like those of the

Hellenic cities. Thus, Herod himself built Sebaste (Samaria), in the

centre of the country; Cæsarea in the west, commanding the sea-coast;

Gaba in Galilee, close to the great plain of Esdraelon; and Esbonitis

in Peræa.[404]404 Similarly, Philip the Tetrarch built Cæsarea

Philippi and Julias (Bethsaida-Julias, on the western shore of the

lake); and Herod Antipas another Julias, and Tiberias.[405]405 The

object of these cities was twofold. As Herod, well knowing his

unpopularity, surrounded himself by foreign mercenaries, and reared

fortresses around his palace and the Temple which he built, so he

erected these fortified posts, which he populated with strangers, as

so many outworks, to surround and command Jerusalem and the Jews on

all sides. Again, as, despite his profession of Judaism, he reared

magnificent heathen temples in honour of Augustus at Sebaste and

Cæsarea, so those cities were really intended to form centres of

Grecian influence within the sacred territory itself. At the same

time, the Herodian cities enjoyed not the same amount of liberty as

the 'Hellenic,' which, with the exception of certain imposts, were

entirely self-governed, while in the former there were representatives

of the Herodian rulers.[406]406

Although each of these towns and districts had its special deities and

rites, some being determined by local traditions, their prevailing

character may be described as a mixture of Greek and Syrian worship,

the former preponderating, as might be expected.[407]407 On the other

hand, Herod and his successors encouraged the worship of the Emperor

and of Rome, which, characteristically, was chiefly practised in the

East.[408]408 Thus, in the temple which Herod built to Augustus in

Cæsarea, there were statues of the Emperor as Olympian Zeus, and of

Rome as Hera.[409]409 He was wont to excuse this conformity to

heathenism before his own people on the ground of political necessity.

Yet, even if his religious inclinations had not been in that

direction, he would have earnestly striven to Grecianise the people.

Not only in Cæsarea, but even in Jerusalem, he built a theatre and

amphitheatre, where at great expense games were held every four years

in honour of Augustus.[410]410 Nay, he placed over the great gate of

Temple at Jerusalem a massive golden eagle, the symbol of Roman

dominion, as a sort of counterpart to that gigantic golden vine, the

symbol of Israel, which hung above the entrance to the Holy Place.

These measures, indeed, led to popular indignation, and even to

conspiracies and tumults,[411]411 though not of the same general and

intense character, as when, at a later period, Pilate sought to

introduce into Jerusalem images of the Emperor, or when the statue of

Caligula was to be placed in the Temple. In connection with this, it

is curious to notice that the Talmud, while on the whole disapproving

of attendance at theatres and amphitheatres - chiefly on the ground

that it implies 'sitting in the seat of scorners,' and might involve

contributions to the maintenance of idol-worship - does not expressly

prohibit it, nor indeed speak very decidedly on the subject.[412]412

The views of the Rabbis in regard to pictorial representations are

still more interesting, as illustrating their abhorrence of all

contact with idolatry. We mark here differences at two, if not at

three periods, according to the outward circumstances of the people.

The earliest and strictest opinions[413]413 absolutely forbade any

representation of things in heaven, on earth, or in the waters. But

the Mishnah[414]414 seems to relax these prohibitions by subtle

distinctions, which are still further carried out in the

Talmud.[415]415

To those who held such stringent views, it must have been peculiarly

galling to see their most sacred feelings openly outraged by their own

rulers. Thus, the Asmonean princess, Alexandra, the mother-in-law of

Herod, could so far forget the traditions of her house, as to send

portraits of her son and daughter to Mark Antony for infamous

purposes, in hope of thereby winning him for her ambitious

plans.[416]416 One would be curious to know who painted these

pictures, for, when the statue of Caligula was to be made for the

Temple at Jerusalem, no native artist could be found, and the work was

entrusted to Phoenicians. It must have been these foreigners also who

made the 'figures,' with which Herod adorned his palace at Jerusalem,

and 'the brazen statues' in the gardens 'through which the water ran

out,'[417]417 as well as the colossal statues at Cæsarea, and those of

the three daughters of Agrippa, which after his death[418]418 were so

shamefully abused by the soldiery at Sebaste and Cæsarea.[419]419

This abhorrence of all connected with idolatry, and the contempt

entertained for all that was non-Jewish, will in great measure explain

the code of legislation intended to keep the Jew and Gentile apart. If

Judæa had to submit to the power of Rome, it could at least avenge

itself in the Academies of its sages. Almost innumerable stories are

told in which Jewish sages, always easily, confute Roman and Greek

philosophers; and others, in which even a certain Emperor (Antoninus)

is represented as constantly in the most menial relation of

self-abasement before a Rabbi.[420]420 Rome, which was the fourth

beast of Daniel,[421]421 would in the age to come,[422]422 when

Jerusalem would be the metropolis of all lands,[423]423 be the first

to excuse herself on false though vain pleas for her wrongs to

Israel.[424]424 But on wordly grounds also, Rome was contemptible,

having derived her language and writing from the Greeks, and not

possessing even a hereditary succession in her empire.[425]425 If such

was the estimate of dreaded Rome, it may be imagined in what contempt

other nations were held. Well might 'the earth tremble,'[426]426 for,

if Israel had not accepted the Law at Sinai, the whole world would

have been destroyed, while it once more 'was still' when that[427]427

happy event took place, although God in a manner forced Israel to it.

And so Israel was purified at Mount Sinai from the impurity which

clung to our race in consequence of the unclean union between Eve and

the serpent, and which still adhered to all other nations![428]428

To begin with, every Gentile child, so soon as born, was to be

regarded as unclean. Those who actually worshipped mountains, hills,

bushes, &c. - in short, gross idolaters - should be cut down with the

sword. But as it was impossible to exterminate heathenism, Rabbinic

legislation kept certain definite objects in view, which may be thus

summarised: To prevent Jews from being inadvertently led into

idolatry; to avoid all participation in idolatry; not to do anything

which might aid the heathen in their worship; and, beyond all this,

not to give pleasure, nor even help, to heathens. The latter involved

a most dangerous principle, capable of almost indefinite application

by fanaticism. Even the Mishnah goes so far[429]429 as to forbid aid

to a mother in the hour of her need, or nourishment to her babe, in

order not to bring up a child for idolatry![430]430 But this is not

all. Heathens were, indeed, not to be precipitated into danger, but

yet not to be delivered from it. Indeed, an isolated teacher ventures

even upon this statement: 'The best among the Gentiles, kill; the best

among serpents, crush its head.'[431]431 Still more terrible was the

fanaticism which directed, that heretics, traitors, and those who had

left the Jewish faith should be thrown into actual danger, and, if

they were in it, all means for their escape removed. No intercourse of

any kind was to be had with such - not even to invoke their medical

aid in case of danger to life,[432]432 since it was deemed, that he

who had to do with heretics was imminent peril of becoming one

himself,[433]433 and that, if a heretic returned to the true faith, he

should die at once - partly, probably, to expiate his guilt, and

partly from fear of relapse. Terrible as all this sounds, it was

probably not worse than the fanaticism displayed in what are called

more enlightened times. Impartial history must chronicle it, however

painful, to show the circumstances in which teaching so far different

was propounded by Christ.[434]434

In truth, the bitter hatred which the Jew bore to the Gentile can only

be explained from the estimate entertained of his character. The most

vile, and even unnatural, crimes were imputed to them. It was not safe

to leave cattle in their charge, to allow their women to nurse

infants, or their physicians to attend the sick, nor to walk in their

company, without taking precautions against sudden and unprovoked

attacks. They should, so far as possible, be altogether avoided,

except in cases of necessity or for the sake of business. They and

theirs were defiled; their houses unclean, as containing idols or

things dedicated to them; their feasts, their joyous occasions, their

very contact, was polluted by idolatry; and there was no security, if

a heathen were left alone in a room, that he might not, in wantonness

or by carelessness, defile the wine or meat on the table, or the oil

and wheat in the store. Under such circumstances, therefore,

everything must be regarded as having been rendered unclean. Three

days before a heathen festival (according to some, also three days

after) every business transaction with them was prohibited, for fear

of giving either help or pleasure. Jews were to avoid passing through

a city where there was an idolatrous feast - nay, they were not even

to sit down within the shadow of a tree dedicated to idol-worship. Its

wood was polluted; if used in baking, the bread was unclean; if a

shuttle had been made of it, not only was all cloth woven on it

forbidden, but if such had been inadvertently mixed with other pieces

of cloth, or a garment made from it placed with other garments, the

whole became unclean. Jewish workmen were not to assist in building

basilicas, nor stadia, nor places where judicial sentences were

pronounced by the heathen. Of course, it was not lawful to let houses

or fields, nor to sell cattle to them. Milk drawn by a heathen, if a

Jew had not been present to watch it,[435]435 bread and oil prepared

by them, were unlawful. Their wine was wholly interdicted[436]436 -

the mere touch of a heathen polluted a whole cask; nay, even to put

one's nose to heathen wine was strictly prohibited!

Painful as these details are, they might be multiplied. And yet the

bigotry of these Rabbis was, perhaps, not worse than that of other

sectaries. It was a painful logical necessity of their system, against

which their heart, no doubt, often rebelled; and, it must be

truthfully added, it was in measure accounted for by the terrible

history of Israel.

CHAPTER VIII.

TRADITIONALISM, ITS ORIGIN, CHARACTER, AND LITERATURE - THE MISHNAH

AND

TALMUD - THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST - THE DAWN OF A NEW DAY.

In trying to picture to ourselves New Testament scenes, the figure

most prominent, next to those of the chief actors, is that of the

Scribe ({hebrew}, grammate_v, literatus). He seems ubiquitous; we meet

him in Jerusalem, in Judæa, and even in Galilee.[437]437 Indeed, he is

indispensable, not only in Babylon, which may have been the birthplace

of his order, but among the 'dispersion' also.[438]438 Everywhere he

appears as the mouthpiece and representative of the people; he pushes

to the front, the crowd respectfully giving way, and eagerly hanging

on his utterances, as those of a recognised authority. He has been

solemnly ordained by the laying on of hands; and is the Rabbi,[439]439

'my great one,' Master, amplitudo. He puts questions; he urges

objections; he expects full explanations and respectful demeanour.

Indeed, his hyper-ingenuity in questioning has become a proverb. There

is not measure of his dignity, nor yet limit to his importance. He is

the 'lawyer,'[440]440 the 'well-plastered pit,'[441]441 filled with

the water of knowledge 'out of which not a drop can escape,'[442]442

in opposition to the weeds of 'untilled soil' {hebrew} of

ignorance.[443]443 He is the Divine aristocrat, among the vulgar herd

of rude and profane 'country-people,' who 'know not the Law' and are

'cursed.' More than that, his order constitutes the ultimate authority

on all questions of faith and practice; he is 'the Exegete of the

Laws,'[444]444 the 'teacher of the Law,'[445]445 and along with 'the

chief priests' and 'elders' a judge in the eccesiastical tribunals,

whether of the capital or in the provinces.[446]446 Although generally

appearing in company with 'the Pharisees,' he is not necessarily one

of them - for they represent a religious party, while he has a status,

and holds an office.[447]447 In short, he is the Talmid or learned

student, the Chakham or sage, whose honour is to be great in the

future world. Each Scribe outweighed all the common people, who must

accordingly pay him every honour. Nay, they were honoured of God

Himself, and their praises proclaimed by the angels; and in heaven

also, each of them would hold the same rank and distinction as on

earth.[448]448 Such was to be the respect paid to their sayings, that

they were to be absolutely believed, even if they were to declare that

to be at the right hand which was at the left, or vice versâ.[449]449

An institution which had attained such proportions, and wielded such

power, could not have been of recent growth. In point of fact, its

rise was very gradual, and stretched back to the time of Nehemiah, if

not beyond it. Although from the utter confusion of historical notices

in Rabbinic writings and their constant practice of antedating events,

it is impossible to furnish satisfactory details, the general

development of the institution can be traced with sufficient

precision. If Ezra is described in Holy Writ[450]450 as 'a ready

(expertus) Scribe,' who had 'set his heart to seek (seek out the full

meaning of) the law of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in

Israel,'[451]451 this might indicate to his successors, the Sopherim

(Scribes), the threefold direction which their studies afterwards

took: the Midrash, the Halakhah, and the Haggadah,[452]452 [453]453 of

which the one pointed to Scriptural investigation, the other to what

was to be observed, and the third to oral teaching in the widest

sense. But Ezra left his work uncompleted. On Nehemiah's second

arrival in Palestine, he found matters again in a state of utmost

confusion.[454]454 He must have felt the need of establishing some

permanent authority to watch over religious affairs. This we take to

have been 'the Great Assembly,' or, as it is commonly called, the

'Great Synagogue.' It is impossible with certainty to

determine,[455]455 either who composed this assembly, or of how many

members it consisted.[456]456 Probably it comprised the leading men in

Church and State, the chief priests, elders, and 'judges' - the latter

two classes including 'the Scribes,' if, indeed, that order was

already separately organised.[457]457 Probably also the term 'Great

Assembly' refers rather to a succession of men than to one Synod; the

ingenuity of later times filling such parts of the historical canvas

as had been left blank with fictitious notices. In the nature of

things such an assembly could not exercise permanent sway in a

sparsely populated country, without a strong central authority. Nor

could they have wielded real power during the political difficulties

and troubles of foreign domination. The oldest tradition[458]458 sums

up the result of their activity in this sentence ascribed to them: 'Be

careful in judgment, set up many Talmidim, and make a hedge about the

Torah (Law).'

In the course of time this rope of sand dissolved. The High-Priest,

Simon the Just,[459]459 is already designated as 'of the remnants of

the Great Assembly.' But even this expression does not necessarily

imply that he actually belonged to it. In the troublous times which

followed his Pontificate, the sacred study seems to have been left to

solitary individuals. The Mishnic tractate Aboth, which records 'the

sayings of the Fathers,' here gives us only the name of Antigonus of

Socho. It is significant, that for the first time we now meet a Greek

name among Rabbinic authorities, together with an indistinct allusion

to his disciples.[460]460 [461]461 The long interval between Simon the

Just and Antigonus and his disciples, brings us to the terrible time

of Antiochus Epiphanes and the great Syrian persecution. The very

sayings attributed to these two sound like an echo of the political

state of the country. On three things, Simon was wont to say, the

permanency of the (Jewish?) world depends: on the Torah (faithfulness

to the Law and its pursuit), on worship (the non-participation in

Grecianism), and on works of righteousness.[462]462 They were dark

times, when God's persecuted people were tempted to think, that it

might be vain to serve Him, in which Antigonus had it: 'Be not like

servants who serve their master for the sake of reward, but be like

servants who serve their lord without a view to the getting of reward,

and let the fear of heaven be upon you.'[463]463 After these two names

come those of the so-called five Zugoth, or 'couples,' of whom Hillel

and Shammai are the last. Later tradition has represented these

successive couples as, respectively, the Nasi (president), and

Ab-beth-din (vice-president, of the Sanhedrin). Of the first three of

these 'couples' it may be said that, except significant allusions to

the circumstances and dangers of their times, their recorded

utterances clearly point to the development of purely Sopheric

teaching, that is, to the Rabbinistic part of their functions. From

the fourth 'couple,' which consists of Simon ben Shetach, who figured

so largely in the political history of the later Maccabees[464]464 (as

Ab-beth-din), and his superior in learning and judgment, Jehudah ben

Tabbai (as Nasi), we have again utterances which show, in harmony with

the political history of the time, that judicial functions had been

once more restored to the Rabbis. The last of five couples brings us

to the time of Herod and of Christ.

We have seen that, during the period of severe domestic troubles,

beginning with the persecutions under the Seleucidæ, which marked the

mortal struggle between Judaism and Grecianism, the 'Great Assembly'

had disappeared from the scene. The Sopherim had ceased to be a party

in power. They had become the Zeqenim, 'Elders,' whose task was purely

ecclesiastical - the preservation of their religion, such as the

dogmatic labours of their predecessors had made it. Yet another period

opened with the advent of the Maccabees. These had been raised into

power by the enthusiasm of the Chasidim, or 'pious ones,' who formed

the nationalist party in the land, and who had gathered around the

liberators of their faith and country. But the later bearing of the

Maccabees had alienated the nationalists. Henceforth they sink out of

view, or, rather, the extreme section of them merged in the extreme

section of the Pharisees, till fresh national calamities awakened a

new nationalist party. Instead of the Chasidim, we see now two

religious parties within the Synagogue - the Pharisees and the

Sadducees. The latter originally represented a reaction from the

Pharisees - the modern men, who sympathised with the later tendencies

of the Maccabees. Josephus places the origin of these two schools in

the time of Jonathan, the successor of Judas Maccabee,[465]465 and

with this other Jewish notices agree. Jonathan accepted from the

foreigner (the Syrian) the High-Priestly dignity, and combined with it

that of secular ruler. But this is not all. The earlier Maccabees

surrounded themselves with a governing eldership.[466]466 [467]467 On

the coins of their reigns this is designated as the Chebher, or

eldership (association) of the Jews. Thus, theirs was what Josephus

designates as an aristocratic government,[468]468 and of which he

somewhat vaguely says, that it lasted 'from the Captivity until the

descendants of the Asmoneans set up kingly government.' In this

aristocratic government the High-Priest would rather be the chief of a

representative ecclesiastical body of rulers. This state of things

continued until the great breach between Hycanus, the fourth from

Judas Maccabee, and the Pharisaical party,[469]469 which is equally

recorded by Josephus[470]470 and the Talmud,[471]471 with only

variations of names and details. The dispute apparently arose from the

desire of the Pharisees, that Hycanus should be content with the

secular power, and resign the Pontificate. But it ended in the

persecution, and removal from power, of the Pharisees. Very

significantly, Jewish tradition introduces again at this time those

purely ecclesiastical authorities which are designated as 'the

couples.'[472]472 In accordance with this, altered state of things,

the name 'Chebher' now disappears from the coins of the Maccabees, and

Rabbinical celebrities ('the couples' or Zugoth) are only teachers of

traditionalism, and ecclesiastical authorities. The

'eldership,'[473]473 which under the earlier Maccabees was called 'the

tribunal of the Asmoneans.'[474]474 [475]475 now passed into the

Sanhedrin.[476]476 [477]477 Thus we place the origin of this

institution about the time of Hyrcanus. With this Jewish tradition

fully agrees.[478]478 The power of the Sanhedrin would, of course,

vary with political circumstances, being at times almost absolute, as

in the reign of the Pharisaic devotee-Queen, Alexandra, while at

others it was shorn of all but ecclesiastical authority. But as the

Sanhedrin was in full force at the time of Jesus, its organization

will claim our attention in the sequel.

After this brief outline of the origin and development of an

institution which exerted such decisive influence on the future of

Israel, it seems necessary similarly to trace the growth of the

'traditions of the Elders,' so as to understand what, alas! so

effectually, opposed the new doctrine of the Kingdom. The first place

must here be assigned to those legal determinations, which

traditionalism declared absolutely binding on all - not only of equal,

but even greater obligation than Scripture itself.[479]479 And this

not illogically, since tradition was equally of Divine origin with

Holy Scripture, and authoritatively explained its meaning;

supplemented it; gave it application to cases not expressly provided

for, perhaps not even forseen in Biblical times; and generally guarded

its sanctity by extending and adding to its provisions, drawing 'a

hedge,' around its 'garden enclosed.' Thus, in new and dangerous

circumstances, would the full meaning of God's Law, to its every title

and iota, be elicited and obeyed. Thus also would their feet be

arrested, who might stray from within, or break in from without.

Accordingly, so important was tradition, that the greatest merit a

Rabbi could claim was the strictest adherence to the traditions, which

he had received from his teacher. Nor might one Sanhedrin annul, or

set aside, the decrees of its predecessors. To such length did they go

in this worship of the letter, that the great Hillel was actually wont

to mispronounce a word, because his teacher before him had done

so.[480]480

These traditional ordinances, as already stated, bear the general name

of the Halakhah, as indicating alike the way in which the fathers had

walked, and that which their children were bound to follow.[481]481

These Halakhoth were either simply the laws laid down in Scripture; or

else derived from, or traced to it by some ingenious and artificial

method of exegesis; or added to it, by way of amplification and for

safety's sake; or, finally, legalized customs. They provided for every

possible and impossible case, entered into every detail of private,

family, and public life; and with iron logic, unbending rigour, and

most minute analysis pursued and dominated man, turn whither he might,

laying on him a yoke which was truly unbearable. The return which it

offered was the pleasure and distinction of knowledge, the acquisition

of righteousness, and the final attainment of rewards; one of its

chief advantages over our modern traditionalism, that it was expressly

forbidden to draw inferences from these traditions, which should have

the force of fresh legal determinations.[482]482

In describing the historical growth of the Halakhah,[483]483 we may

dismiss in a few sentences the legends of Jewish tradition about

patriarchal times. They assure us, that there was an Academy and a

Rabbinic tribunal of Shem, and they speak of traditions delivered by

that Patriarch to Jacob; of diligent attendance by the latter on the

Rabbinic College; of a tractate (in 400 sections) on idolatry by

Abraham, and of his observance of the whole traditional law; of the

introduction of the three daily times of prayer, successively by

Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; of the three benedictions in the customary

'grace at meat,' as propounded by Moses, Joshua, and David and

Solomon; of the Mosaic introduction of the practice of reading lessons

from the law on Sabbaths, New Moons, and Feast Days, and even on the

Mondays and Thursdays; and of that, by the same authority, of

preaching on the three great festivals about those feasts. Further,

they ascribe to Moses the arrangement of the priesthood into eight

courses (that intosixteen to Samuel, and that into twenty-four to

David), as also, the duration of the time for marriage festivities,

and for mourning. But evidently these are vague statements, with the

object of tracing traditionalism and its observances to primaeval

times, even as legend had it, that Adam was born circumcised,[484]484

and later writers that he had kept all the ordinances.

But other principles apply to the traditions, from Moses downwards.

According to the Jewish view, God had given Moses on Mount Sinai alike

the oral and the written Law, that is, the Law with all its

interpretations and applications. From Ex. xx. 1, it was inferred,

that God had communicated to Moses the Bible, the Mishnah, and Talmud,

and the Haggadah, even to that which scholars would in latest times

propound.[485]485 In answer to the somewhat natural objection, why the

Bible alone had been written, it was said that Moses had proposed to

write down all the teaching entrusted to him, but the Almighty had

refused, on account of the future subjection of Israel to the nations,

who would take from them the written Law. Then the unwritten

traditions would remain to separate between Israel and the Gentiles.

Popular exegesis found this indicated even in the language of

prophecy.[486]486

But traditionalism went further, and placed the oral actually above

the written Law. The expression,[487]487 'After the tenor of these

words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel,' was explained

as meaning, that God's covenant was founded on the spoken, in

opposition to the written words.[488]488 If the written was thus

placed below the oral Law, we can scarcely wonder that the reading of

the Hagiographa was actually prohibited to the people on the Sabbath,

from fear that it might divert attention from the learned discourses

of the Rabbis. The study of them on that day was only allowed for the

purpose of learned investigation and discussions.[489]489 [490]490

But if traditionalism was not to be committed to writing by Moses,

measures had been taken to prevent oblivion or inaccuracy. Moses had

always repeated a traditional law successively to Aaron, to his sons,

and to the elders of the people, and they again in turn to each other,

in such wise, that Aaron heard the Mishnah four times, his sons three

times, the Elders twice, and the people once. But even this was not

all, for by successive repetitions (of Aaron, his sons, and the

Elders) the people also heard it four times.[491]491 And, before his

death, Moses had summoned any one to come forward, if he had forgotten

aught of what he had heard and learned.[492]492 But these 'Halakhoth

of Moses from Sinai' do not make up the whole of traditionalism.

According to Maimonides, it consists of five, but more critically of

three classes.[493]493 The first of these comprises both such

ordinances as are found in the Bible itself, and the so-called

Halakhoth of Moses from Sinai - that is, such laws and usages as

prevailed from time immemorial, and which, according to the Jewish

view, had been orally delivered to, but not written down by Moses. For

these, therefore, no proof was to be sought in Scripture - at most

support, or confirmatory allusion (Asmakhtu).[494]494 Nor were these

open to discussion. The second class formed the 'oral law,'[495]495 or

the 'traditional teaching'[496]496 in the stricter sense. To this

class belonged all that was supposed to be implied in, or that could

be deduced from, the Law of Moses.[497]497 The latter contained,

indeed, in substance or germ, everything; but it had not been brought

out, till circumstances successfully evolved what from the first had

been provided in principle. For this class of ordinances reference to,

and proof from, Scripture was required. Not so for the third class of

ordinances, which were 'the hedge' drawn by the Rabbis around the Law,

to prevent any breach of the Law or customs, to ensure their exact

observance, or to meet peculiar circumstances and dangers. These

ordinances constituted 'the sayings of the Scribes'[498]498 or 'of the

Rabbis'[499]499 [500]500 - and were either positive in their character

(Teqqanoth), or else negative (Gezeroth from gazar 'to cut off').

Perhaps the distinction of these two cannot always be strictly carried

out. But it was probably to this third class especially, confessedly

unsupported by Scripture, that these words of Christ referred:[501]501

'All therefore whatsoever they tell you, that do and observe; but do

not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind

heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's

shoulders; but with their finger they will not move them away (set in

motion).'[502]502 This view has two-fold confirmation. For, this third

class of Halakhic ordinances was the only one open to the discussion

of the learned, the ultimate decision being according to the majority.

Yet it possessed practically (though not theoretically) the same

authority as the other two classes. In further confirmation of our

view the following may be quoted: 'A Gezerah (i.e. this third class of

ordinances) is not to be laid on the congregation, unless the majority

of the congregation is able to bear it'[503]503 - words which read

like a commentary on those of Jesus, and show that these burdens could

be laid on, or moved away, according to the varying judgment or

severity of a Rabbinic College.[504]504

This body of traditional ordinances forms the subject of the Mishnah,

or second, repeated law. We have here to place on one side the Law of

Moses as recorded in the Pentateuch, as standing by itself. All else -

even the teaching of the Prophets and of the Hagiographa, as well as

the oral traditions - bore the general name of Qabbalah - 'that which

has been received.' The sacred study - or Midrash, in the original

application of the term - concerned either the Halakhah, traditional

ordinance, which was always 'that which had been heard' (Shematha), or

else the Haggadah, 'that which was said' upon the authority of

individuals, not as legal ordinance. It was illustration, commentary,

anecdote, clever or learned saying, &c. At first the Halakhah remained

unwritten, probably owing to the disputes between Pharisees and

Sadducees. But the necessity of fixedness and order led in course of

time to more or less complete collections of the Halakhoth.[505]505

The oldest of these is ascribed to R. Akiba, in the time of the

Emperor Hadrian.[506]506 [507]507 But the authoritative collection in

the so-called Mishnah is the work of Jehudah the Holy, who died about

the end of the second century of our era.

Altogether, the Mishnah comprises six 'Orders' (Sedarim), each devoted

to a special class of subjects.[508]508 These 'Orders' are divided

into tractates (Massikhtoth, Massekhtiyoth, 'textures, webs'), of

which there are sixty-three (or else sixty-two) in all. These

tractates are again subdivided into chapters (Peraqim) - in all 525,

which severally consist of a certain number of verses, or Mishnahs

(Mishnayoth, in all 4,187). Considering the variety and complexity of

the subjects treated, the Mishnah is arranged with remarkable logical

perspicuity. The language is Hebrew, though of course not that of the

Old Testament. The words rendered necessary by the new circumstances

are chiefly derived from the Greek, the Syriac, and the Latin, with

Hebrew terminations.[509]509 But all connected with social

intercourse, or ordinary life (such as contracts), is written, not in

Hebrew, but in Aramæan, as the language of the people.

But the traditional law embodied other materials than the Halakhoth

collected in the Mishnah. Some that had not been recorded there, found

a place in the works of certain Rabbis, or were derived from their

schools. These are called Boraithas - that is, traditions external to

the Mishnah. Finally, there were 'additions' (or Tosephtoth), dating

after the completion of the Mishnah, but probably not later than the

third century of our era. Such there are to not fewer than fifty-two

out of the sixty-three Mishnic tractates. When speaking of the

Halakhah as distinguished from the Haggadah, we must not, however,

suppose that the latter could be entirely separated from it. In point

of fact, one whole tractate in the Mishnah (Aboth: The Sayings of the

'Fathers') is entirely Haggadah; a second (Middoth: the 'Measurements

of the Temple') has Halakhah in only fourteen places; while in the

rest of the tractates Haggadah occurs in not fewer than 207

places.[510]510 Only thirteen out of the sixty-three tractates of the

Mishnah are entirely free from Haggadah.

Hitherto we have only spoken of the Mishnah. But this comprises only a

very small part of traditionalism. In course of time the discussions,

illustrations, explanations, and additions to which the Mishnah gave

rise, whether in its application, or in the Academies of the Rabbis,

were authoritatively collected and edited in what are known as the two

Talmuds or Gemaras.[511]511 If we imagine something combining law

reports, a Rabbinical 'Hansard,' and notes of a theological debating

club - all thoroughly Oriental, full of digressions, anecdotes, quaint

sayings, fancies, legends, and too often of what, from its profanity,

superstition, and even obscenity, could scarcely be quoted, we may

form some general idea of what the Talmud is. The oldest of these two

Talmuds dates from about the close of the fourth century of our era.

It is the product of the Palestinian Academies, and hence called the

Jerusalem Talmud. The second is about a century younger, and the

outcome of the Babylonian schools, hence called the Babylon

(afterwards also 'our') Talmud. We do not possess either of these

works complete.[512]512 The most defective is the Jerusalem Talmud,

which is also much briefer, and contains far fewer discussions than

that of Babylon. The Babylon Talmud, which in its present form extends

over thirty-six out of the sixty-three tractates of the Mishnah, is

about ten or eleven times the size of the latter, and more than four

times that of the Jerusalem Talmud. It occupies (in our editions),

with marginal commentations, 2,947 folio leaves (pages a and b). Both

Talmuds are written in Aramæan; the one in its western, the other in

its eastern dialect, and in both the Mishnah is discussed seriatim,

and clause by clause. Of the character of these discussions it would

be impossible to convey an adequate idea. When we bear in mind the

many sparkling, beautiful, and occasionally almost sublime passages in

the Talmud, but especially that its forms of thought and expression so

often recall those of the New Testament, only prejudice and hatred

could indulge in indiscriminate vituperation. On the other hand, it

seems unaccountable how any one who has read a Talmudic tractate, or

even part of one, could compare the Talmud with the New Testament, or

find in the one the origin of the other.

To complete our brief survey, it should be added that our editions of

the Babylon Talmud contain (at the close of vol. ix. and after the

fourth 'Order') certain Boraithas. Of these there were originally

nine, but two of the smaller tractates (on 'the memorial fringes,' and

on 'non-Israelites') have not been preserved. The first of these

Boraithas is entitled Abhoth de Rabbi Nathan, and partially

corresponds with a tractate of a similar name in the Mishnah.[513]513

Next follow six minor tractates. These are respectively entitled

Sopherim (Scribes),[514]514 detailing the ordinances about copying the

Scriptures, the ritual of the Lectionary, and festive prayers; Ebhel

Rabbathi or Semakhoth,[515]515 containing Halakhah and Haggadah about

funeral and mourning observances; Kallah,[516]516 on the married

relationship; Derekh Erets,[517]517 embodying moral directions and the

rules and customs of social intercourse; Derekh Erets Zuta,[518]518

treating of similar subjects, but as regards learned students; and,

lastly, the Pereq ha Shalom,[519]519 which is a eulogy on peace. All

these tractates date, at least in their present form, later than the

Talmudic period.[520]520

But when the Halakhah, however varied in its application, was

something fixed and stable, the utmost latitude was claimed and given

in the Haggadah. It is sadly characteristic, that, practically, the

main body of Jewish dogmatic and moral theology is really only

Haggadah, and hence of no absolute authority. The Halakhah indicated

with the most minute and painful punctiliousness every legal ordinance

as to outward observances, and it explained every bearing of the Law

of Moses. But beyond this it left the inner man, the spring of

actions, untouched. What he was to believe and what to feel, was

chiefly matter of the Haggadah. Of course the laws of morality, and

religion, as laid down in the Pentateuch, were fixed principles, but

there was the greatest divergence and latitude in the explanation and

application of many of them. A man might hold or propound almost any

views, so long as he contravened not the Law of Moses, as it was

understood, and adhered in teaching and practice to the traditional

ordinances. In principle it was the same liberty which the Romish

Church accords to its professing members - only with much wider

application, since the debatable ground embraced so many matters of

faith, and the liberty given was not only that of private opinion but

of public utterance. We emphasise this, because the absence of

authoritative direction and the latitude in matters of faith and inner

feeling stand side by side, and in such sharp contrast, with the most

minute punctiliousness in all matters of outward observance. And here

we may mark the fundamental distinction between the teaching of Jesus

and Rabbinism. He left the Halakhah untouched, putting it, as it were,

on one side, as something quite secondary, while He insisted as

primary on that which to them was chiefly matter of Haggadah. And this

rightly so, for, in His own words, 'Not that which goeth into the

mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth,' since

'those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the

heart, and they defil the man.'[521]521 The difference was one of

fundamental principle, and not merely of development, form, or detail.

The one developed the Law in its outward direction as ordinances and

commandments; the other in its inward direction as life and liberty.

Thus Rabbinism occupied one pole - and the outcome of its tendency to

pure externalism was the Halakhah, all that was internal and higher

being merely Haggadic. The teaching of Jesus occupied the opposite

pole. Its starting-point was the inner sanctuary in which God was

known and worshipped, and it might well leave the Rabbinic Halakhoth

aside, as not worth controversy, to be in the meantime 'done and

observed,' in the firm assurance that, in the course of its

development, the spirit would create its own appropriate forms, or, to

use a New Testament figure, the new wine burst the old bottles. And,

lastly, as closely connected with all this, and marking the climax of

contrariety: Rabbinism started with demand of outward obedience and

righteousness, and pointed to sonship as its goal; the Gospel started

with the free gift of forgiveness through faith and of sonship, and

pointed to obedience and righteousness as its goal.

In truth, Rabbinism, as such, had no system of theology; only what

ideas, conjectures, or fancies the Haggadah yielded concerning God,

Angels, demons, man, his future destiny and present position, and

Israel, with its past history and coming glory. Accordingly, by the

side of what is noble and pure, what a terrible mass of utter

incongruities, of conflicting statements and too often debasing

superstitions, the outcome of ignorance and narrow nationalism; of

legendary colouring of Biblical narratives and scenes, profane,

coarse, and degrading to them; the Almighty Himself and His Angels

taking part in the conversations of Rabbis, and the discussions of

Academies; nay, forming a kind of heavenly Sanhedrin, which

occasionally requires the aid of an earthly Rabbi.[522]522 The

miraculous merges into the ridiculous, and even the revolting.

Miraculous cures, miraculous supplies, miraculous help, all for the

glory of great Rabbis,[523]523 who by a look or word can kill, and

restore to life. At their bidding the eyes of a rival fall out, and

are again inserted. Nay, such was the veneration due to Rabbis, that

R. Joshua used to kiss the stone on which R. Eliezer had sat and

lectured, saying: 'This stone is like Mount Sinai, and he who sat on

it like the Ark.' Modern ingenuity has, indeed, striven to suggest

deeper symbolical meaning for such stories. It should own the terrible

contrast existing side by side: Hebrewism and Judaism, the Old

Testament and traditionalism; and it should recognise its deeper cause

in the absence of that element of spiritual and inner life which

Christ has brought. Thus as between the two - the old and the new - it

may be fearlessly asserted that as regards their substance and spirit,

there is not a difference, but a total divergence, of fundamental

principle between Rabbinism and the New Testament, so that comparison

between them is not possible. Here there is absolute contrariety.

The painful fact just referred to is only too clearly illustrated by

the relation in which traditionalism places itself to the Scriptures

of the Old Testament, even though it acknowledges their inspiration

and authority. The Talmud has it,[524]524 that he who busies himself

with Scripture only (i.e. without either the Mishnah or Gemara) has

merit, and yet no merit.[525]525 Even the comparative paucity of

references to the Bible in the Mishnah[526]526 is significant. Israel

had made void the Law by its traditions. Under a load of outward

ordinances and observances its spirit had been crushed. The religion

as well as the grand hope of the Old Testament had become

externalized. And so alike Heathenism and Judaism - for it was no

longer the pure religion of the Old Testament - each following its own

direction, had reached its goal. All was prepared and waiting. The

very porch had been built, through which the new, and yet old,

religion was to pass into the ancient world, and the ancient world

into the new religion. Only one thing was needed: the Coming of the

Christ. As yet darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness lay upon

the people. But far away the golden light of the new day was already

tingeing the edge of the horizon. Presently would the Lord arise upon

Zion, and His glory be seen upon her. Presently would the Voice from

out the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord; presently would it

herald the Coming of His Christ to Jew and Gentile, and that Kingdom

of heaven, which, established upon earth, is righteousness, and peace,

and joy in the Holy Ghost.[527]527

Book II.

FROM THE MANGER IN BETHLEHEM TO THE BAPTISM IN JORDAN.

________________

'Fortitudo infirmatur,

Parva fit immensitas;

Liberator alligatur,

Nascitur æternitas.

O quam mira perpetrasti

Jesu propter hominem!

Tam ardenter quem amasti

Paradiso exulem.' - Ancient Latin Hymn

CHAPTER I.

IN JERUSALEM WHEN HEROD REIGNED

IF the dust of ten centuries could have been wiped from the eyelids of

those sleepers, and one of them who thronged Jerusalem in the highday

of its glory, during the reign of King Solomon, had returned to its

streets, he would scarcely have recognised the once familiar city.

Then, as now, a Jewish king reigned, who bore undivided rule over the

whole land; then, as now, the city was filled with riches and adorned

with palaces and architectural monuments; then, as now, Jerusalem was

crowded with strangers from all lands. Solomon and Herod were each the

last Jewish king over the Land of Promise;[528]528 Solomon and Herod,

each, built the Temple. But with the son of David began, and with the

Idumæan ended, 'the kingdom;' or rather, having fulfilled its mission,

it gave place to the spiritual world-kingdom of 'David's greater Son.'

The sceptre departed from Judah to where the nations were to gather

under its sway. And the Temple which Solomon built was the first. In

it the Shekhinah dwelt visibly. The Temple which Herod reared was the

last. The ruins of its burning, which the torch of the Romans had

kindled, were never to be restored. Herod was not the antitype, he was

the Barabbas, of David's Royal Son.

In other respects, also, the difference was almost equally great. The

four 'companion-like' hills on which the city was built,[529]529 the

deep clefts by which it was surrounded, the Mount of Olives rising in

the the east, were the same as a thousand years ago. There, as of old

were the Pool of Siloam and the royal gardens - nay, the very wall

that had then surrounded the city. And yet all was so altered as to be

scarcely recognisable. The ancient Jebusite fort, the City of David,

Mount Zion,[530]530 was now the priests' quarter, Ophel, and the old

royal palace and stables had been thrown into the Temple area - now

completely levelled - where they formed the magnificent treble

colonnade, known as the Royal Porch. Passing through it, and out by

the Western Gate of the Temple, we stand on the immense bridge which

spans the 'Valley of the Cheesemongers,' or the Tyropoeon, and

connects the Eastern with the Western hills of the city. It is perhaps

here that we can best mark the outstanding features, and note the

changes. On the right, as we look northward, are (on the Eastern hill)

Ophel, the Priest-quarter, and the Temple - oh, how wondrously

beautiful and enlarged, and rising terrace upon terrace, surrounded by

massive walls: a palace, a fortress, a Sanctuary of shining marble and

glittering gold. And beyond it frowns the old fortress of Baris,

rebuilt by Herod, and named after his patron, Antonia. This is the

Hill of Zion. Right below us is the cleft of the Tyropoeon, and here

creeps up northwards the 'Lower City' or Acra, in the form of a

crescent, widening into an almost square 'suburb.' Across the

Tyropoeon - westward, rises the 'Upper City.' If the Lower City and

suburb form the business-quarter with its markets bazaars, and streets

of trades and guilds, the 'Upper City' is that of palaces. Here, at

the other end of the great bridge which connects the Temple with the

'Upper City,' is the palace of the Maccabees; beyond it, the Xystos,

or vast colonnaded enclosure, where popular assemblies are held; then

the Palace of Ananias the High-Priest, and nearest to the Temple, 'the

Council Chamber' and public Archives. Behind it, westwards, rise,

terrace upon terrace, the stately mansions of the Upper City, till,

quite in the north-west corner of the old city, we reach the Palace

which Herod had built for himself - almost a city and fortress,

flanked by three high towers, and enclosing spacious gardens. Beyond

it again, and outside the city walls, both of the first and the

second, stretches all north of the city the new suburb of Bezetha.

Here on every side are gardens and villas; here passes the great

northern road; out there must they have laid hold on Simon the

Cyrenian, and here must have led the way to the place of the

Crucifixion.

Changes that marked the chequered course of Israel's history had come

even over the city walls. The first and oldest - that of David and

Solomon - ran round the west side of the Upper City, then crossed

south to the Pool of Siloam, and ran up east, round Ophel, till it

reached the eastern enclosure of the Temple, whence it passed in a

straight line to the point from which it had started, forming the

northern boundary of the ancient city. But although this wall still

existed, there was now a marked addition to it. When the Maccabee

Jonathan finally cleared Jerusalem of the Syrian garrison that lay in

Fort Acra,[531]531 he built a wall right 'through the middle of the

city,' so as to shut out the foe.[532]532 This wall probably ran from

the western angle of the Temple southwards, to near the pool of

Siloam, following the winding course of the Tyropoeon, but on the

other side of it, where the declivity of the Upper City merged in the

valley. Another monument of the Syrian Wars, of the Maccabees, and of

Herod, was the fortress Antonia. Part of it had, probably, been

formerly occupied by what was known as Fort Acra, of such unhappy

prominence in the wars that preceded and marked the early Maccabean

period. It had passed from the Ptolemies to the Syrians, and always

formed the central spot round which the fight for the city turned.

Judas Maccabee had not been able to take it. Jonathan had laid siege

to it, and built the wall, to which reference has just been made, so

as to isolatc its garrison. It was at last taken by Simon, the brother

and successor of Jonathan, and levelled with the ground.[533]533 Fort

Baris, which was constructed by his successor Hyrcanus I.,[534]534

covered a much wider space. It lay on the northwestern angle of the

Temple, slightly jutting beyond it in the west, but not covering the

whole northern area of the Temple. The rock on which it stood was

higher than the Temple,[535]535 although lower than the hill up which

the new suburb Bezetha crept, which, accordingly, was cut off by a

deep ditch, for the safety of the fortress. Herod greatly enlarged and

strengthened it. Within encircling walls the fort rose to a height of

sixty feet, and was flanked by four towers, of which three had a

height of seventy, the fourth (S.E.), which jutted into the Temple

area, of 105 feet, so as to command the sacred enclosure. A

subterranean passage led into the Temple itself,[536]536 which was

also connected with it by colonnades and stairs. Herod had adorned as

well as strengthened and enlarged, this fort (now Antonia), and made

it a palace, an armed camp, and almost a city.[537]537

Hitherto we have only spoken of the first, or old wall, which was

fortified by sixty towers. The second wall, which had only fourteen

towers, began at some point in the northern wall at the Gate Gennath,

whence it ran north, and then east, so as to enclose Acra and the

Suburb. It terminated at Fort Antonia. Beyond, and all around this

second wall stretched, as already noticed, the new, as yet unenclosed

suburb Bezetha, rising towards the north-east. But these changes were

as nothing compared with those within the city itself. First and

foremost was the great transformation in the Temple itself,[538]538

which, from a small building, little larger than an ordinary church,

in the time of Solomon,[539]539 had become that great and glorious

House which excited the admiration of the foreigner, and kindled the

enthusiasm of every son of Israel. At the time of Christ it had been

already forty-six years in building, and workmen were still, and for a

long time, engaged on it.[540]540 But what a heterogeneous crowd

thronged its porches and courts! Hellenists; scattered wanderers from

the most distant parts of the earth - east, west, north, and south;

Galileans, quick of temper and uncouth of Jewish speech; Judæans and

Jerusalemites; white-robed Priests and Levites; Temple officials;

broad-phylacteried, wide-fringed Pharisees, and courtly, ironical

Sadducees; and, in the outer court, curious Gentiles! Some had come to

worship; others to pay vows, or bring offerings, or to seek

purification; some to meet friends, and discourse on religious

subjects in those colonnaded porches, which ran round the Sanctuary;

or else to have their questions answered, or their causes heard and

decided, by the smaller Sanhedrin of twenty-three, that sat in the

entering of the gate or by the Great Sanhedrin. The latter no longer

occupied the Hall of Hewn Stones, Gazith, but met in some chamber

attached to those 'shops,' or booths, on the Temple Mount, which

belonged to the High-Priestly family of Ananias, and where such

profitable trade was driven by those who, in their cupidity and

covetousness, were worthy successors of the sons of Eli. In the Court

of the Gentiles (or in its porches) sat the official money-changers,

who for a fixed discount changed all foreign coins into those of the

Sanctuary. Here also was that great mart for sacrificial animals, and

all that was requisite for offerings. How the simple, earnest country

people, who came to pay vows, or bring offerings for purifying, must

have wondered, and felt oppressed in that atmosphere of strangely

blended religious rigorism and utter worldliness; and how they must

have been taxed, imposed upon, and treated with utmost curtness, nay,

rudeness, by those who laughed at their boorishness, and despised them

as cursed, ignorant country people, little better than heathens, or,

for that matter, than brute beasts. Here also there lay about a crowd

of noisy beggars, unsightly from disease, and clamorous for help. And

close by passed the luxurious scion of the High-Priestly families; the

proud, intensely self-conscious Teacher of the Law, respectfully

followed by his disciples; and the quick-witted, subtle Scribe. These

were men who, on Sabbaths and feast-days, would come out on the

Temple-terrace to teach the people, or condescend to answer their

questions; who in the Synagogues would hold their puzzled hearers

spell-bound by their traditional lore and subtle argumentation, or

tickle the fancy of the entranced multitude, that thronged every

available space, by their ingenious frivolities, their marvellous

legends, or their clever sayings; but who would, if occasion required,

quell an opponent by well-poised questions, or crush him beneath the

sheer weight of authority. Yet others were there who, despite the

utterly lowering influence which the frivolities of the prevalent

religion, and the elaborate trifling of its endless observances, must

have exercised on the moral and religious feelings of all - perhaps,

because of them - turned aside, and looked back with loving gaze to

the spiritual promises of the past, and forward with longing

expectancy to the near 'consolation of Israel,' waiting for it in

prayerful fellowship, and with bright, heaven-granted gleams of its

dawning light amidst the encircling gloom.

Descending from the Temple into the city, there was more than

enlargement, due to the increased population. Altogether, Jerusalem

covered, at its greatest, about 300 acres.[541]541 As of old there

were still the same narrow streets in the business quarters; but in

close contiguity to bazaars and shops rose stately mansions of wealthy

merchants, and palaces of princes.[542]542 And what a change in the

aspect of these streets, in the character of those shops, and, above

all, in the appearance of the restless Eastern crowd that surged to

and fro! Outside their shops in the streets, or at least in sight of

the passers, and within reach of their talk, was the shoemaker

hammering his sandals, the tailor plying his needle, the carpenter, or

the worker in iron and brass. Those who were less busy, or more

enterprising, passed along, wearing some emblem of their trade: the

dyer, variously coloured threads; the carpenter, a rule: the writer, a

reed behind his ear; the tailor, with a needle prominently stuck in

his dress. In the side streets the less attractive occupations of the

butcher, the wool-comber, or the flaxspinner were pursued: the elegant

workmanship of the goldsmith and jeweller; the various articles de

luxe, that adorned the houses of the rich; the work of the designer,

the moulder, or the artificer in iron or brass. In these streets and

lanes everything might be purchased: the production of Palestine, or

imported from foreign lands - nay, the rarest articles from the

remotest parts. Exquisitely shaped, curiously designed and jewelled

cups, rings and other workmanship of precious metals; glass, silks,

fine linen, woollen stuffs, purple, and costly hangings; essences,

ointments, and perfumes, as precious as gold; articles of food and

drink from foreign lands - in short, what India, Persia, Arabia, Media

Egypt, Italy, Greece, and even the far-off lands of the Gentiles

yielded, might be had in these bazaars.

Ancient Jewish writings enable us to identify no fewer than 118

different articles of import from foreign lands, covering more than

even modern luxury has devised. Articles of luxury, especially from

abroad, fetched indeed enormous prices; and a lady might spend 36l. on

a cloak;[543]543 silk would be paid by its weight in gold; purple wool

at 3l. 5s. the pound, or, if double-dyed, at almost ten times that

amount; while the price of the best balsam and nard was most

exorbitant. On the other hand, the cost of common living was very low.

In the bazaars you might get a complete suit for your slave for

eighteen or nineteen shillings,[544]544 and a tolerable outfit for

yourself from 3l. to 6l. For the same sum you might purchase an

ass,[545]545 an ox,[546]546 or a cow,[547]547 and, for little more, a

horse. A calf might be had for less than fifteen shillings, a goat for

five or six.[548]548 Sheep were dearer, and fetched from four to

fifteen or sixteen shillings, while a lamb might sometimes be had as

low as two pence. No wonder living and labour were so cheap. Corn of

all kinds, fruit, wine, and oil, cost very little. Meat was about a

penny a pound; a man might get himself a small, of course unfurnished,

lodging for about sixpence a week.[549]549 A day labourer was paid

about 7½d. a day, though skilled labour would fetch a good deal more.

Indeed, the great Hillel was popularly supposed to have supported his

family on less than twopence a day,[550]550 while property to the

amount of about 6l., or trade with 2l. or 3l. of goods, was supposed

to exclude a person from charity, or a claim on what was left in the

corners of fields and the gleaners.[551]551

To these many like details might be added.[552]552 Sufficient has been

said to show the two ends of society: the exceeding dearness of

luxuries, and the corresponding cheapness of necessaries. Such

extremes would meet especially at Jerusalem. Its population, computed

at from 200,000 to 250,000,[553]553 was enormously swelled by

travellers, and by pilgrims during the great festivals.[554]554 The

great Palace was the residence of King and Court, with all their

following and luxury; in Antonia lay afterwards the Roman garrison.

The Temple called thousands of priests, many of them with their

families, to Jerusalem; while the learned Academies were filled with

hundreds, though it may have been mostly poor, scholars and students.

In Jerusalem must have been many of the large warehouses for the near

commercial harbour of Joppa; and thence, as from the industrial

centres of busy Galilee, would the pedlar go forth to carry his wares

over the land. More especially would the markets of Jerusalem, held,

however, in bazaars and streets rather than in squares, be thronged

with noisy sellers and bargaining buyers. Thither would Galilee send

not only its manufactures, but its provisions: fish (fresh or salted),

fruit[555]555 known for its lusciousness, oil, grape-syrup, and wine.

There were special inspectors for these markets - the Agardemis or

Agronimos - who tested weights and measures, and officially stamped

them,[556]556 tried the soundness of food or drink,[557]557 and

occasionally fixed or lowered the market-prices, enforcing their

decision,[558]558 if need were, even with the stick.[559]559 [560]560

Not only was there an upper and a lower market in Jerusalem,[561]561

but we read of at least seven special markets: those for

cattle,[562]562 wool, iron-ware,[563]563 clothes, wood,[564]564 bread,

and fruit and vegetables. The original market-days were Monday and

Tuesday, afterwards Friday.[565]565 The large fairs (Yeridin) were

naturally confined to the centres of import and export - the borders

of Egypt (Gaza), the ancient Phoenician maritime towns (Tyre and

Acco), and the Emporium across the Jordan (Botnah).[566]566 Besides,

every caravansary, or khan (qatlis, atlis, kat_lusiv), was a sort of

mart, where goods were unloaded, and especially cattle set out[567]567

for sale, and purchases made. But in Jerusalem one may suppose the

sellers to have been every day in the market; and the magazines, in

which greengrocery and all kinds of meat were sold (the Beth

haShevaqim),[568]568 must have been always open. Besides, there were

the many shops (Chanuyoth) either fronting the streets, or in

courtyards, or else movable wooden booths in the streets. Strangely

enough, occasionally Jewish women were employed in selling.[569]569

Business was also done in the restaurants and wineshops, of which

there were many; where you might be served with some dish: fresh or

salted fish, fried locusts, a mess of vegetables, a dish of soup,

pastry, sweetmeats, or a piece of a fruit-cake, to be washed down with

Judæan or Galilean wine, Idumæan vinegar, or foreign beer.

If from these busy scenes we turn to the more aristocratic quarters of

the Upper City,[570]570 we still see the same narrow streets, but

tenanted by another class. First, we pass the High-Priest's palace on

the slope of the hill, with a lower story under the principal

apartments, and a porch in front. Here, on the night of the Betrayal,

Peter was 'beneath in the Palace.'[571]571 Next, we come to Xystos,

and then pause for a moment at the Palace of the Maccabees. It lies

higher up the hill, and westward from the Xytos. From its halls you

can look into the city, and even into the Temple. We know not which of

the Maccabees had built this palace. But it was occupied, not by the

actually reigning prince, who always resided in the fortress (Baris,

afterwards Antonia), but by some other member of the family. From them

it passed into the possession of Herod. There Herod Antipas was when,

on that terrible Passover, Pilate sent Jesus from the old palace of

Herod to be examined by the Ruler of Galilee.[572]572 If these

buildings pointed to the difference between the past and present, two

structures of Herod's were, perhaps, more eloquent than any words in

their accusations of the Idumæan. One of these, at least, would come

in sight in passing along the slopes of the Upper City. The Maccabean

rule had been preceded by that of corrupt High-Priests, who had

prostituted their office to the vilest purposes. One of them, who had

changed his Jewish name of Joshua into Jason, had gone so far, in his

attempts to Grecianise the people, as to build a Hippodrome and

Gymnasium for heathen games. We infer, it stood where the Western hill

sloped into the Tyropoeon, to the south-west of the Temple.[573]573 It

was probably this which Herod afterwards enlarged and beautified, and

turned into a threatre. No expense was spared on the great games held

there. The threatre itself was magnificently adorned with gold,

silver, precious stones, and trophies of arms and records of the

victories of Augustus. But to the Jews this essentially heathen place,

over against their Temple, was cause of deep indignation and

plots.[574]574 Besides this theatre, Herod also built an immense

amphitheatre, which we must locate somewhere in the north-west, and

outside the second city wall.[575]575

All this was Jerusalem above ground. But there was an under ground

Jerusalem also, which burrowed everywhere under the city - under the

Upper City, under the Temple, beyond the city walls. Its extent may be

gathered from the circumstance that, after the capture of the city,

besides the living who had sought shelter there, no fewer than 2,000

dead bodies were found in those subterranean streets.

Close by the tracks of heathenism in Jerusalem, and in sharp contrast,

was what gave to Jerusalem its intensely Jewish character. It was not

only the Temple, nor the festive pilgrims to its feasts and services.

But there were hundreds of Synagogues,[576]576 some for different

nationalities - such as the Alexandrians, or the Cyrenians; some for,

or perhaps founded by, certain trade-guilds. If possible, the Jewish

schools were even more numerous than the Synagogues. Then there were

the many Rabbinic Academies; and, besides, you might also see in

Jerusalem that mysterious sect, the Essenes, of which the members were

easily recognized by their white dress. Essenes, Pharisees, stranger

Jews of all hues, and of many dresses and languages! One could have

imagined himself almost in another world, a sort of enchanted land, in

this Jewish metropolis, and metropolis of Judaism. When the silver

trumpets of the Priests woke the city to prayer, or the strain of

Levite music swept over it, or the smoke of the sacrifices hung like

another Shekhinah over the Temple, against the green background of

Olivet; or when in every street, court, and housetop rose the booths

at the Feast of Tabernacles, and at night the sheen of the Temple

illumination threw long fantastic shadows over the city; or when, at

the Passover, tens of thousands crowded up the Mount with their

Paschal lambs, and hundreds of thousands sat down to the Paschal

supper - it would be almost difficult to believe, that heathenism was

so near, that the Roman was virtually, and would soon be really,

master of the land, or that a Herod occupied the Jewish throne.

Yet there he was; in the pride of his power, and the reckless cruelty

of his ever-watchful tyranny. Everywhere was his mark. Temples to the

gods and to Cæsar, magnificent, and magnificently adorned, outside

Palestine and in its non-Jewish cities; towns rebuilt or built:

Sebaste for the ancient Samaria, the splendid city and harbour of

Cæsarea in the west, Antipatris (after his father) in the north,

Kypros and Phasaelis (after his mother and brother), and Agrippeion;

unconquerable fortresses, such as Essebonitis and Machoerus in Peræa,

Alexandreion, Herodeion, Hyrcania, and Masada in Judæa - proclaimed

his name and sway. But in Jerusalem it seemed as if he had gathered up

all his strength. The theatre and amphitheatre spoke of his

Grecianism; Antonia was the representative fortress; for his religion

he had built that glorious Temple, and for his residence the noblest

of palaces, at the north-western angle of the Upper City, close by

where Milo had been in the days of David. It seems almost incredible,

that a Herod should have reared the Temple, and yet we can understand

his motives. Jewish tradition had it, that a Rabbi (Baba ben Buta) had

advised him in this manner to conciliate the people,[577]577 or else

thereby to expiate the slaughter of so many Rabbis.[578]578 [579]579

Probably a desire to gain popularity, and supersition, may alike have

contributed, as also the wish to gratify his love for splendour and

building. At the same time, he may have wished to show himself a

better Jew than that rabble of Pharisees and Rabbis, who perpetually

would cast it in his teeth, that he was an Idumæan. Whatever his

origin, he was a true king of the Jews - as great, nay greater, than

Solomon himself. Certainly, neither labour nor money had been spared

on the Temple. A thousand vehicles carried up the stone; 10,000

workmen, under the guidance of 1,000 priests, wrought all the costly

material gathered into that house, of which Jewish tradition could

say, 'He that has not seen the temple of Herod, has never known what

beauty is.'[580]580 And yet Israel despised and abhorred the builder!

Nor could his apparent work for the God of Israel have deceived the

most credulous. In youth he had browbeaten the venerable Sanhedrin,

and threatened the city with slaughter and destruction; again and

again had he murdered her venerable sages; he had shed like water the

blood of her Asmonean princes, and of every one who dared to be free;

had stifled every national aspiration in the groans of the torture,

and quenched it in the gore of his victims. Not once, nor twice, but

six times did he change the High-Priesthood, to bestow it at last on

one who bears no good name in Jewish theology, a foreigner in Judæa,

an Alexandrian. And yet the power of that Idumæan was but of

yesterday, and of mushroom growth!

CHAPTER II.

THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF HEROD - THE TWO WORLDS IN JERUSALEM.

It is an intensely painful history,[581]581 in the course of which

Herod made his way to the throne. We look back nearly two and a half

centuries to where, with the empire of Alexander, Palestine fell to

his successors. For nearly a century and a half it continued the

battle-field of the Egyptian and Syrian kings (the Ptolemies and the

Seleucidæ). At last it was a corrupt High-Priesthood - with which

virtually the government of the land had all along lain - that

betrayed Israel's precious trust. The great-grandson of so noble a

figure in Jewish history as Simon the Just (compare Ecclus. 1.) bought

from the Syrians the High-Priestly office of his brother, adopted the

heathen name Jason, and sought to Grecianise the people. The sacred

office fell, if possible, even lower when, through bribery, it was

transferred to his brother Menelaus. Then followed the brief period of

the terrible persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes, when Judaism was all

but exterminated in Palestine. The glorious uprising of the Maccabees

called forth all the national elements left in Israel, and kindled

afresh the smouldering religious feeling. It seemed like a revival of

Old Testament times. And when Judas the Maccabee, with a band so

inferior in numbers and discipline, defeated the best of the Syrian

soldiery, led by its ablest generals, and, on the anniversary of its

desecration by heathen rites, set up again the great altar of

burnt-offering, it appeared as if a new Theocracy were to be

inaugurated. The ceremonial of that feast of the new 'dedication of

the Temple,' when each night the number of lights grew larger in the

winter's darkness, seemed symbolic of what was before Israel. But the

Maccabees were not the Messiah; nor yet the kingdom, which their sword

would have restored - that of Heaven, with its blessings and peace. If

ever, Israel might then have learned what Saviour to look for.

The period even of promise was more brief than might have been

expected. The fervour and purity of the movement ceased almost with

its success. It was certainly never the golden age of Israel - not

even among those who remained faithful to its God - which those seem

to imagine who, forgetful of its history and contests, would trace to

it so much that is most precious and spiritual in the Old Testament.

It may have been the pressure of circumstances, but it was anything

but a pious, or even a 'happy' thought[582]582 of Judas the Maccabee,

to seek the alliance of the Romans. From their entrance on the scene

dates the decline of Israel's national cause. For a time, indeed -

though after varying fortunes of war - all seemed prosperous. The

Maccabees became both High-Priests and Kings. But party strife and

worldliness, ambition and corruption, and Grecianism on the throne,

soon brought their sequel in the decline of morale and vigour, and led

to the decay and decadence of the Maccabean house. It is a story as

old as the Old Testament, and as wide as the history of the world.

Contention for the throne among the Maccabees led to the interference

of the foreigner. When, after capturing Jerusalem, and violating the

sanctity of the Temple, although not plundering its treasures, Pompey

placed Hyrcanus II. in the possession of the High-Priesthood, the last

of the Maccabean rulers[583]583 was virtually shorn of power. The

country was now tributary to Rome, and subject to the Governor of

Syria. Even the shadow of political power passed from the feeble hands

of Hyrcanus when, shortly afterwards, Gabinius (one of the Roman

governors) divided the land into five districts, independent of each

other.

But already a person had appeared on the stage of Jewish affairs, who

was to give them their last decisive turn. About fifty years before

this, the district of Idumæa had been conquered by the Maccabean King

Hyrcanus I., and its inhabitants forced to adopt Judaism. By this

Idumæa we are not, however, to understand the ancient or Eastern Edom,

which was now in the hands of the Nabataeans, but parts of Southern

Palestine which the Edomites had occupied since the Babylonian Exile,

and especially a small district on the northern and eastern boundary

of Judæa, and below Samaria.[584]584 After it became Judæan, its

administration was entrusted to a governor. In the reign of the last

of the Maccabees this office devolved on one Antipater, a man of equal

cunning and determination. He successfully interfered in the unhappy

dispute for the crown, which was at last decided by the sword of

Pompey. Antipater took the part of the utterly weak Hyrcanus in that

contest with his energetic brother Aristobulus. He soon became the

virtual ruler, and Hyrcanus II. only a puppet in his hands. From the

accession of Judas Maccabæus, in 166 b.c., to the year 63 b.c., when

Jerusalem was taken by Pompey, only about a century had elapsed. Other

twenty-four years, and the last of the Maccabees had given place to

the son of Antipater: Herod, surnamed the Great.

The settlement of Pompey did not prove lasting. Aristobulus, the

brother and defeated rival of Hyrcanus, was still alive, and his sons

were even more energetic than he. The risings attempted by them, the

interference of the Parthians on behalf of those who were hostile to

Rome, and, lastly, the contentions for supremacy in Rome itself, made

this period one of confusion, turmoil, and constant warfare in

Palestine. When Pompey was finally defeated by Cæsar, the prospects of

Antipater and Hycanus seemed dark. But they quickly changed sides; and

timely help given to Cæsar in Egypt brought to Antipater the title of

Procurator of Judæa, while Hycanus was left in the High-Priesthood,

and, at least, nominal head of the people. The two sons of Antipater

were now made governors: the elder, Phasaelus, of Jerusalem; the

younger, Herod, only twenty-five years old, of Galilee. Here he

displayed the energy and determination which were his characteristics,

in crushing a guerilla warfare, of which the deeper springs were

probably nationalist. The execution of its leader brought Herod a

summons to appear before the Great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem, for having

arrogated to himself the power of life and death. He came, but arrayed

in purple, surrounded by a body-guard, and supported by the express

direction of the Roman Governor to Hyrcanus, that he was to be

acquitted. Even so he would have fallen a victim to the apprehensions

of the Sanhedrin - only too well grounded - had he not been persuaded

to withdrawn from the city. He returned at the head of an army, and

was with difficulty persuaded by his father to spare Jerusalem.

Meantime Cæsar had named him Governor of Coelesyria.

On the murder of Cæsar, and the possession of Syria by Cassius,

Antipater and Herod again changed sides. But they rendered such

substantial service as to secure favour, and Herod was continued in

the position conferred on him by Cæsar. Antipater was, indeed,

poisoned by a rival, but his sons Herod and Phasaelus repressed and

extinguished all opposition. When the battle of Philippi placed the

Roman world in the hands of Antony and Octavius, the former obtained

Asia. Once more the Idumæans knew how to gain the new ruler, and

Phasaelus and Herod were named Tetrarchs of Judæa. Afterwards, when

Antony was held in the toils of Cleopatra, matters seemed, indeed, to

assume a different aspect. The Parthians entered the land, in support

of the rival Maccabean prince Antigonus, the son of Aristobulus. By

treachery, Phasaelus and Hyrcanus were induced to go to the Parthian

camp, and made captives. Phasaelus shortly afterwards destroyed

himself in his prison,[585]585 while Hyrcanus was deprived of his

ears, to unfit him for the High-Priestly office. And so Antigonus for

a short time succeeded both to the High-Priesthood and royalty in

Jerusalem. Meantime Herod, who had in vain warned his brother and

Hyrcanus against the Parthian, had been able to make his escape from

Jerusalem. His family he left to the defence of his brother Joseph, in

the inaccessible fortress of Masada; himself fled into Arabia, and

finally made his way to Rome. There he succeeded, not only with

Antony, but obtained the consent of Octavius, and was proclaimed by

the Senate King of Judæa. A sacrifice on the Capitol, and a banquet by

Antony, celebrated the accession of the new successor of David.

But he had yet to conquer his kingdom. At first he made way by the

help of the Romans. Such success, however, as he had gained, was more

than lost during his brief absence on a visit to Antony. Joseph, the

brother of Herod, was defeated and slain, and Galilee, which had been

subdued, revolted again. But the aid which the Romans rendered, after

Herod's return from Antony, was much more hearty, and his losses were

more than retrieved. Soon all Palestine, with the exception of

Jerusalem, was in his hands. While laying siege to it, he went to

Samaria, there to wed the beautiful Maccabean princess Mariamme, who

had been betrothed to him five years before.[586]586 That ill-fated

Queen, and her elder brother Aristobulus, united in themselves the two

rival branches of the Maccabean family. Their father was Alexander,

the eldest son of Aristobulus, and brother of that Antigonus whom

Herod now besieged in Jerusalem; and their mother, Alexandra, the

daughter of Hyrcanus II. The uncle of Mariamme was not long able to

hold out against the combined forces of Rome and Herod. The carnage

was terrible. When Herod, by rich presents, at length induced the

Romans to leave Jerusalem, they took Antigonus with them. By desire of

Herod he was executed.

This was the first of the Maccabees who fell victim to his jealousy

and cruelty. The history which now follows is one of sickening

carnage. The next to experience his vengeance were the principal

adherents in Jerusalem of his rival Antigonus. Forty-five of the

noblest and richest were executed. His next step was to appoint an

abscure Babylonian to the High-Priesthood. This awakened the active

hostility of Alexandra, the mother of Marimme, Herod's wife. The

Maccabean princess claimed the High-Priesthood for her son

Aristobulus. Her intrigues with Cleopatra - and through her with

Antony - and the entreaties of Mariamme, the only being whom Herod

loved, though in his own mad way, prevailed. At the age of seventeen

Aristobulus was made High-Priest. But Herod, who well knew the hatred

and contempt of the Maccabean members of his family, had his

mother-in-law watched, a precaution increased after the vain attempt

of Alexandra to have herself and her son removed in coffins from

Jerusalem, to flee to Cleopatra. Soon the jealousy and suspicions of

Herod were raised to murderous madness, by the acclamations which

greeted the young Aristobulus at the Feast of Tabernacles. So

dangerous a Maccabean rival must be got rid of; and, by secret order

of Herod, Aristobulus was drowned while bathing. His mother denounced

the murderer, and her influence with Cleopatra, who also hated Herod,

led to his being summoned before Antony. Once more bribery, indeed,

prevailed; but other troubles awaited Herod.

When obeying the summons of Antony, Herod had committed the government

to his uncle Joseph, who was also his brother-in-law, having wedded

Salome, the sister of Herod. His mad jealousy had prompted him to

direct that, in case of his condemnation, Mariamme was to be killed,

that she might not become the wife of another. Unfortunately, Joseph

told this to Mariamme, to show how much she was loved. But on the

return of Herod, the infamous Salome accused her old husband of

impropriety with Mariamme. When it appeared that Joseph had told the

Queen of his commission, Herod, regarding it as confirming his

sister's charge, ordered him to be executed, without even a hearing.

External complications of the gravest kind now supervened. Herod had

to cede to Cleopatra the districts of Phoenice and Philistia, and that

of Jericho with its rich balsam plantations. Then the dissensions

between Antony and Octavius involved him, in the cause of the former,

in a war with Arabia, whose king had failed to pay tribute to

Cleopatra. Herod was victorious; but he had now to reckon with another

master. The battle of Actium[587]587 decided the fate on Antony, and

Herod had to make his peace with Octavius. Happily, he was able to do

good service to the new cause, ere presenting himself before Augustus.

But, in order to be secure from all possible rivals, he had the aged

Hyrcanus II. executed, on pretence of intrigues with the Arabs. Herod

was successful with Augustus; and when, in the following summer, he

furnished him supplies on his march to Egypt, he was rewarded by a

substantial addition of territory.

When about to appear before Augustus, Herod had entrusted to one

Soemus the charge of Mariamme, with the same fatal directions as

formerly to Joseph. Again Mariamme learnt the secret; again the old

calumnies were raised - this time not only by Salome, but also by

Kypros, Herod's mother; and again Herod imagined he had found

corroborative evidence. Soemus was slain without a hearing, and the

beautiful Mariamme executed after a mock trail. The most fearful

paroxysm of remorse, passion, and longing for his murdered wife now

seized the tyrant, and brought him to the brink of the grave.

Alexandra, the mother of Mariamme, deemed the moment favorable for her

plots - but she was discovered, and executed. Of the Maccabean race

there now remained only distant members, the sons of Babas, who had

found an asylum with Costobarus, the Governor of Idumæa, who had

wedded Salome after the death of her first husband. Tired of him, as

she had been of Joseph, Salome denounced her second husband; and

Costobarus, as well as the sons of Babas, fell victims to Herod. Thus

perished the family of the Maccabees.

The hand of the maddened tyrant was next turned against his own

family. Of his ten wives, we mention only those whose children occupy

a place in this history. The son of Doris was Antipater; those of the

Maccabean Mariamme, Alexander and Aristobulus; another Mariamme, whose

father Herod had made High-Priest, bore him a son named Herod (a name

which other of the sons shared); Malthake, a Samaritan, was the mother

of Archelaus and Herod Antipas; and, lastly, Cleopatra of Jerusalem

bore Philip. The sons of the Maccabean princess, as heirs presumptive,

were sent to Rome for their education. On this occasion Herod

received, as reward for many services, the country east of the Jordan,

and was allowed to appoint his still remaining brother, Pheroras,

Tetrarch of Peræa. On their return from Rome the young princes were

married: Alexander to a daughter of the King of Cappadocia, and

Aristobulus to his cousin Berenice, the daughter of Salome. But

neither kinship, nor the yet nearer relation in which Aristobulus now

stood to her, could extinguish the hatred of Salome towards the dead

Maccabean princess or her children. Nor did the young princes, in

their pride of descent, disguise their feelings towards the house of

their father. At first, Herod gave not heed to the denunciations of

his sister. Presently he yielded to vague apprehensions. As a first

step, Antipater, the son of Doris, was recalled from exile, and sent

to Rome for education. So the breach became open; and Herod took his

sons to Italy, to lay formal accusation against them before Augustus.

The wise counsels of the Emperor restored peace for a time. But

Antipater now returned to Plaestine, and joined his calumnies to those

of Salome. Once more the King of Cappadocia succeeded in reconciling

Herod and his sons. But in the end the intrigues of Salome, Antipater,

and of an infamous foreigner who had made his way at Court, prevailed.

Alexander and Aristobulus were imprisoned, and an accusation of high

treason laid against them before the Emperor. Augustus gave Herod full

powers, but advised the convocation of a mixed tribunal of Jews and

Romans to try the case. As might have been expected, the two princes

were condemned to death, and when some old soldiers ventured to

intercede for them, 300 of the supposed adherents of the cause were

cut down, and the two princes strangled in prison. This happened in

Samaria, where, thirty years before, Herod had wedded their ill-fated

mother.

Antipater was now the heir presumptive. But, impatient of the throne,

he plotted with Herod's brother, Pheroras, against his father. Again

Salome denounced her nephew and her brother. Antipater withdrew to

Rome; but when, after the death of Pheraras, Herod obtained

indubitable evidence that his son had plotted against his life, he

lured Antipater to Palestine, where on his arrival he was cast into

prison. All that was needed was the permission of Augustus for his

execution. It arrived, and was carried out only five days before the

death of Herod himself. So ended a reign almost unparalleled for

reckless cruelty and bloodshed, in which the murder of the Innocents

in Bethlehem formed but so trifling an episode among the many deeds of

blood, as to have seemed not deserving of record on the page of the

Jewish historian.

But we can understand the feelings of the people towards such a King.

They hated the Idumæan; they detested his semi-heathen reign; they

abhorred his deeds of cruelty. the King had surrounded himself with

foreign councillors, and was protected by foreign mercenaries from

Thracia, Germany, and Gaul.[588]588 So long as he lived, no woman's

honour was safe, no man's life secure. An army of all-powerful spies

pervaded Jerusalem - nay, the King himself was said to stoop to that

office.[589]589 If pique or private enmity led to denunciation, the

torture would extract any confession from the most innocent. What his

relation to Judaism had been, may easily be inferred. He would be a

Jew - even build the Temple, advocate the cause of the Jews in other

lands, and, in a certain sense, conform to the Law of Judaism. In

building the Temple, he was so anxious to conciliate national

prejudice, that the Sanctuary itself was entrusted to the workmanship

of priests only. Nor did he ever intrude into the Holy Place, nor

interfere with any functions of the priesthood. None of his coins bear

devices which could have shocked popular feeling, nor did any of the

buildings he erected in Jerusalem exhibit any forbidden emblems. The

Sanhedrin did exist during his reign,[590]590 though it must have been

shorn of all real power, and its activity confined to ecclesiastical,

or semi-ecclesiastical, causes. Strangest of all, he seems to have had

at least the passive support of two of the greatest Rabbis - the

Pollio and Sameas of Josephus[591]591 - supposed to represent those

great figures in Jewish tradition, Abtalion and Shemajah.[592]592

[593]593 We can but conjecture, that they preferred even his rule to

what had preceded; and hoped it might lead to a Roman Protectorate,

which would leave Judæa practically independent, or rather under

Rabbinc rule.

It was also under the government of Herod, that Hillel and Shammai

lived and taught in Jerusalem:[594]594 the two, whom tradition

designates as 'the fathers of old.'[595]595 Both gave their names to

'schools,' whose direction was generally different - not unfrequently,

it seems, chiefly for the sake of opposition. But it is not correct to

describe the former as consistently the more liberal and mild.[596]596

The teaching of both was supposed to have been declared by the 'Voice

from Heaven' (the Bath-Qol) as 'the words of the living God;' yet the

Law was to be henceforth according to the teaching of Hillel.[597]597

But to us Hillel is so intensely interesting, not merely as the mild

and gentle, nor only as the earnest student who came from Babylon to

learn in the Academies of Jerusalem; who would support his family on a

third of his scanty wages as a day labourer, that he might pay for

entrance into the schools; and whose zeal and merits were only

discovered when, after a severe night, in which, from poverty, he had

been unable to gain admittance into the Academy, his benumbed form was

taken down from the window-sill, to which he had crept up not to lose

aught of the precious instruction. And for his sake did they gladly

break on that Sabbath the sacred rest. Nor do we think of him, as

tradition fables him - the descendant of David,[598]598 possessed of

every great quality of body, mind, and heart; nor yet as the second

Ezra, whose learning placed him at the head of the Sanhedrin, who laid

down the principles afterwards applied and developed by Rabbinism, and

who was the real founder of traditionalism. Still less do we think of

him, as he is falsely represented by some: as he whose principles

closely resemble the teaching of Jesus, or, according to certain

writers, were its source. By the side of Jesus we think of him

otherwise than this. We remember that, in his extreme old age and near

his end, he may have presided over that meeting of Sanhedrin which, in

answer to Herod's inquiry, pointed to Bethlehem as the birthplace of

the Messiah.[599]599 [600]600 We think of him also as the grandfather

of that Gamaliel, at whose feet Saul of Tarsus sat. And to us he is

the representative Jewish reformer, in the spirit of those times, and

in the sense of restoring rather than removing; while we think of

Jesus as the Messiah of Israel, in the sense of bringing the Kingdom

of God to all men, and opening it to all believers.

And so there were two worlds in Jerusalem, side by side. On the one

hand, was Grecianism with its theatre and amphitheatre; foreigners

filling the Court, and crowding the city; foreign tendencies and ways,

from the foreign King downwards. On the other hand, was the old Jewish

world, becoming now set and ossified in the Schools of Hillel and

Shammai, and overshadowed by Temple and Synagogue. And each was

pursuing its course, by the side of the other. If Herod had everywhere

his spies, the Jewish law provided its two police magistrates in

Jerusalem, the only judges who received renumeration.[601]601 [602]602

If Herod judged cruelly and despotically, the Sanhedrin weighed most

deliberately, the balance always inclining to mercy. If Greek was the

language of the court and camp, and indeed must have been understood

and spoken by most in the land, the language of the people, spoken

also by Christ and His Apostles, was a dialect of the ancient Hebrew,

the Western or Palestinian Aramaic.[603]603 It seems strange, that

this could ever have been doubted.[604]604 A Jewish Messiah Who would

urge His claim upon Israel in Greek, seems almost a contradiction in

terms. We know, that the language of the Temple and the Synagogue was

Hebrew, and that the addresses of the Rabbis had to be 'targumed' into

the vernacular Aramæan - and can we believe that, in a Hebrew service,

the Messiah could have risen to address the people in Greek, or that

He would have argued with the Pharisees and Scribes in that tongue,

especially remembering that its study was actually forbidden by the

Rabbis?[605]605

Indeed, it was a peculiar mixture of two worlds in Jerusalem: not only

of the Grecian and the Jewish, but of piety and frivolity also. The

devotion of the people and the liberality of the rich were unbounded.

Fortunes were lavished on the support of Jewish learning, the

promotion of piety, or the advance of the national cause. Thousands of

votive offerings, and the costly gifts in the Temple, bore evidence of

this. Priestly avarice had artificially raised the price of

sacrificial animals, a rich man would bring into the Temple at his own

cost the number requisite for the poor. Charity was not only

open-handed, but most delicate, and one who had been in good

circumstances would actually be enabled to live according to his

former station.[606]606 Then these Jerusalemites - townspeople, as

they called themselves - were so polished, so witty, so pleasant.

There was a tact in their social intercourse, and a considerateness

and delicacy in their public arrangements and provisions, nowhere else

to be found. Their very language was different. There was a Jerusalem

dialect,[607]607 quicker, shorter, 'lighter' (Lishna Qalila).[608]608

And their hospitality, especially at festive seasons, was unlimited.

No one considered his house his own, and no stranger or pilgrim but

found reception. And how much there was to be seen and heard in those

luxuriously furnished houses, and at those sumptuous entertainments!

In the women's apartments, friends from the country would see every

novelty in dress, adornment, and jewellery, and have the benefit of

examining themselves in looking-glasses. To be sure, as being womanish

vanity, their use was interdicted to men, except it were to the

members of the family of the President of the Sanhedrin, on account of

their intercourse with those in authority, just as for the same reason

they were allowed to learn Greek.[609]609 Nor might even women look in

the glass on the Sabbath.[610]610 But that could only apply to those

carried in the hand, since one might be tempted, on the holy day, to

do such servile work as to pull out a grey hair with the pincers

attached to the end of the glass; but not to a glass fixed in the lid

of a basket;[611]611 nor to such as hung on the wall.[612]612 And then

the lady-visitor might get anything in Jerusalem; from a false tooth

to an Arabian veil, a Persian shawl, or an Indian dress!

While the women so learned Jerusalem manners in the inner apartments,

the men would converse on the news of the day, or on politics. For the

Jerusalemites had friends and correspondents in the most distant parts

of the world, and letters were carried by special messengers,[613]613

in a kind of post-bag. Nay, there seem to have been some sort of

receiving-offices in towns,[614]614 and even something resembling our

parcel-post.[615]615 And, strange as it may sound, even a species of

newspapers, or broadsheets, appears to have been circulating

(Mikhtabhin), not allowed, however, on the Sabbath, unless they

treated of public affairs.[616]616

Of course, it is difficult accurately to determine which of these

things were in use in the earliest times, or else introduced at a

later period. Perhaps, however, it was safer to bring them into a

picture of Jewish society. Undoubted, and, alas, too painful evidence

comes to us of the luxuriousness of Jerusalem at that time, and of the

moral corruption to which it led. It seems only too clear, that such

commentations as the Talmud[617]617 gives of Is. iii. 16-24, in regard

to the manners and modes of attraction practised by a certain class of

the female population in Jerusalem, applied to a far later period than

that of the prophet. With this agrees only too well the recorded

covert lascivious expressions used by the men, which gives a

lamentable picture of the state of morals of many in the city,[618]618

and the notices of the indecent dress worn not only by women,[619]619

but even by corrupt High-Priestly youths. Nor do the exaggerated

descriptions of what the Midrash on Lamentations[620]620 describes as

the dignity of the Jerusalemites; of the wealth which they lavished on

their marriages; of the ceremony which insisted on repeated

invitations to the guests to a banquet, and that men inferior in rank

should not be bidden to it; of the dress in which they appeared; the

manner in which the dishes were served, the wine in white crystal

vases; and the punishment of the cook who had failed in his duty, and

which was to be commensurate to the dignity of the party - give a

better impression of the great world in Jerusalem.

And yet it was the City of God, over whose destruction not only the

Patriarch and Moses, but the Angelic hosts - nay, the Almighty Himself

and His Shekhinah - had made bitterest lamentation.[621]621 The City

of the Prophets, also, since each of them whose birthplace had not

been mentioned, must be regarded as having sprung from it.[622]622

Equally, even more, marked, but now for joy and triumph, would be the

hour of Jerusalem's uprising, when it would welcome its Messiah. Oh,

when would He come? In the feverish excitement of expectancy they were

only too ready to listen to the voice of any pretender, however coarse

and clumsy the imposture. Yet He was at hand - even now coming: only

quite other than the Messiah of their dreams. 'He came unto His own,

and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, to them

gave He power to become children of God, even to them that believe on

His Name.'

CHAPTER III.

THE ANNUNCIATION OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST

(St. Luke i. 5-25.)

It was the time of the Morning Sacrifice.[623]623 As the massive

Temple gates slowly swung on their hinges, a three-fold blast from the

silver trumpets of the Priests seemed to waken the City, as with the

Voice of God, to the life of another day. As its echoes came in the

still air across the cleft of the Tyropoeon, up the slopes of the

Upper City, down the busy quarters below, or away to the new suburb

beyond, they must, if but for a moment, have brought holier thoughts

to all. For, did it not seem to link the present to the past and the

future, as with the golden chain of promises that bound the Holy City

to the Jerusalem that was above, which in type had already, and in

reality would soon descend from heaven? Patriot, saint, or stranger,

he could not have heard it unmoved, as thrice the summons from within

the Temple-gates rose and fell.

It had not come too soon. The Levites on ministry, and those of the

laity, whose 'course' it was to act as the representatives of Israel,

whether in Palestine or far away, in a sacrifice provided by, and

offered for, all Israel, hastened to their duties.[624]624 For already

the blush of dawn, for which the Priest on the highest pinnacle of the

Temple had watched, to give the signal for beginning the services of

the day, had shot its brightness far away to Hebron and beyond. Within

the Courts below all had long been busy. At some time previously,

unknown to those who waited for the morning - whether at cockcrowing,

or a little earlier or later,[625]625 the superintending Priest had

summoned to their sacred functions those who had 'washed,' according

to the ordinance. There must have been each day about fifty priests on

duty.[626]626 Such of them as were ready now divided into two parties,

to make inspection of the Temple courts by torchlight. Presently they

met, and trooped to the well-known Hall of Hewn Polished

Stones,[627]627 where formerly the Sanhedrin had been wont to sit. The

ministry for the day was there apportioned. To prevent the disputes of

carnal zeal, the 'lot' was to assign to each his function. Four times

was it resorted to: twice before, and twice after the Temple-gates

were opened. The first act of their ministry had to be done in the

grey dawn, by the fitful red light that glowed on the altar of burnt

offering, ere the priests had stirred it into fresh flame. It was

scarcely daybreak, when a second time they met for the 'lot,' which

designated those who were to take part in the sacrifice itself, and

who were to trim the golden candlestick, and make ready the altar of

incense within the Holy Place. And now morn had broken, and nothing

remained before the admission of worshippers but to bring out the

lamb, once again to make sure of its fitness for sacrifice, to water

it from a golden bowl, and then to lay it in mystic fashion - as

tradition described the binding of Isaac - on the north side of the

altar, with its face to the west.

All, priests and laity, were present as the Priest, standing on the

east side of the altar, from a golden bowl sprinkled with sacrificial

blood two sides of the altar, below the red line which marked the

difference between ordinary sacrifices and those that were to be

wholly consumed. While the sacrifice was prepared for the altar, the

priests, whose lot it was, had made ready all within the Holy Place,

where the most solemn part of the day's service was to take place -

that of offering the incense, which symbolised Israel's accepted

prayers. Again was the lot (the third) cast to indicate him, who was

to be honoured with this highest mediatorial act. Only once in a

lifetime might any one enjoy that privilege.[628]628 Henceforth he was

called 'rich,'[629]629 and must leave to his brethren the hope of the

distinction which had been granted him. It was fitting that, as the

custom was, such lot should be preceded by prayer and confession of

their faith[630]630 on the part of the assembled priests.

It was the first week in October 748 a.u.c.,[631]631 that is, in the

sixth year before our present era, when 'the course of Abia'[632]632 -

the eighth in the original arrangement of the weekly service - was on

duty in the Temple. True this, as indeed most of the twenty-four

'courses' into which the Priesthood had been arranged, could not claim

identity, only continuity, with those whose names they bore. For only

three, or at most four, of the ancient 'courses' had returned from

Babylon. But the original arrangement had been preserved, the names of

the missing courses being retained, and their number filled up by lot

from among those who had come back to Palestine. In our ignorance of

the number of 'houses of their father,' or 'families,' which

constituted the 'course of Abia,' it is impossible to determine, how

the services of that week had been apportioned among them. But this is

of comparatively small importance, since there is no doubt about the

central figure in the scene.

In the group ranged that autumn morning around the superintending

Priest was one, on whom the snows of at least sixty winters had

fallen.[633]633 But never during these many years had he been honoured

with the office of incensing - and it was perhaps well he should have

learned, that this distinction came direct from God. Yet the venerable

figure of Zacharias must have been well known in the Temple. For, each

course was twice a year on ministry, and, unlike the Levites, the

priests were not disqualified by age, but only by infirmity. In many

respects he seemed different from those around. His home was not in

either of the great priest-centres - the Ophel-quarter in Jerusalem,

nor in Jericho[634]634 - but in some small town in those uplands,

south of Jerusalem: the historic 'hill-country of Judea.' And yet he

might have claimed distinction. To be a priest, and married to the

daughter of a priest, was supposed to convey twofold honour.[635]635

That he was surrounded by relatives and friends, and that he was well

known and respected throughout his district, appears incidentally from

the narrative.[636]636 It would, indeed, have been strange had it been

otherwise. There was much in the popular habits of thought, as well as

in the office and privileges of the Priesthood, if worthily

represented, to invest it with a veneration which the aggressive

claims of Rabbinism could not wholly monopolise. And in this instance

Zacharias and Elisabeth, his wife, were truly 'righteous,'[637]637 in

the sense of walking, so far as man could judge, 'blamelessly,' alike

in those commandments which were specially binding on Israel, and in

those statutes that were of universal bearing on mankind.[638]638 No

doubt their piety assumed in some measure the form of the time, being,

if we must use the expression, Pharisaic, though in the good, not the

evil sense of it.

There is much about those earlier Rabbis - Hillel, Gamaliel, and

others - to attract us, and their spirit ofttimes sharply contrasts

with the narrow bigotry, the self-glory, and the unspiritual

externalism of their successors. We may not unreasonably infer, that

the Tsaddiq in the quiet home of the hill-country was quite other than

the self-asserting Rabbi, whose dress and gait, voice and manner,

words and even prayers, were those of the religious parvenu, pushing

his claims to distinction before angels and men. Such a household as

that of Zacharias and Elisabeth would have all that was beautiful in

the religion of the time: devotion towards God; a home of affection

and purity; reverence towards all that was sacred in things Divine and

human; ungrudging, self-denying, loving charity to the poor; the

tenderest regard for the feelings of others, so as not to raise a

blush, nor to wound their hearts;[639]639 above all, intense faith and

hope in the higher and better future of Israel. Of such, indeed, there

must have been not a few in the land - the quiet, the prayerful, the

pious, who, though certainly not Sadducees nor Essenes, but reckoned

with the Pharisaic party, waited for the consolation of Israel, and

received it with joy when manifested. Nor could aught more certainly

have marked the difference between the one and the other section than

on a matter, which must almost daily, and most painfully have forced

itself on Zacharias and Elisabeth. There were among the Rabbis those

who, remembering the words of the prophet,[640]640 spoke in most

pathetic language of the wrong of parting from the wife of

youth,[641]641 and there were those to whom the bare fact of

childlessness rendered separation a religious duty.[642]642 Elisabeth

was childless. For many a year this must have been the burden of

Zacharias' prayer; the burden also of reproach, which Elisabeth seemed

always to carry with her. They had waited together these many years,

till in the evening of life the flower of hope had closed its fragrant

cup; and still the two sat together in the twilight, content to wait

in loneliness, till night would close around them.

But on that bright autumn morning in the Temple no such thoughts would

come to Zacharias. For the first, and for the last time in life the

lot had marked him for incensing, and every thought must have centred

on what was before him. Even outwardly, all attention would be

requisite for the proper performance of his office. First, he had to

choose two of his special friends or relatives, to assist in his

sacred service. Their duties were comparatively simple. One reverently

removed what had been left on the altar from the previous evening's

service; then, worshipping, retired backwards. The second assistant

now advanced, and, having spread to the utmost verge of the golden

altar the live coals taken from that of burnt-offering, worshipped and

retired. Meanwhile the sound of the 'organ' (the Magrephah), heard to

the most distant parts of the Temple, and, according to tradition, far

beyond its precincts, had summoned priests, Levites, and people to

prepare for whatever service or duty was before them. For, this was

the innermost part of the worship of the day. But the celebrant

Priest, bearing the golden censer, stood alone within the Holy Place,

lit by the sheen of the seven-branched candlestick. Before him -

somewhat farther away, towards the heavy Veil that hung before the

Holy of Holies, was the golden altar of incense, on which the red

coals glowed. To his right (the left of the altar - that is, on the

north side) was the table of shewbread; to his left, on the right or

south side of the altar, was the golden candlestick. And still he

waited, as instructed to do, till a special signal indicated, that the

moment had come to spread the incense on the altar, as near as

possible to the Holy of Holies. Priests and people had reverently

withdrawn from the neighbourhood of the altar, and were prostrate

before the Lord, offering unspoken worship, in which record of past

deliverance, longing for mercies promised in the future, and entreaty

for present blessing and peace,[643]643 seemed the ingredients of the

incense, that rose in a fragrant cloud of praise and prayer. Deep

silence had fallen on the worshippers, as if they watched to heaven

the prayers of Israel, ascending in the cloud of 'odours' that rose

from the golden altar in the Holy Place.[644]644 Zacharias waited,

until he saw the incense kindling. Then he also would have 'bowed down

in worship,' and reverently withdrawn,[645]645 had not a wondrous

sight arrested his steps.

On the right (or south) side of the altar, between it and the golden

candlestick, stood what he could not but recognise as an Angelic

form.[646]646 Never, indeed, had even tradition reported such a vision

to an ordinary Priest in the act of incensing. The two super-natural

apparitions recorded - one of an Angel each year of the Pontificate of

Simon the Just; the other in that blasphemous account of the vision of

the Almighty by Ishmael, the son of Elisha, and of the conversation

which then ensued[647]647 [648]648 - had both been vouchsafed to

High-Priests, and on the Day of Atonement. Still, there was always

uneasiness among the people as any mortal approached the immediate

Presence of God, and every delay in his return seemed ominous.[649]649

No wonder, then, that Zacharias 'was troubled, and fear fell on him,'

as of a sudden - probably just after he had spread the incense on the

altar, and was about to offer his parting prayer - he beheld what

afterwards he knew to be the Angel Gabriel ('the might of God'). Apart

from higher considerations, there could perhaps be no better evidence

of the truth of this narrative than its accord with psychological

facts. An Apocryphal narrative would probably have painted the scene

in agreement with what, in the view of such a writer, should have been

the feelings of Zacharias, and the language of the Angel.[650]650 The

Angel would have commenced by referring to Zacharias' prayers for the

coming of a Messiah, and Zacharias would have been represented in a

highly enthusiastic state. Instead of the strangely prosaic objection

which he offered to the Angelic announcement, there would have been a

burst of spiritual sentiment, or what passed for such. But all this

would have been psychologically untrue. There are moments of moral

faintness, so to spseak, when the vital powers of the spiritual heart

are depressed, and, as in the case of the Disciples on the Mount of

Transfiguration and in the Garden of Gethsemane, the physical part of

our being and all that is weakest in us assert their power.

It was true to this state of semi-consciousness, that the Angel first

awakened within Zacharias the remembrance of life-long prayers and

hopes, which had now passed into the background of his being, and then

suddenly startled him by the promise of their realisation. But that

Child of so many prayers, who was to bear the significant name of John

(Jehochanan, or Jochanan), 'the Lord is gracious,' was to be the

source of joy and gladness to a far wider circle than that of the

family. This might be called the first rung of the ladder by which the

Angel would take the priest upwards. Nor was even this followed by an

immediate disclosure of what, in such a place, and from such a

messenger, must have carried to a believing heart the thrill of almost

unspeakable emotion. Rather was Zacharias led upwards, step by step.

The Child was to be great before the Lord; not only an ordinary, but a

life-Nazarite,[651]651 as Samson and Samuel of old had been. Like

them, he was not to consecrate himself, but from the inception of life

wholly to belong to God, for His work. And, greater than either of

these representatives of the symbolical import of Nazarism, he would

combine the twofold meaning of their mission - outward and inward

might in God, only in a higher and more spiritual sense. For this

life-work he would be filled with the Holy Ghost, from the moment life

woke within him. Then, as another Samson, would he, in the strength of

God, lift the axe to each tree to be felled, and, like another Samuel,

turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. Nay,

combining these two missions, as did Elijah on Mount Carmel, he

should, in accordance with prophecy,[652]652 precede the Messianic

manifestation, and, not indeed in the person or form, but in the

spirit and power of Elijah, accomplish the typical meaning of his

mission, as on that day of decision it had risen as the burden of his

prayer[653]653 - that is, in the words of prophecy,[654]654 'turn the

heart of the fathers to the children,' which, in view of the coming

dispensation, would be 'the disobedient (to walk) in the wisdom of the

just.'[655]655 Thus would this new Elijah 'make ready for the Lord a

people prepared.'

If the apparition of the Angel, in that place, and at that time, had

overwhelmed the aged priest, the words which he heard must have filled

him with such bewilderment, that for the moment he scarcely realised

their meaning. One idea alone, which had struck its roots so long in

his consciousness, stood out: A son - while, as it were in the dim

distance beyond, stretched, as covered with a mist of glory, all those

marvellous things that were to be connected with him. So, when age or

strong feeling renders us almost insensible to the present, it is ever

that which connects itself with the past, rather than with the

present, which emerges first and strongest in our consciousness. And

so it was the obvious doubt, that would suggest itself, which fell

from his lips - almost unconscious of what he said. Yet there was in

his words an element of faith also, or at least of hope, as he asked

for some pledge or confirmation of what he had heard.

It is this demand of some visible sign, by which to 'know' all that

the Angel had promised, which distinguishes the doubt of Zacharias

from that of Abraham,[656]656 or of Manoah and his wife,[657]657 under

somewhat similar circumstances - although, otherwise also, even a

cursory reading must convey the impression of most marked differences.

Nor ought we perhaps to forget, that we are on the threshold of a

dispensation, to which faith is the only entrance. This door Zacharias

was now to hold ajar, a dumb messenger. He that would not speak the

praises of God, but asked a sign, received it. His dumbness was a sign

- though the sign, as it were the dumb child of the prayer of

unbelief, was its punishment also. And yet, when rightly applied, a

Temple; a sign to Elisabeth; to all who knew Zacharias in the

hill-country; and to the priest himself, during those nine months of

retirement and inward solitude; a sign also that would kindle into

flame in the day when God would loosen his tongue.

A period of unusual length had passed, since the signal for incensing

had been given. The prayers of the people had been offered, and their

anxious gaze was directed towards the Holy Place. At last Zacharias

emerged to take his stand on the top of the steps which led from the

Porch to the Court of the Priests, waiting to lead in the priestly

benediction,[658]658 that preceded the daily meat-offering and the

chant of the Psalms of praise, accompanied with joyous sound of music,

as the drink-offering was poured out. But already the sign of

Zacharias was to be a sign to all the people. The pieces of the

sacrifices had been ranged in due order on the altar of

burnt-offering; the priests stood on the steps to the porch, and the

people were in waiting. Zacharias essayed to speak the words of

benediction, unconscious that the stoke had fallen. But the people

knew it by his silence, that he had seen a vision in the Temple. Yet

as he stood helpless, trying by signs to indicate it to the awestruck

assembly, he remained dumb.

Wondering, they had dispersed - people and priests. The day's service

over, another family of ministrants took the place of those among whom

Zacharias had been; and again, at the close of the week's service,

another 'course' that of Abia. They returned to their homes - some to

Ophel, some to Jericho, some to their quiet dwellings in the country.

But God fulfilled the word which He had spoken by His Angel.

Before leaving this subject, it may be well to inquire into the

relation between the events just described, and the customs and

expectations of the time. The scene in the Temple, and all the

surroundings, are in strictest accordance with what we know of the

services of the Sanctuary. In a narrative that lays hold on some

details of a very complex service, such entire accuracy conveys the

impression of general truthfulness. Similarly, the sketch of Zacharias

and Elisabeth is true to the history of the time - though Zacharias

could not have been one of the 'learned,' nor to the Rabbinists, a

model priest. They would have described him as an 'idiot,'[659]659 or

common, and as an Amha-arets, a 'rustic' priest, and treated him with

benevolent contempt.[660]660 The Angelic apparition, which he saw, was

wholly unprecedented, and could therefore not have lain within range

of common expectation; though the possibility, or rather the fear, of

some contact with the Divine was always present to the popular mind.

But it is difficult to conceive how, if not true, the invention of

such a vision in such circumstances could have suggested itself. This

difficulty is enhanced by the obvious difference between the Evangelic

narrative, and the popular ideas of the time. Far too much importance

has here been attached by a certain class of writers to a Rabbinic

saying,[661]661 that the names of the Angels were brought from

Babylon. For, not only was this saying (of Ben Lakish) only a clever

Scriptural deduction (as the context shows), and not even an actual

tradition, but no competent critic would venture to lay down the

principle, that isolated Rabbinic sayings in the Talmud are to be

regarded as sufficient foundation for historical facts. On the other

hand, Rabbinic tradition does lay it down, that the names of the

Angels were derived from their mission, and might be changed with it.

Thus the reply of the Angel to the inquiry of Manoah[662]662 is

explained as implying, that he knew not what other name might be given

him in the future. In the Book of Daniel, to which the son of Lakish

refers, the only two Angelic names mentioned are Gabriel[663]663 and

Michael,[664]664 while the appeal to the Book of Daniel, as evidence

of the Babylonish origin of Jewish Angelology, comes with strange

inconsistency from writers who date it in Maccabean times.[665]665 But

the question of Angelic nomenclature is quite secondary. The real

point at issue is, whether or not the Angelology and Demonology of the

New Testament was derived from contemporary Judaism. The opinion, that

such was the case, has been so dogmatically asserted, as to have

almost passed among a certain class as a settled fact. That

nevertheless such was not the case, is capable of the most ample

proof. Here also, with similarity of form, slighter than usually,

there is absolutely contrast of substance.[666]666

Admitting that the names of Gabriel and Michael must have been

familiar to the mind of Zacharias, some not unimportant differences

must be kept in view. Thus, Gabriel was regarded in tradition as

inferior to Michael; and, though both were connected with Israel,

Gabriel was represented as chiefly the minister of justice, and

Michael of mercy; while, thirdly, Gabriel was supposed to stand on the

left, and not (as in the Evangelic narrative) on the right, side of

the throne of glory. Small as these divergences may seem, they are all

important, when derivation of one set of opinions from another is in

question. Finally, as regarded the coming of Elijah as forerunner of

the Messiah, it is to be observed that, according to Jewish notions,

he was to appear personally, and not merely 'in spirit and power.' In

fact, tradition represents his ministry and appearances as almost

continuous - not only immediately before the coming of Messiah, but at

all times. Rabbinic writings introduce him on the scene, not only

frequently, but on the most incongruous occasions, and for the most

diverse purposes. In this sense it is said of him, that he always

liveth.[667]667 Sometimes, indeed, he is blamed, as for the closing

words in his prayer about the turning of the heart of the

people,[668]668 and even his sacrifice on Carmel was only excused on

the ground of express command.[669]669 But his great activity as

precursor of the Messiah is to resolve doubts of all kinds; to

reintroduce those who had been violently and improperly extruded from

the congregation of Israel, and vice-versa; to make peace; while,

finally, he was connected with the raising of the dead.[670]670

[671]671 But nowhere is he prominently designated as intended 'to make

ready for the Lord a people prepared.'[672]672

Thus, from whatever source the narrative may be supposed to have been

derived, its details certainly differ, in almost all particulars, from

the theological notions current at the time. And the more Zacharias

meditated on this in the long solitude of his enforced silence, the

more fully must new spiritual thoughts have come to him. As for

Elisabeth, those tender feelings of woman, which ever shrink from the

disclosure of the dearest secret of motherhood, were intensely

deepened and sanctified in the knowledge of all that had passed.

Little as she might understand the full meaning of the future, it must

have been to her, as if she also now stood in the Holy Place, gazing

towards the Veil which concealed the innermost Presence. Meantime she

was content with, nay, felt the need of, absolute retirement from

other fellowship than that of God and her own heart. Like her husband,

she too would be silent and alone - till another voice called her

forth. Whatever the future might bring, sufficient for the present,

that thus the Lord had done to her, in days in which He looked down to

remove her reproach among men. The removal of that burden, its manner,

its meaning, its end, were all from God, and with God; and it was

fitting to be quite alone and silent, till God's voice would again

wake the echoes within. And so five months passed in absolute

retirement.

CHAPTER IV.

THE ANNUNCIATION OF JESUS THE MESSIAH, AND THE BIRTH OF HIS

FORERUNNER.

(St. Matt. i.; St. Luke i. 26-80.)

FROM the Temple to Nazareth! It seems indeed most fitting that the

Evangelic story should have taken its beginning within the Sanctuary,

and at the time of sacrifice. Despite its outward veneration for them,

the Temple, its services, and specially its sacrifices, were, by an

inward logical necessity, fast becoming a superfluity for Rabbinism.

But the new development, passing over the intruded elements, which

were, after all, of rationalistic origin, connected its beginning

directly with the Old Testament dispensation - its sacrifices,

priesthood, and promises. In the Sanctuary, in connection with

sacrifice, and through the priesthood - such was significantly the

beginning of the era of fulfillment. And so the great religious

reformation of Israel under Samuel had also begun in the Tabernacle,

which had so long been in the background. But if, even in this

Temple-beginning, and in the communication to, and selection of an

idiot 'priest,' there was marked divergence from the Rabbinic ideal,

that difference widens into the sharpest contrast, as we pass from the

Forerunner to the Messiah, from the Temple to Galilee, from the

'idiot' priest to the humble, unlettered family of Nazareth. It is

necessary here to recall our general impression of Rabbinism: its

conception of God,[673]673 and of the highest good and ultimate object

of all things, as concentrated in learned study, pursued in Academies;

and then to think of the unmitigated contempt with which they were

wont to speak of Galilee, and of the Galileans, whose very patois was

an offence; of the utter abhorrence with which they regarded the

unlettered country-people, in order to realise, how such an household

as that of Joseph and Mary would be regarded by the leaders of Israel.

A Messianic announcement, not the result of learned investigation, nor

connected with the Academies, but in the Sanctuary, to a 'rustic'

priest; an Elijah unable to untie the intellectual or ecclesiastical

knots, of whose mission, indeed, this formed no part at all; and a

Messiah, the offspring of a Virgin in Galilee betrothed to a humble

workman - assuredly, such a picture of the fulfillment of Israel's

hope could never have been conceived by contemporary Judaism. There

was in such a Messiah absolutely nothing - past, present, or possible;

intellectually, religiously, or even nationally - to attract, but all

to repel. And so we can, at the very outset of this history,

understand the infinite contrast which it embodied - with all the

difficulties to its reception, even to those who became disciples, as

at almost every step of its progress they were, with ever fresh

surprise, recalled from all that they had formerly thought, to that

which was so entirely new and strange.

And yet, just as Zacharias may be described as the representative of

the good and the true in the Priesthood at that time, so the family of

Nazareth as a typical Israelitish household. We feel, that the

scantiness of particulars here supplied by the Gospels, was intended

to prevent the human interest from overshadowing the grand central

Fact, to which alone attention was to be directed. For, the design of

the Gospels was manifestly not to furnish a biography of Jesus the

Messiah,[674]674 but, in organic connection with the Old Testament, to

tell the history of the long-promised establishment of the Kingdom of

God upon earth. Yet what scanty details we possess of the 'Holy

Family' and its surroundings may here find a place.

The highlands which form the central portion of Palestine are broken

by the wide, rich plain of Jezreel, which severs Gailee from the rest

of the land. This was always the great battle-field of Israel.

Appropriately, it is shut in as between mountain-walls. That along the

north of the plain is formed by the mountains of Lower Galilee, cleft

about the middle by a valley that widens, till, after an hour's

journey, we stand within an enclosure which seems almost one of

Nature's own sanctuaries. As in an amphitheatre, fifteen hill-tops

rise around. That to the west is the highest - about 500 feet. On its

lower slopes nestles a little town, its narrow streets ranged like

terraces. This is Nazareth, probably the ancient Sarid (or En-Sarid),

which, in the time of Joshua, marked the northern boundary of

Zebulun.[675]675 [676]676

Climbing this steep hill, fragrant with aromatic plants, and bright

with rich-coloured flowers, a view almost unsurpassed opens before us.

For, the Galilee of the time of Jesus was not only of the richest

fertility, cultivated to the utmost, and thickly covered with populous

towns and villages, but the centre of every known industry, and the

busy road of the world's commerce. Northward the eye would sweep over

a rich plain; rest here and there on white towns, glittering in the

sunlight; then quickly travel over the romantic hills and glens which

form the scenes of Solomon's Song, till, passing beyond Safed (the

Tsephath of the Rabbis - the 'city set on a hill'), the view is

bounded by that giant of the far-off mountain-chain, snow-tipped

Hermon. Westward stretched a like scene of beauty and wealth - a land

not lonely, but wedded; not desolate, but teeming with life; while, on

the edge of the horizon, lay purple Carmel; beyond it a fringe of

silver sand, and then the dazzling sheen of the Great Sea. In the

farthest distance, white sails, like wings outspread towards the ends

of the world; nearer, busy ports; then, centres of industry; and close

by, travelled roads, all bright in the pure Eastern air and rich glow

of the sun. But if you turned eastwards, the eye would soon be

arrested by the wooded height of Tabor, yet not before attention had

been riveted by the long, narrow string of fantastic caravans, and

curiosity roused by the motley figures, of all nationalities and in

all costumes, busy binding the East to the West by that line of

commerce that passed along the route winding around Tabor. And when,

weary with the gaze, you looked once more down on little Nazareth

nestling on the breast of the mountain, the eye would rest on a scene

of tranquil, homely beauty. Just outside the town, in the north-west,

bubbled the spring or well, the trysting-spot of townspeople, and

welcome resting-place of travellers. Beyond it stretched lines of

houses, each with its flat roof standing out distinctly against the

clear sky; watered, terraced gardens, gnarled wide-spreading figtrees,

graceful feathery palms, scented oranges, silvery olive-trees, thick

hedges, rich pasture-land, then the bounding hills to the south; and

beyond, the seemingly unbounded expanse of the wide plain of

Esdraelon!

And yet, withdrawn from the world as, in its enclosure of mountains,

Nazareth might seem, we must not think of it as a lonely village which

only faint echoes reached of what roused the land beyond. With

reverence be it said: such a place might have suited the training of

the contemplative hermit, not the upbringing of Him Whose sympathies

were to be with every clime and race. Nor would such an abode have

furnished what (with all due acknowledgment of the supernatural) we

mark as a constant, because a rationally necessary, element in

Scripture history: that of inward preparedness in which the higher and

the Divine afterwards find their ready points of contact.

Nor was it otherwise in Nazareth. The two great interests which

stirred the land, the two great factors in the religious future of

Israel, constantly met in the retirement of Nazareth. The great

caravan-route which led from Acco on the sea to Damascus divided at

its commencement into three roads: the most northern passing through

Cæsarea Philippi; the Upper Galilean; and the Lower Galilean. The

latter, the ancient Via Maris led through Nazareth, and thence either

by Cana, or else along the northern shoulder of Mount Tabor, to the

Lake of Gennesaret - each of these roads soon uniting with the Upper

Galilean.[677]677 Hence, although the stream of commerce between Acco

and the East was divided into three channels, yet, as one of these

passed through Nazareth, the quiet little town was not a stagnant pool

of rustic seclusion. Men of all nations, busy with another life than

that of Israel, would appear in the streets of Nazareth; and through

them thoughts, associations, and hopes connected with the great

outside world be stirred. But, on the other hand, Nazareth was also

one of the great centers of Jewish Temple-life. It has already been

indicated that the Priesthood was divided into twenty-four 'courses,'

which, in turn, ministered in the Temple. The Priests of the 'course'

which was to be on duty always gathered in certain towns, whence they

went up in company to Jerusalem, while those of their number who were

unable to go spent the week in fasting and prayer. Now Nazareth was

one of these Priest-centres,[678]678 and although it may well have

been, that comparatively few in distant Galilee conformed to the

Priestly regulations - some must have assembled there in preparation

for the sacred functions, or appeared in its Synagogue. Even the fact,

so well known to all, of this living connection between Nazareth and

the Temple, must have wakened peculiar feelings. Thus, to take the

wider view, a double symbolic significance attached to Nazareth, since

through it passed alike those who carried on the traffic of the world,

and those who ministered in the Temple.[679]679

We may take it, that the people of Nazareth were like those of other

little towns similarly circumstanced:[680]680 with all the

peculiarities of the impulsive, straight-spoken, hot-blooded, brave,

intensely national Galileans;[681]681 with the deeper feelings and

almost instinctive habits of thought and life, which were the outcome

of long centuries of Old Testament training; but also with the petty

interest and jealousies of such places, and with all the ceremonialism

and punctilious self-assertion of Orientals. The cast of Judaism

prevalent in Nazareth would, of course, be the same as in Galilee

generally. We know, that there were marked divergences from the

observances in that stronghold of Rabbinism,[682]682 Judæa -

indicating greater simplicity and freedom from the constant intrusion

of traditional ordinances. The home-life would be all the purer, that

the veil of wedded life was not so coarsely lifted as in Judæa, nor

its sacred secrecy interfered with by an Argus-eyed

legislation.[683]683 The purity of betrothal in Galilee was less

likely to be sullied,[684]684 and weddings were more simple than in

Judæa - without the dubious institution of groomsmen,[685]685 [686]686

or 'friends of the bridegroom'[687]687 whose office must not

unfrequently have degenerated into utter coarseness. The bride was

chosen, not as in Judæa, where money was too often the motive, but as

in Jerusalem, with chief regard to 'a fair degree;' and widows were

(as in Jerusalem) more tenderly cared for, as we gather even from the

fact, that they had a life-right of residence in their husband's

house.

Such a home was that to which Joseph was about to bring the maiden, to

whom he had been betrothed. Whatever view may be taken of the

genealogies in the Gospels according to St. Matthew and St. Luke -

whether they be regarded as those of Joseph and of Mary,[688]688 or,

which seems the more likely,[689]689 as those of Joseph only, marking

his natural and his legal descent[690]690 from David, or vice

versâ[691]691 - there can be no question, that both Joseph and Mary

were of the royal lineage of David.[692]692 Most probably the two were

nearly related,[693]693 while Mary could also claim kinship with the

Priesthood, being, no doubt on her mother's side, a 'blood-relative'

of Elisabeth, the Priest-wife of Zacharias.[694]694 [695]695 Even this

seems to imply, that Mary's family must shortly before have held

higher rank, for only with such did custom sanction any alliance on

the part of Priests.[696]696 But at the time of their betrothal, alike

Joseph and Mary were extremely poor, as appears - not indeed from his

being a carpenter, since a trade was regarded as almost a religious

duty - but from the offering at the presentation of Jesus in the

Temple.[697]697 Accordingly, their betrothal must have been of the

simplest, and the dowry settled the smallest possible.[698]698

Whichever of the two modes of betrothal[699]699 may have been adopted:

in the presence of witnesses - either by solemn word of mouth, in due

prescribed formality, with the added pledge of a piece of money,

however small, or of money's worth for use; or else by writing (the

so-called Shitre Erusin) - there would be no sumptuous feast to

follow; and the ceremony would conclude with some such benediction as

that afterwards in use: 'Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the

World, Who hath sanctified us by His Commandments, and enjoined us

about incest, and forbidden the betrothed, but allowed us those wedded

by Chuppah (the marriage-baldachino) and betrothal. Blessed art Thou,

Who sanctifiest Israel by Chuppah and betrothal' - the whole being

perhaps concluded by a benediction over the statutory cup of wine,

which was tasted in turn by the betrothed. From that moment Mary was

the betrothed wife of Joseph; their relationship as sacred, as if they

had already been wedded. Any breach of it would be treated as

adultery; nor could the band be dissolved except, as after marriage,

by regular divorce. Yet months might intervene between the betrothal

and marriage.[700]700

Five months of Elisabeth's sacred retirement had passed, when a

strange messenger brought its first tidings to her kinswoman in

far-off Galilee. It was not in the solemn grandeur of the Temple,

between the golden altar of incense and the seven-branched

candlesticks that the Angel Gabriel now appeared, but in the privacy

of a humble home at Nazareth. The greatest honor bestowed on man was

to come amidst circumstances of deepest human lowliness, as if the

more clearly to mark the exclusively Divine character of what was to

happen. And, although the awe of the Supernatural must unconsciously

have fallen upon her, it was not so much the sudden appearance of the

mysterious stranger in her retirement that startled the maiden, as the

words of his greeting, implying unthought blessing. The 'Peace to

thee'[701]701 was, indeed, the well-known salutation, while the words,

'The Lord is with thee' might waken the remembrance of the Angelic

call, to great deliverance in the past.[702]702 But this designation

of 'highly favored'[703]703 came upon her with bewildering surprise,

perhaps not so much from its contrast to the humbleness of her estate,

as from the self-conscious humility of her heart. And it was intended

so, for of all feelings this would now most become her. Accordingly,

it is this story of special 'favour' or grace, which the Angel traces

in rapid outline, from the conception of the Virgin-Mother to the

distinctive, Divinely-given Name, symbolic of the meaning of His

coming; His absolute greatness; His acknowledgment as the Son of God;

and the fulfillment in Him of the great Davidic hope, with its

never-ceasing royalty,[704]704 and its never-ending, boundless

Kingdom.[705]705

In all this, however marvellous, there could be nothing strange to

those who cherished in their hearts Israel's great hope, not merely as

an article of abstract belief, but as matter of certain fact - least

of all to the maiden of the lineage of David, betrothed to him of the

house and lineage of David. So long as the hand of prophetic blessing

rested on the house of David, and before its finger had pointed to the

individual who 'found favor' in the highest sense, the consciousness

of possibilities, which scarce dared shape themselves into definite

thoughts, must at times have stirred nameless feelings - perhaps the

more often in circumstances of outward depression and humility, such

as those of the 'Holy Family.' Nor was there anything strange even in

the naming of the yet unconceived Child. It sounds like a saying

current among the people of old, this of the Rabbis,[706]706

concerning the six whose names were given before their birth: Isaac,

Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and 'the Name of the Messiah, Whom

may the Holy One, blessed be His Name, bring quickly in our

days!'[707]707 But as for the deeper meaning of the name

Jesus,[708]708 which, like an unopened bud, enclosed the flower of His

Passion, that was mercifully yet the unthought-of secret of that

sword, which should pierce the soul of the Virgin-Mother, and which

only His future history would lay open to her and to others.

Thus, on the supposition of the readiness of her believing heart, and

her entire self-unconsciousness, it would have been only the glorious

announcement of the impending event, which would absorb her thinking -

with nothing strange about it, or that needed further light, than the

how of her own connection with it.[709]709 And the words, which she

spake, were not of trembling doubt, that required to lean on the staff

of a 'sign,' but rather those of enquiry, for the further guidance of

a willing self-surrender. The Angel had pointed her opened eyes to the

shining path: that was not strange; only, that She should walk in it,

seemed so. And now the Angel still further unfolded it in words which,

however little she may have understood their full meaning, had again

nothing strange about them, save once more that she should be thus

'favoured;' words which, even to her understanding, must have carried

yet further thoughts of Divine favour, and so deepened her humility.

For, the idea of the activity of the Holy Ghost in all great events

was quite familiar to Israel at the time,[710]710 even though the

Individuation of the Holy Ghost may not have been fully apprehended.

Only, that they expected such influences to rest exclusively upon

those who were either mighty, or rich, or wise.[711]711 And of this

twofold manifestation of miraculous 'favour' - that she, and as a

Virgin, should be its subject - Gabriel, 'the might of God,' gave this

unasked sign, in what had happened to her kinswoman Elisabeth.

The sign was at the same time a direction. The first, but also the

ever-deepening desire in the heart of Mary, when the Angel left her,

must have been to be away from Nazareth, and for the relief of opening

her heart to a woman, in all things like-minded, who perhaps might

speak blessed words to her. And to such an one the Angel himself

seemed to have directed her. It is only what we would have expected,

that 'with haste' she should have resorted to her kinswoman, without

loss of time, and before she would speak to her betrothed of what even

in wedded life is the first secret whispered.[712]712

It could have been no ordinary welcome that would greet the

Virgin-Mother, on entering the house of her kinswoman. Elisabeth must

have learnt from her husband the destiny of their son, and hence the

near Advent of the Messiah. But she could not have known either when,

or of whom He would be born. When, by a sign not quite strange to

Jewish expectancy,[713]713 she recognised in her near kinswoman the

Mother of her Lord, her salutation was that of a mother to a mother -

the mother of the 'preparer' to the mother of Him for Whom he would

prepare. To be more precise: the words which, filled with the Holy

Ghost, she spake, were the mother's utterance, to the mother, of the

homage which her unborn babe offered to his Lord; while the answering

hymn of Mary was the offering of that homage unto God. It was the

antiphonal morning-psalmody of the Messianic day as it broke, of which

the words were still all of the old dispensation,[714]714 but their

music of the new; the keynote being that of 'favour,' 'grace,' struck

by the Angel in his first salutation: 'favour' to the Virgin;[715]715

'favour,' eternal 'favour' to all His humble and poor ones;[716]716

and 'favour' to Israel, stretching in golden line from the calling of

Abraham to the glorious future that now opened.[717]717 Not one of

these fundamental ideas but lay strictly within the range of the Old

Testament; and yet all of them now lay beyond it, bathed in the golden

light of the new day. Miraculous it all is, and professes to be; not

indeed in the connection of these events, which succeed each other

with psychological truthfulness; nor yet in their language, which is

of the times and the circumstances; but in the underlying

facts.[718]718 And for these there can be no other evidence than the

Life, the Death, and the Resurrection of Jesus the Messiah. If He was

such, and if He really rose from the dead, then, with all soberness

and solemnity, such inception of His appearance seems almost a logical

necessity. But of this whole narrative it may be said, that such

inception of the Messianic appearance, such announcement of it, and

such manner of His Coming, could never have been invented by

contemporary Judaism; indeed, ran directly counter to all its

preconceptions.[719]719

Three months had passed since the Virgin-Mother entered the home of

her kinswoman. And now she must return to Nazareth. Soon Elisabeth's

neighbours and kinsfolk would gather with sympathetic joy around a

home which, as they thought, had experienced unexpected mercy - little

thinking, how wide-reaching its consequences would be. But the

Virgin-Mother must not be exposed to the publicity of such meetings.

However conscious of what had led to her condition, it must have been

as the first sharp pang of the sword which was to pierce her soul,

when she told it all to her betrothed. For, however deep his trust in

her whom he had chosen for wife, only a direct Divine communication

could have chased all questioning from his heart, and given him that

assurance, which was needful in the future history of the Messiah.

Brief as, with exquisite delicacy, the narrative is, we can read in

the 'thoughts' of Joseph the anxious contending of feelings, the

scarcely established, and yet delayed, resolve to 'put her away,'

which could only be done by regular divorce; this one determination

only standing out clearly, that, if it must be, her letter of divorce

shall be handed to her privately, only in the presence of two

witnesses. The humble Tsaddiq of Nazareth would not willingly have

brought the blush to any face, least of all would he make of her 'a

public exhibition of shame.'[720]720 It was a relief that he could

legally divorce her either publicly or privately, whether from change

of feeling, or because he had found just cause for it, but hesitated

to make it known, either from regard for his own character, or because

he had not sufficient legal evidence[721]721 of the charge. He would

follow, all unconscious of it, the truer manly feeling of R.

Eliezar,[722]722 R. Jochanan, and R. Zera,[723]723 according to which

a man would not like to put his wife to shame before a Court of

Justice, rather than the opposite sentence of R. Meir.

The assurance, which Joseph could scarcely dare to hope for, was

miraculously conveyed to him in a dream-vision. All would now be

clear; even the terms in which he was addressed ('thou son of David'),

so utterly unusual in ordinary circumstances, would prepare him for

the Angel's message. The naming of the unborn Messiah would accord

with popular notions;[724]724 the symbolism of such a name was deeply

rooted in Jewish belief;[725]725 while the explanation of Jehoshua or

Jeshua (Jesus), as He who would save His people (primarily, as he

would understand it, Israel) from their sins, described at least one

generally expected aspect of His Mission,[726]726 although Joseph may

not have known that it was the basis of all the rest. And perhaps it

was not without deeper meaning and insight into His character, that

the Angel laid stress on this very element in His communication to

Joseph, and not to Mary.

The fact that such an announcement came to Him in a dream, would

dispose Joseph all the more readily to receive it. 'A good dream' was

one of the three things[727]727 popularly regarded as marks of God's

favour; and so general was the belief in their significance, as to

have passed into this popular saying: 'If any one sleeps seven days

without dreaming (or rather, remembering his dream for

interpretation), call him wicked' (as being unremembered of

God[728]728 [729]729). Thus Divinely set at rest, Joseph could no

longer hesitate. The highest duty towards the Virgin-Mother and the

unborn Jesus demanded an immediate marriage, which would afford not

only outward, but moral protection to both.[730]730

Viewing events, not as isolated, but as links welded in the golden

chain of the history of the Kingdom of God, 'all this' - not only the

birth of Jesus from a Virgin, nor even His symbolic Name with its

import, but also the unrestful questioning of Joseph, -

'happened'[731]731 in fulfilment[732]732 of what had been

prefigured.[733]733 The promise of a Virginborn son as a sign of the

firmness of God's covenant of old with David and his house; the now

unfolded meaning of the former symbolic name Immanuel; even the

unbelief of Ahaz, with its counterpart in the questioning of Joseph -

'all this' could now be clearly read in the light of the breaking day.

Never had the house of David sunk morally lower than when, in the

words of Ahaz, it seemed to renounce the very foundation of its claim

to continuance; never had the fortunes of the house of David fallen

lower, than when a Herod sat on its throne, and its lineal

representative was a humble village carpenter, from whose heart doubts

of the Virgin-Mother had to be Divinely chased. And never, not even

when God gave to the doubts of Moses this as the sign of Israel's

future deliverance, that in that mountain they should worship[734]734

- had unbelief been answered by more strange evidence. But as,

nevertheless, the stability of the Davidic house was ensured by the

future advent of Immanuel - and with such certainty, that before even

such a child could discern between choice of good and evil, the land

would be freed of its dangers; so now all that was then prefigured was

to become literally true, and Israel to be saved from its real danger

by the Advent of Jesus, Immanuel.[735]735 And so it had all been

intended. The golden cup of prophecy which Isaiah had placed empty on

the Holy Table, waiting for the time of the end, was now full filled,

up to its brim, with the new wine of the Kingdom.

Meanwhile the long-looked-for event had taken place in the home of

Zacharias. No domestic solemnity so important or so joyous as that in

which, by circumcision, the child had, as it were, laid upon it the

yoke of the Law, with all of duty and privilege which this implied.

Even the circumstance, that it took place at early morning[736]736

might indicate this. It was, so tradition has it, as if the father had

acted sacrificially as High-Priest,[737]737 offering his child to God

in gratitude and love;[738]738 and it symbolised this deeper moral

truth, that man must by his own act complete what God had first

instituted.[739]739 To Zacharias and Elisabeth the rite would have

even more than this significance, as administered to the child of

their old age, so miraculously given, and who was connected with such

a future. Besides, the legend which associates circumcision with

Elijah, as the restorer of this rite in the apostate period of the

Kings of Israel,[740]740 was probably in circulation at the

time.[741]741 We can scarcely be mistaken in supposing, that then, as

now, a benediction was spoken before circumcision, and that the

ceremony closed with the usual grace over the cup of wine,[742]742

when the child received his name in a prayer that probably did not

much differ from this at present in use: 'Our God, and the God of our

fathers, raise up this child to his father and mother, and let his

name be called in Israel Zacharias, the son of Zacharias.[743]743 Let

his father rejoice in the issue of his loins, and his mother in the

fruit of her womb, as it is written in Prov. xxiii. 25, and as it is

said in Ezek. xvi. 6, and again in Ps. cv. 8, and Gen. xxi. 4;' the

passages being, of course, quoted in full. The prayer closed with the

hope that the child might grow up, and successfully, 'attain to the

Torah, the marriagebaldachino, and good works.'[744]744

Of all this Zacharias was, though a deeply interested, yet a deaf and

dumb[745]745 witness. This only had he noticed, that, in the

benediction in which the child's name was inserted, the mother had

interrupted the prayer. Without explaining her reason, she insisted

that his name should not be that of his aged father, as in the

peculiar circumstances might have been expected, but John (Jochanan).

A reference to the father only deepened the general astonishment, when

he also gave the same name. But this was not the sole cause for

marvel. For, forthwith the tongue of the dumb was loosed, and he, who

could not utter the name of the child, now burst into praise of the

name of the Lord. His last words had been those of unbelief, his first

were those of praise; his last words had been a question of doubt, his

first were a hymn of assurance. Strictly Hebrew in its cast, and

closely following Old Testament prophecy, it is remarkable - and yet

almost natural - that this hymn of the Priest closely follows, and, if

the expression be allowable, spiritualises a great part of the most

ancient Jewish prayer: the so-called Eighteen Benedictions; rather

perhaps, that it transforms the expectancy of that prayer into praise

of its realisation. And if we bear in mind, that a great portion of

these prayers was said by the Priests before the lot was cast for

incensing, or by the people in the time of incesing, it almost seems

as if, during the long period of his enforced solitude, the aged

Priest had meditated on, and learned to understand, what so often he

had repeated. Opening with the common form of benediction, his hymn

struck, one by one, the deepest chords of that prayer, specially this

the most significant of all (the fifteenth Eulogy), 'Speedily make to

shoot forth the Branch[746]746 of David, Thy servant, and exalt Thou

his horn by Thy salvation, for in Thy salvation we trust all the day

long. Blessed art Thou, Jehovah! Who causeth to spring forth the Horn

of Salvation' (literally, to branch forth). This analogy between the

hymn of Zacharias and the prayers of Israel will best appear from the

benedictions with which these eulogies closed. For, when thus

examined, their leading thoughts will be found to be as follows: God

as the Shield of Abraham; He that raises the dead, and causes

salvation to shoot forth; the Holy One; Who graciously giveth

knowledge; Who taketh pleasure in repentance; Who multiplieth

forgiveness; Who redeemeth Israel; Who healeth their (spiritual)

diseases; Who blesseth the years; Who gathereth the outcasts of His

people; Who loveth righteousness and judgment; Who is the abode and

stay of the righteous; Who buildeth Jerusalem; Who causeth the Horn of

Salvation to shoot forth; Who heareth prayer; Who bringeth back His

Shekhinah to Zion; God the Gracious One, to Whom praise is due; Who

blesseth His people Israel with peace.[747]747

It was all most fitting. The question of unbelief had struck the

Priest dumb, for most truly unbelief cannot speak; and the answer of

faith restored to him speech, for most truly does faith loosen the

tongue. The first evidence of his dumbness had been, that his tongue

refused to speak the benediction to the people; and the first evidence

of his restored power was, that he spoke the benediction of God in a

rapturous burst of praise and thanksgiving. The sign of the unbeliving

Priest standing before the awe-struck people, vainly essaying to make

himself understood by signs, was most fitting; most fitting also that,

when 'they made signs' to him, the believing father should burst in

their hearing into a prophetic hymn.

But far and wide, as these marvellous tidings spread throughout the

hill-country of Judæa, fear fell on all - the fear also of a nameless

hope. The silence of a long-clouded day had been broken, and the light

which had suddenly riven its gloom, laid itself on their hearts in

expectancy: 'What then shall this Child be? For the Hand of the Lord

also was with Him!'[748]748

CHAPTER V.

WHAT MESSIAH DID THE JEWS EXPECT?

It were an extremely narrow, and, indeed, false view, to regard the

difference between Judaism and Christianity as confined to the

question of the fulfillment of certain prophecies in Jesus of

Nazareth. These predictions could only outline individual features in

the Person and history of the Messiah. It is not thus that a likeness

is recognised, but rather by the combination of the various features

into a unity, and by the expression which gives it meaning. So far as

we can gather from the Gospel narratives, no objection was ever taken

to the fulfillment of individual prophecies in Jesus. But the general

conception which the Rabbis had formed of the Messiah, differed

totally from what was presented by the Prophet of Nazareth. Thus, what

is the fundamental divergence between the two may be said to have

existed long before the events which finally divided them. It is the

combination of letters which constitute words, and the same letters

may be combined into different words. Similarly, both Rabbinism and -

what, by anticipation, we designate - Christianity might regard the

same predictions as Messianic, and look for their fulfillment; while

at the same time the Messianic ideal of the Synagogue might be quite

other than that, to which the faith and hope of the Church have clung.

1. The most important point here is to keep in mind the organic unity

of the Old Testament. Its predictions are not isolated, but features

of one grand prophetic picture; its ritual and institutions parts of

one great system; its history, not loosely connected events, but an

organic development tending towards a definite end. Viewed in its

innermost substance, the history of the Old Testament is not different

from its typical institutions, nor yet these two from its predictions.

The idea, underlying all, is God's gracious manifestation in the world

- the Kingdom of God; the meaning of all - the establishment of this

Kingdom upon earth. That gracious purpose was, so to speak,

individualized, and the Kingdom actually established in the Messiah.

Both the fundamental and the final relationship in view was that of

God towards man, and of man towards God: the former as expressed by

the word Father; the latter by that of Servant - or rather the

combination of the two ideas: 'Son-Servant.' This was already implied

in the so-called Protevangel;[749]749 and in this sense also the words

of Jesus hold true: 'Before Abraham came into being, I am.'

But, narrowing our survey to where the history of the Kingdom of God

begins with that of Abraham, it was indeed as Jesus said: 'Your father

Abraham rejoiced that he should see My day, and he saw it, and was

glad.'[750]750 For, all that followed from Abraham to the Messiah was

one, and bore this twofold impress: heavenwards, that of Son;

earthwards, that of Servant. Israel was God's Son - His 'first-born;'

their history that of the children of God; their institutions those of

the family of God; their predictions those of the household of God.

And Israel was also the Servant of God - 'Jacob My Servant;' and its

history, institutions, and predictions those of the Servant of the

Lord. Yet not merely Servant, but Son-Servant - 'anointed' to such

service. This idea was, so to speak, crystallised in the three great

representative institutions of Israel. The 'Servant of the Lord' in

relation to Israel's history was Kingship in Israel; the 'Servant of

the Lord' in relation to Israel's ritual ordinances was the Priesthood

in Israel; the 'Servant of the Lord' in relation to prediction was the

Prophetic order. But all sprang from the same fundamental idea: that

of the 'Servant of Jehovah.'

One step still remains. The Messiah and His history are not presented

in the Old Testament as something separate from, or superadded to,

Israel. The history, the institutions, and the predictions of Israel

run up into Him.[751]751 He is the typical Israelite, nay, typical

Israel itself - alike the crown, the completion, and the

representative of Israel. He is the Son of God and the Servant of the

Lord; but in that highest and only true sense, which had given its

meaning to all the preparatory development. As He was 'anointed' to be

the 'Servant of the Lord,' not with the typical oil, but by 'the

Spirit of Jehovah' 'upon' Him, so was He also the 'Son' in a unique

sense. His organic connection with Israel is marked by the

designations 'Seed of Abraham' and 'Son of David,' while at the same

time He was essentially, what Israel was subordinately and typically:

'Thou art My Son - this day have I begotten Thee.' Hence also, in

strictest truthfulness, the Evangelist could apply to the Messiah what

referred to Israel, and see it fulfilled in His history: 'Out of Egypt

have I called my Son.'[752]752 And this other correlate idea, of

Israel as 'the Servant of the Lord,' is also fully concentrated in the

Messiah as the Representative Israelite, so that the Book of Isaiah,

as the series of predictions in which His picture is most fully

outlined, might be summarised as that concerning 'the Servant of

Jehovah.' Moreover, the Messiah, as Representative Israelite, combined

in Himself as 'the Servant of the Lord' the threefold office of

Prophet, Priest, and King, and joined together the two ideas of 'Son'

and 'Servant.'[753]753 And the final combination and full exhibition

of these two ideas was the fulfillment of the typical mission of

Israel, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God among men.

Thus, in its final, as in its initial,[754]754 stage it was the

establishment of the Kingdom of God upon earth - brought about by the

'Servant' of the Lord, Who was to stricken humanity the God-sent

'Anointed Comforter' (Mashiach ha-Menachem): in this twofold sense of

'Comforter' of individuals ('the friend of sinners'), and 'Comforter'

of Israel and of the world, reconciling the two, and bringing to both

eternal salvation. And here the mission of Israel ended. It had passed

through three stages. The first, or historical, was the preparation of

the Kingdom of God; the second, or ritual, the typical presentation of

that Kingdom; while the third, or prophetic, brought that Kingdom into

actual contact with the kingdoms of the world. Accordingly, it is

during the latter that the designation 'Son of David' (typical Israel)

enlarged in the visions of Daniel into that of 'Son of Man' (the Head

of redeemed humanity). It were a onesided view to regard the

Babylonish exile as only a punishment for Israel's sin. There is, in

truth, nothing in all God's dealings in history exclusively punitive.

That were a merely negative element. But there is always a positive

element also of actual progress; a step forward, even though in the

taking of it something should have to be crushed. And this step

forward was the development of the idea of the Kingdom of God in its

relation to the world.

2. This organic unity of Israel and the Messiah explains how events,

institutions, and predictions, which initially were purely

Israelitish, could with truth be regarded as finding their full

accomplishment in the Messiah. From this point of view the whole Old

Testament becomes the perspective in which the figure of the Messiah

stands out. And perhaps the most valuable element in Rabbinic

excommentation on Messianic times is that in which, as so frequently,

it is explained, that all the miracles and deliverances of Israel's

past would be re-enacted, only in a much wider manner, in the days of

the Messiah. Thus the whole past was symbolic, and typical of the

future - the Old Testament the glass, through which the universal

blessings of the latter days were seen. It is in this sense that we

would understand the two sayings of the Talmud: 'All the prophets

prophesied only of the days of the Messiah,'[755]755 and 'The world

was created only for the Messiah.'[756]756

In accordance with all this, the ancient Synagogue found references to

the Messiah in many more passages of the Old Testament than those

verbal predictions, to which we generally appeal; and the latter

formed (as in the New Testament) a proportionately small, and

secondary, element in the conception of the Messianic era. This is

fully borne out by a detailed analysis of those passages in the Old

Testament to which the ancient Synagogue referred as

Messianic.[757]757 Their number amounts to upwards of 456 (75 from the

Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Hagiographa), and

their Messianic application is supported by more than 558 references

to the most ancient Rabbinic writings.[758]758 But comparatively few

of these are what would be termed verbal predictions. Rather would it

seem as if every event were regarded as prophetic, and every prophecy,

whether by fact, or by word (prediction), as a light to cast its sheen

on the future, until the picture of the Messianic age in the far

back-ground stood out in the hundredfold variegated brightness of

prophetic events, and prophetic utterances; or, as regarded the then

state of Israel, till the darkness of their present night was lit up

by a hundred constellations kindling in the sky overhead, and its

lonely silence broken by echoes of heavenly voices, and strains of

prophetic hymns borne on the breeze.

Of course, there was the danger that, amidst these dazzling lights, or

in the crowd of figures, each so attractive, or else in the absorbing

interest of the general picture, the grand central Personality should

not engage the attention it claimed, and so the meaning of the whole

be lost in the contemplation of its details. This danger was the

greater from the absence of any deeper spiritual elements. All that

Israel needed: 'study of the Law and good works,' lay within the reach

of every one; and all that Israel hoped for, was national restoration

and glory. Everything else was but means to these ends; the Messiah

Himself only the grand instrument in attaining them. Thus viewed, the

picture presented would be of Israel's exaltation, rather than of the

salvation of the world. To this, and to the idea of Israel's exclusive

spiritual position in the world, must be traced much, that otherwise

would seem utterly irrational in the Rabbinic pictures of the latter

days. But in such a picture there would be neither room nor occasion

for a Messiah-Saviour, in the only sense in which such a heavenly

mission could be rational, or the heart of humanity respond to it. The

Rabbinic ideal of the Messiah was not that of 'a light to lighten the

Gentiles, and the glory of His people Israel' - the satisfaction of

the wants of humanity, and the completion of Israel's mission - but

quite different, even to contrariety. Accordingly, there was a

fundamental antagonism between the Rabbis and Christ, quite

irrespective of the manner in which He carried out His Messianic work.

On the other hand, it is equally noteworthy, that the purely national

elements, which well nigh formed the sum total of Rabbinic

expectation, scarcely entered into the teaching of Jesus about the

Kingdom of God. And the more we realise, that Jesus so fundamentally

separated Himself from all the ideas of His time, the more evidential

is it of the fact, that He was not the Messiah of Jewish conception,

but derived His mission from a source unknown to, or at least ignored

by, the leaders of His people.

3. But still, as the Rabbinic ideas were at least based on the Old

Testament, we need not wonder that they also embodied the chief

features of the Messianic history. Accordingly, a careful perusal of

their Scripture quotations[759]759 shows, that the main postulates of

the New Testament concerning the Messiah are fully supported by

Rabbinic statements. Thus, such doctrines as the pre-mundane existence

of the Messiah; His elevation above Moses, and even above the Angels;

His representative character; His cruel sufferings and derision; His

violent death, and that for His people; His work on behalf of the

living and of the dead; His redemption, and restoration of Israel; the

opposition of the Gentiles; their partial judgment and conversion; the

prevalence of His Law; the universal blessings of the latter days; and

His Kingdom - can be clearly deduced from unquestioned passages in

ancient Rabbinic writings. Only, as we might expect, all is there

indistinct, incoherent, unexplained, and from a much lower standpoint.

At best, it is the lower stage of yet unfulfilled prophecy - the haze

when the sun is about to rise, not the blaze when it has risen. Most

painfully is this felt in connection with the one element on which the

New Testament most insists. There is, indeed, in Rabbinic writings

frequent reference to the sufferings, and even the death of the

Messiah, and these are brought into connection with our sins - as how

could it be otherwise in view of Isaiah liii. and other passages - and

in one most remarkable comment[760]760 the Messiah is represented as

willingly taking upon Himself all these sufferings, on condition that

all Israel - the living, the dead, and those yet unborn - should be

saved, and that, in consequence of His work, God and Israel should be

reconciled, and Satan cast into hell. But there is only the most

indistinct reference to the removal of sin by the Messiah, in the

sense of vicarious sufferings.

In connection with what has been stated, one most important point must

be kept in view. So far as their opinions can be gathered from their

writings, the great doctrines of Original Sin, and of the sinfulness

of our whole nature, were not held by the ancient Rabbis.[761]761 Of

course, it is not meant that they denied the consequences of sin,

either as concerned Adam himself, or his descendants; but the final

result is far from that seriousness which attaches to the Fall in the

New Testament, where it is presented as the basis of the need of a

Redeemer, Who, as the Second Adam, restored what the first had lost.

The difference is so fundamental as to render further explanation

necessary.[762]762

The fall of Adam is ascribed to the envy of the Angels[763]763 - not

the fallen ones, for none were fallen, till God cast them down in

consequence of their seduction of man. The Angels, having in vain

tried to prevent the creation of man, at last conspired to lead him

into sin as the only means of his ruin - the task being undertaken by

Sammael (and his Angels), who in many respects was superior to the

other Angelic princes.[764]764 The instrument employed was the

serpent, of whose original condition the strangest legends are told,

probably to make the Biblical narrative appear more rational.[765]765

The details of the story of the Fall, as told by the Rabbis, need not

be here repeated, save to indicate its consequences. The first of

these was the withdrawal of the Shekhinah from earth to the first

heaven, while subsequent sins successively led to its further removal

to the seventh heaven. This, however, can scarcely be considered a

permanent sequel of sin, since the good deeds of seven righteous men,

beginning with Abraham, brought it again, in the time of Moses, to

earth.[766]766 Six things Adam is said to have lost by his sin; but

even these are to be restored to man by the Messiah.[767]767 [768]768

That the physical death of Adam was the consequence of his sin, is

certainly taught. Otherwise he would have lived forever, like Enoch

and Elijah.[769]769 But although the fate which overtook Adam was to

rest on all the world,[770]770 and death came not only on our first

father but on his descendants, and all creation lost its

perfectness,[771]771 yet even these temporal sequences are not

universally admitted. It rather seems taught, that death was intended

to be the fate of all, or sent to show the folly of men claiming

Divine worship, or to test whether piety was real,[772]772 the more so

that with death the weary struggle with our evil inclination ceased.

It was needful to die when our work was done, that others might enter

upon it. In each case death was the consequence of our own, not of

Adam's sin.[773]773 In fact, over these six - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,

Moses, Aaron, and Miriam - the Angel of Death had had no absolute

power. Nay, there was a time when all Israel were not only free from

death, but like the Angels, and even higher than they. For, originally

God had offered the Law to all Gentile nations,[774]774 but they had

refused to submit to it.[775]775 But when Israel took on themselves

the Law at Mount Sinai, the description in Psalm 1xxxii. 6 applied

literally to them. They would not have died, and were 'the sons of

God.'[776]776 But all this was lost by the sin of making the golden

calf - although the Talmud marks that, if Israel had continued in that

Angelic state, the nation would have ceased with that

generation.[777]777 Thus there were two divergent opinions - the one

ascribing death to personal, the other tracing it to Adam's

guilt.[778]778

When, however, we pass from the physical to the moral sequences of the

fall, our Jewish authorities wholly fail us. They teach, that man is

created with two inclinations - that to evil (the Yetser ha-ra), and

that to good;[779]779 the first working in him from the beginning, the

latter coming gradually in the course of time.[780]780 Yet, so far

from guilt attaching to the Yetser ha-ra, its existence is absolutely

necessary, if the world is to continue.[781]781 In fact, as the Talmud

expressly teaches,[782]782 the evil desire or impulse was created by

God Himself; while it is also asserted[783]783 that, on seeing the

consequences, God actually repented having done so. This gives quite

another character to sin, as due to causes for which no blame attaches

to man.[784]784 On the other hand, as it is in the power of each

wholly to overcome sin, and to gain life by study and works;[785]785

as Israel at Mount Sinai had actually got rid of the Yetser ha-ra; and

as there had been those, who were entirely righteous[786]786 - there

scarcely remains any moral sequence of Adam's fall to be considered.

Similarly, the Apocrypha are silent on the subject, the only exception

being the very strong language used in II. Esdras, which dates after

the Christian era.[787]787 [788]788

4. In the absence of felt need of deliverance from sin, we can

understand, how Rabbinic tradition found no place for the Priestly

office of the Messiah, and how even His claims to be the Prophet of

His people are almost entirely overshadowed by His appearance as their

King and Deliverer. This, indeed, was the ever-present want, pressing

the more heavily as Israel's national sufferings seemed almost

inexplicable, while they contrasted so sharply with the glory expected

by the Rabbis. Whence these sufferings? From sin[789]789 - national

sin; the idolatry of former times;[790]790 the prevalence of crimes

and vices; the dereliction of God's ordinances;[791]791 the neglect of

instruction, of study, and of proper practice of His Law; and, in

later days, the love of money and party strife.[792]792 But the

seventy years' captivity had ceased, why not the present dispersion?

Because hypocrisy had been added to all other sins;[793]793 because

there had not been proper repentance;[794]794 because of the

half-heartedness of the Jewish proselytes; because of improper

marriages, and other evil customs;[795]795 and because of the gross

dissoluteness of certain cities.[796]796 The consequences appeared not

only in the political condition of Israel, but in the land itself, in

the absence of rain and dew, of fruitfulness and of plenty; in the

general disorder of society; the cessation of piety and of religious

study; and the silence of prophecy.[797]797 As significantly summed

up, Israel was without Priesthood, without law, without God.[798]798

Nay, the world itself suffered in consequence of the destruction of

the Temple. In a very remarkable passage,[799]799 where it is

explained, that the seventy bullocks offered during the Feast of

Tabernacles were for the nations of the world, R. Jochanan deplores

their fate, since while the Temple had stood the altar had atoned for

the Gentiles, but who was now to do so? The light, which had shone

from out the Temple windows into the world, had been

extinguished.[800]800 Indeed, but for the intercession of the Angels

the world would now be destroyed.[801]801 In the poetic language of

the time, the heavens, sun, moon and stars, trees and mountains, even

the Angels, mourned over the desolation of the Temple,[802]802

[803]803 and the very Angelic hosts had since been diminished.[804]804

But, though the Divine Presence had been withdrawn, it still lingered

near His own; it had followed them in all their banishments; it had

suffered with them in all their sorrows.[805]805 It is a touching

legend, which represents the Shekhinah as still lingering over the

western wall of the Temple[806]806 - the only one supposed to be still

standing.[807]807 Nay, in language still bolder, and which cannot be

fully reproduced, God Himself is represented as mourning over

Jerusalem and the Temple. He has not entered His Palace since then,

and His hair is wet with the dew.[808]808 He weeps over His children

and their desolateness,[809]809 and displays in the heavens tokens of

mourning, corresponding to those which an earthly monarch would

show.[810]810

All this is to be gloriously set right, when the Lord turneth the

captivity of Zion, and the Messiah cometh. But when may He be

expected, and what are the signs of His coming? Or perhaps the

question should thus be put: Why are the redemption of Israel and the

coming of the Messiah so unaccountably delayed? It is here that the

Synagogue finds itself in presence of an insoluble mystery. The

explanations attempted are, confessedly, guesses, or rather attempts

to evade the issue. The only course left is, authoritatively to impose

silence on all such inquiries - the silence, as they would put it, of

implicit, mournful submission to the inexplicable, in faith that

somehow, when least expected, deliverance would come; or, as we would

put it, the silence of ever-recurring disappointment and despair. Thus

the grand hope of the Synagogue is, as it were, written in an epitaph

on a broken tombstone, to be repeated by the thousands who, for these

long centuries, have washed the ruins of the Sanctuary with unavailing

tears.

5. Why delayeth the Messiah His coming? Since the brief and broken

sunshine of the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, the sky overhead has ever

grown darker, nor have even the terrible storms, which have burst over

Israel, reft the canopy of cloud. The first capitivity passed, why not

the second? This is the painful question ever and again discussed by

the Rabbis.[811]811 Can they mean it seriously, that the sins of the

second, are more grievous than those which caused the first

dispersion; or that they of the first captivity repented, but not they

of the second? What constitutes this repentance which yet remains to

be made? But the reasoning becomes absolutely self-contradictory when,

together with the assertion that, if Israel repented but one day, the

Messiah would come,[812]812 we are told, that Israel will not repent

till Elijah comes.[813]813 Besides, bold as the language is, there is

truth in the expostulation, which the Midrash[814]814 puts into the

mouth of the congregation of Israel: 'Lord of the world, it depends on

Thee that we repent.' Such truth, that, although at first the Divine

reply is a repetition of Zechar. i. 3, yet, when Israel reiterates the

words, 'Turn Thou us unto Thee, O Lord, and we shall be turned,'

supporting them by Ps lxxxv. 4, the argument proves unanswerable.

Other conditions of Israel's deliverance are, indeed, mentioned. But

we can scarcely regard the Synagogue as seriously making the coming of

Messiah dependent on their realisation. Among the most touching of

these is a beautiful passage (almost reminding us of Heb. xi.), in

which Israel's future deliverance is described as the reward of

faith.[815]815 Similarly beautiful is the thought,[816]816 that, when

God redeems Israel, it will be amidst their weeping.[817]817 But

neither can this be regarded as the condition of Messiah's coming; nor

yet such generalities as the observance of the Law, or of some special

commandments. The very variety of suggestions[818]818 [819]819 shows,

how utterly unable the Synagogue felt to indicate any condition to be

fulfilled by Israel. Such vague statements, as that the salvation of

Israel depended on the merits of the patriarchs, or on that of one of

them, cannot help us to a solution; and the long discussion in the

Talmud[820]820 leaves no doubt, that the final and most sober opinion

was, that the time of Messiah's coming depended not on repentance, nor

any other condition, but on the mercy of God, when the time fixed had

arrived. But even so, we are again thrown into doubt by the statement,

that it might be either hastened or retarded by Israel's

bearing![821]821

In these circumstances, any attempt at determining the date of

Messiah's coming would be even more hypothetical than such

calculations generally are.[822]822 Guesses on the subject could only

be grounded on imaginary symbolisms. Of such we have examples in the

Talmud.[823]823 Thus, some fixed the date at 4000 years after the

Creation - curiously enough, about the era of Christ - though Israel's

sin had blotted out the whole past from the reckoning; others at 4291

from the Creation;[824]824 others again expected it at the beginning,

or end, of the eighty-fifth Jubilee - with this proviso, that it it

would not take place earlier; and so on, through equally groundless

conjectures. A comparatively late work speaks of five monarchies -

Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome and Ishmael. During the last of

these God would hear the cry of Israel,[825]825 and the Messiah come,

after a terrible war between Rome and Ishmael (the West and the

East).[826]826 But as the rule of these monarchies was to last

altogether one day (= 1000 years), less two-thirds of an hour (1 hour

= 83 ½ years);[827]827 it would follow, that their domination would

last 944 4/9 years.[828]828 Again, according to Jewish tradition, the

rule of Babylon had lasted 70, that of Medo-Persia 34, and that of

Greece 180 years, leaving 660 4/9 years for Rome and Ishmael. Thus the

date for the expected Advent of the Messiah would have been about 661

after the destruction of Jerusalem, or about the year 729 of the

Christian era.[829]829

In the category of guesses we must also place such vague statements,

as that the Messiah would come, when all were righteous, or all

wicked; or else nine months after the empire of Rome had extended over

the whole world;[830]830 [831]831 or when all the souls, predestined

to inhabit bodies, had been on earth.[832]832 But as, after years of

unrelieved sufferings, the Synagogue had to acknowledge that, one by

one, all the terms had passed, and as despair settled on the heart of

Israel, it came to be generally thought, that the time of Messiah's

Advent could not be known beforehand,[833]833 and that speculation on

the subject was dangerous, sinful, even damnable. The time of the end

had, indeed, been revealed to two sons of Adam, Jacob and David; but

neither of them had been allowed to make it known.[834]834 In view of

this, it can scarcely be regarded as more than a symbolical, though

significant guess, when the future redemption of Israel is expected on

the Paschal Day, the 15th of Nisan.[835]835 [836]836

6. We now approach this most difficult and delicate question: What was

the expectation of the ancient Synagogue, as regarded the Nature,

Person, and qualifications of the Messiah? In answering it - not at

present from the Old Testament, but from the views expressed in

Rabinic literature, and, so far as we can gather from the

Gospel-narratives, from those cherished by the contemporaries of

Christ - two inferences seem evident. First, the idea of a Divine

Personality, and of the union of the two Natures in the Messiah, seems

to have been foreign to the Jewish auditory of Jesus of Nazareth, and

even at first to His disciples. Secondly, they appear to have regarded

the Messiah as far above the ordinary human, royal, prophetic, and

even Angelic type, to such extent, that the boundary-line separating

it from Divine Personality is of the narrowest, so that, when the

conviction of the reality of the Messianic manifestation in Jesus

burst on their minds, this boundary-line was easily, almost naturally,

overstepped, and those who would have shrunk from framing their belief

in such dogmatic form, readily owned and worshipped Him as the Son of

God. Nor need we wonder at this, even taking the highest view of Old

Testament prophecy. For here also the principle applies, which

underlies one of St. Paul's most wide-reaching utterance: 'We prophesy

in part'[837]837 (_k m_rouv profjte_omen).[838]838 In the nature of

it, all prophecy presents but disjecta, membra, and it almost seems,

as if we had to take our stand in the prophet's valley of vision

(Ezek. xxxvii.), waiting till, at the bidding of the Lord, the

scattered bones should be joined into a body, to which the breath of

the Spirit would give life.

These two inferences, derived from the Gospel-narratives, are in exact

accordance with the whole line of ancient Jewish teaching. Beginning

with the LXX. rendering of Genesis xlix. 10, and especially of Numbers

xxiv. 7, 17, we gather, that the Kingdom of the Messiah[839]839 was

higher than any that is earthly, and destined to subdue them all. But

the rendering of Psalm lxxii. 5, 7; Psalm cx. 3; and especially of

Isaiah ix., carries us much farther. They convey the idea, that the

existence of this Messiah was regarded as premundane (before the

moon,[840]840 before the morning-star[841]841), and eternal,[842]842

and His Person and dignity as superior to that of men and Angels: 'the

Angel of the Great Council,'[843]843 [844]844 probably 'the Angel of

the Face' - a view fully confirmed by the rendering of the

Targum.[845]845 The silence of the Apocrypha about the Person of the

Messiah is so strange, as to be scarcely explained by the

consideration, that those books were composed when the need of a

Messiah for the deliverance of Israel was not painfully felt.[846]846

All the more striking are the allusions in the Pseudepigraphic

Writings, although these also do not carry us beyond our two

inferences. Thus, the third book of the Sibylline Oracles - which,

with few exceptions,[847]847 dates from more than a century and a half

before Christ - presents a picture of Messianic times,[848]848

generally admitted to have formed the basis of Virgil's description of

the Golden Age, and of similar heathen expectations. In these Oracles,

170 years before Christ, the Messiah is 'the King sent from heaven'

who would 'judge every man in blood and splendour of fire.'[849]849

Similarly, the vision of Messianic times opens with a reference to

'the King Whom God will send from the sun.'[850]850 [851]851 That a

superhuman Kingdom of eternal duration, such as this vision

paints,[852]852 should have a superhuman King, seems almost a

necessary corollary.[853]853

Even more distinct are the statements in the so-called 'Book of

Enoch.' Critics are substantially agreed, that the oldest part of

it[854]854 dates from between 150 and 130 b.c.[855]855 The part next

in date is full of Messianic allusions; but, as a certain class of

modern writers has ascribed to it a post-Christian date, and, however

ungrounded,[856]856 to Christian authorship, it may be better not to

refer to it in the present argument, the more so as we have other

testimony from the time of Herod. Not to speak, therefore, of such

peculiar designations of the Messiah as 'the Woman's Son,'[857]857

'the Son of Man,'[858]858 'the Elect,' and 'the Just One,' we mark

that the Messiah is expressly designed in the oldest portion as 'the

Son of God' ('I and My Son').[859]859 That this implies, not, indeed,

essential Sonship, but infinite superiority over all other servants of

God, and rule over them, appears from the mystic description of the

Messiah as 'the first of the [now changed] white bulls,' 'the great

Animal among them, having great and black horns on His head'[860]860 -

Whom 'all the beasts of the field and all the fowls of heaven dread,

and to Whom they cry at all times.'

Still more explicit is that beautiful collection of eighteen Psalms,

dating from about half a century before Christ, which bears the name

of 'the Psalter of Solomon.' A chaste anticipation of the Messianic

Kingdom[861]861 is followed by a full description of its need and its

blessings,[862]862 to which the concluding Psalm[863]863 forms an apt

epilogue. The King Who reigns is of the house of David.[864]864 He is

the Son of David, Who comes at the time known to God only, to reign

over Israel.[865]865 He is a righteous King, taught of God.[866]866 He

is Christ the Lord. (Crist_v K_riov,[867]867 exactly as in the LXX.

translations of Lamentations iv. 20). 'He is pure from sin,' which

qualifies Him for ruling His people, and banishing sinners by His

word.[868]868 'Never in His days will He be infirm towards His God,

since God renders Him strong in the Holy Ghost,' wise in counsel, with

might and righteousness ('mighty in deed and word'). The blessingof

the Lord being upon Him, He does not fail.[869]869 'This is the beauty

of the King of Israel, Whom God hath chosen, to set Him over the house

of Israel to rule it.'[870]870 Thus invincible, not by outward might,

but in His God, He will bring His people the blessings of restoration

to their tribal possessions, and of righteousness, but break in pieces

His enemies, not by outward weapons, but by the word of His mouth;

purify Jerusalem, and judge the nations, who will be subject to His

rule, and behold and own His glory.[871]871 Manifestly, this is not an

earthly Kingdom, nor yet an earthly King.

If we now turn to works dating after the Christian era, we would

naturally expect them, either simply to reproduce earlier opinions,

or, from opposition to Christ, to present the Messiah in a less

exalted manner.[872]872 But since, strange to say, they even more

strongly assert the high dignity of the Messiah, we are warranted in

regarding this as the rooted belief of the Synagogue.[873]873 This

estimate of the Messiah may be gathered from IV Esdras,[874]874

[875]875 with which the kindred picture of the Messiah and His reign

in the Apocalypse of Baruch[876]876 may be compared. But even in

strictly Rabbinic documents, the premundane, if not the eternal

existence of the Messiah appears as matter of common belief. Such is

the view expressed in the Targum on Is. ix. 6, and in that on Micah v.

2. But the Midrash on Prov. viii. 9[877]877 expressly mentions the

Messiah among the seven things created before the world.[878]878 The

passage is the more important, as it throws light on quite a series of

others, in which the Name of the Messiah is said to have been created

before the world.[879]879 [880]880 [881]881 [882]882 Even if this were

an ideal conception, it would prove the Messiah to be elevated above

the ordinary conditions of humanity. But it means much more than this,

since not only the existence of the Messiah long before His actual

appearance, but His premundane state are clearly taught in other

places. In the Talmud[883]883 it is not only implied, that the Messiah

may already be among the living, but a strange story is related,

according to which He had actually been born in the royal palace at

Bethlehem, bore the name Menachem (Comforter), was discovered by one

R. Judan through a peculiar device, but had been carried away by a

storm. Similarly, the Babylon Talmud represents Him as sitting at the

gate of Imperial Rome.[884]884 In general, the idea of the Messiah's

appearance and concealment is familiar to Jewish tradition.[885]885

[886]886 But the Rabbis go much farther back, and declare that from

the time of Judah's marriage,[887]887 'God busied Himself with

creating the light of the Messiah,' it being significantly added that,

'before the first oppressor [Pharaoh] was born, the final deliverer

[Messiah, the son of David] was already born.'[888]888 In another

passage the Messiah is expresily identified with Anani,[889]889

[890]890 and therefore represented as pre-existent long before his

actual manifestation.[891]891 The same inference may be drawn from His

emphatic designation as the First.[892]892 Lastly, in Yalkut on Is.

lx., the words 'In Thy light shall we see light' (Ps. xxxvi. 9) are

explained as meaning, that this is the light of the Messiah, - the

same which God had at the first pronounced to be very good, and which,

before the world was created, He had hid beneath the throne of His

glory for the Messiah and His age. When Satan asked for whom it was

reserved, he was told that it was destined for Him Who would put him

to shame, and destroy him. And when, at his request, he was shown the

Messiah, he fell on his face and owned, that the Messiah would in the

future cast him and the Gentiles into Gehenna[893]893 Whatever else

may be inferred from it, this passage clearly implies not only the

pre-existence, but the premundane existence of the Messiah.[894]894

But, indeed, it carries us much farther. For, a Messiah, preexistent,

in the Presence of God, and destined to subdue Satan and cast him into

hell, could not have been regarded as an ordinary man. It is indeed

true that, as the history of Elijah, so that of the Messiah is

throughout compared with that of Moses, the 'first' with 'the last

Redeemer.' As Moses was educated at the court of Pharaoh, so the

Messiah dwells in Rome (or Edom) among His enemies.[895]895 Like Moses

He comes, withdraws, and comes again.[896]896 Like Moses He works

deliverance. But here the analogy ceases, for, whereas the redemption

by Moses was temporary and comparatively small, that of the Messiah

would be eternal and absolute. All the marvels connected with Moses

were to be intensified in the Messiah. The ass on which the Messiah

would ride - and this humble estate was only caused by Israel's

sin[897]897 - would be not only that on which Moses had come back to

Egypt, but also that which Abraham had used when he went to offer up

Isaac, and which had been specially created on the eve of the world's

first Sabbath.[898]898 Similarly, the horns of the ram caught in the

thicket, which was offered instead of Isaac, were destined for blowing

- the left one by the Almighty on Mount Sinai, the right and larger

one by the Messiah, when He would gather the outcasts of Israel (Is.

xxvii. 13).[899]899 Again, the 'rod' of the Messiah was that of Aaron,

which had budded, blossomed, and burst into fruit; as also that on

which Jacob had leaned, and which, through Judah, had passed to all

the kings of Israel, till the destruction of the Temple.[900]900 And

so the principle that 'the later Deliverer would be like the first'

was carried into every detail. As the first Deliverer brought down the

Manna, so the Messiah;[901]901 as the first Deliverer had made a

spring of water to rise, so would the second.[902]902

But even this is not all. That the Messiah had, without any

instruction, attained to knowledge of God;[903]903 and that He had

received, directly from Him, all wisdom, knowledge, counsel, and

grace,[904]904 is comparatively little, since the same was claimed for

Abraham, Job, and Hezekiah. But we are told that, when God showed

Moses all his successors, the spirit of wisdom and knowledge in the

Messiah equalled that of all the others together.[905]905 The Messiah

would be 'greater than the Patriarchs,' higher than Moses,[906]906 and

even loftier than the ministering Angels.[907]907 In view of this we

can understand, how the Midrash on Psalm xxi. 3 should apply to the

Messiah, in all its literality, that 'God would set His own crown on

His head,' and clothe Him with His 'honour and majesty.' It is only

consistent that the same Midrash should assign to the Messiah the

Divine designations: 'Jehovah is a Man of War,' and 'Jehovah our

Righteousness.'[908]908 One other quotation, from perhaps the most

spiritual Jewish commentary, must be added, reminding us of that

outburst of adoring wonder which once greeted Jesus of Nazareth. The

passage first refers to the seven garments with which God successively

robed Himself - the first of 'honour and glory,' at creation;[909]909

the second of 'majesty,' at the Red Sea;[910]910 the third of

'strength,' at the giving of the Law;[911]911 the fourth 'white,' when

He blotteth out the sins of Israel;[912]912 the fifth of 'zeal,' when

He avengeth them of their enemies;[913]913 the sixth of

'righteousness,' at the time when the Messiah should be

revealed;[914]914 and the seventh 'red,' when He would take vengeance

on Edom (Rome).[915]915 'But,' continues the commentary, 'the garment

with which in the future He will clothe the Messiah, its splendour

will extend from one end of the world to the other, as it is

written:[916]916 "As a bridegroom priestly in headgear." And Israel

are astounded at His light, and say: Blessed the hour in which the

Messiah was created; blessed the womb whence He issued; blessed the

generation that sees Him; blessed the eye that is worthy to behold

Him; because the opening of His lips is blessing and peace, and His

speech quieting of the spirit. Glory and majesty are in His appearance

(vesture), and confidence and tranquillity in His words; and on His

tongue compassion and forgiveness; His prayer is a sweet-smelling

odour, and His supplication holiness and purity. Happy Israel, what is

reserved for you! Thus it is written:[917]917 "How manifold is Thy

goodness, which Thou hast reserved to them that fear Thee."'[918]918

Such a King Messiah might well be represented as sitting at the Right

Hand of God, while Abraham was only at His left;[919]919 nay, as

throwing forth His Right Hand, while God stood up to war for

Him.[920]920

It is not without hesitation, that we make reference to Jewish

allusions to the miraculous birth of the Saviour. Yet there are two

expressions, which convey the idea, if not of superhuman origin, yet

of some great mystery attaching to His birth. The first occurs in

connection with the birth of Seth. 'Rabbi Tanchuma said, in the name

of Rabbi Samuel: Eve had respect [had regard, looked forward] to that

Seed which is to come from another place. And who is this? This is

Messiah the King.'[921]921 The second appears in the narrative of the

crime of Lot's daughters:[922]922 'It is not written "that we may

preserve a son from our father," but "seed from our father." This is

that seed which is coming from another place. And who is this? This is

the King Messiah.'[923]923 [924]924

That a superhuman character attached, if not to the Personality, yet

to the Mission of the Messiah, appears from three passages, in which

the expression, 'The Spirit of the Lord moved upon the face of the

deep,' is thus paraphrased: 'This is the Spirit of the King

Messiah.'[925]925 [926]926 Whether this implies some activity of the

Messiah in connection with creation,[927]927 or only that, from the

first, His Mission was to have a bearing on all creation, it elevates

His character and work above every other agency, human or Angelic.

And, without pressing the argument, it is at least very remarkable

that even the Ineffable Name Jehovah is expressly attributed to the

Messiah.[928]928 [929]929 The whole of this passage, beginning at p.

147 b, is very curious and deeply interesting. It would lead too far

to quote fact becomes the more significant, when we recall that one of

the most familiar names of the Messiah was Anani - He Who cometh in

the clouds of heaven.[930]930

In what has been stated, no reference has been made to the final

conquests of Messiah, to His reign with all its wonders, or to the

subdual of all nation - in short, to what are commonly called 'the

last things.' This will be treated in another connection. Nor is it

contented that, whatever individuals may have expected, the Synagogue

taught the doctrine of the Divine Personality of the Messiah, as held

by the Christian Church. On the other hand, the cumulative evidence

just presented must leave on the mind at least this conviction, that

the Messiah expected was far above the conditions of the most exalted

of God's servants, even His Angels; in short, so closely bordering on

the Divine, that it was almost impossible to distinguish Him

therefrom. In such circumstances, it only needed the personal

conviction, that He, Who taught and wrought as none other, was really

the Messiah, to kindle at His word into the adoring confession, that

He was indeed 'the Son of the Living God.' And once that point

reached, the mind, looking back through the teaching of the Synagogue,

would, with increasing clearness, perceive that, however

ill-understood in the past, this had been all along the sum of the

whole Old Testament. Thus, we can understand alike the preparedness

for, and yet the gradualness of conviction on this point; then, the

increasing clearness with which it emerged in the consciousness of the

disciples; and, finally, the unhesitating distinctness with which it

was put forward in Apostolic teaching as the fundamental article of

belief to the Church Catholic.[931]931

CHAPTER VI.

THE NATIVITY OF JESUS THE MESSIAH.

(St. Matthew i. 25; St. Luke ii. 1-20.)

SUCH then was 'the hope of the promise made of God unto the fathers,'

for which the twelve tribes, 'instantly serving (God) night and day,'

longed - with such vividness, that they read it in almost every event

and promise; with such earnestness, that it ever was the burden of

their prayers; with such intensity, that many and long centuries of

disappointment have not quenched it. Its light, comparatively dim in

days of sunshine and calm, seemed to burn brightest in the dark and

lonely nights of suffering, as if each gust that swept over Israel

only kindled it into fresh flame.

To the question, whether this hope has ever been realised - or rather,

whether One has appeared Whose claims to the Messiahship have stood

the test of investigation and of time - impartial history can make

only one answer. It points to Bethlehem and to Nazareth. If the claims

of Jesus have been rejected by the Jewish Nation, He has at least,

undoubtedly, fulfilled one part of the Mission prophetically assigned

to the Messiah. Whether or not He be the Lion of the tribe of Judah,

to Him, assuredly, has been the gathering of the nations, and the

isles have waited for His law. Passing the narrow bounds of obscure

Judæa, and breaking down the walls of national prejudice and

isolation, He has made the sublimer teaching of the Old Testament the

common possession of the world, and founded a great Brotherhood, of

which the God of Israel is the Father. He alone also has exhibited a

life, in which absolutely no fault could be found; and promulgated a

teaching, to which absolutely no exception can be taken. Admittedly,

He was the One perfect Man - the ideal of humanity, His doctrine the

one absolute teaching. The world has known none other, none equal. And

the world has owned it, if not by the testimony of words, yet by the

evidence of facts. Springing from such a people; born, living, and

dying in circumstances, and using means, the most unlikely of such

results - the Man of Nazareth has, by universal consent, been the

mightiest Factor in our world's history: alike politically, socially,

intellectually, and morally. If He be not the Messiah, He has at least

thus far done the Messiah's work. If He be not the Messiah, there has

has at least been none other, before or after Him. If He be not the

Messiah, the world has not, and never can have, a Messiah.

To Bethlehem as the birthplace of Messiah, not only Old Testament

prediction,[932]932 but the testimony of Rabbinic teaching,

unhesitatingly pointed. Yet nothing could be imagined more directly

contrary to Jewish thoughts and feelings - and hence nothing less

likely to suggest itself to Jewish invention[933]933 - than the

circumstances which, according to the Gospel-narrative, brought about

the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem. A counting of the people, of

Census; and that Census taken at the bidding of a heathen Emperor, and

executed by one so universally hated as Herod, would represent the ne

plus ultra of all that was most repugnant to Jewish feeling.[934]934

If the account of the circumstances, which brought Joseph and Mary to

Bethlehem, has no basis in fact, but is a legend invented to locate

the birth of the Nazarene in the royal City of David, it must be

pronounced most clumsily devised. There is absolutely nothing to

account for its origination - either from parallel events in the past,

or from contemporary expectancy. Why then connect the birth of their

Messiah with what was most repugnant to Israel, especially if, as the

advocates of the legendary hypothesis contend, it did not occur at a

time when any Jewish Census was taken, but ten years previously?

But if it be impossible rationally to account for any legendary origin

of the narrative of Joseph and Mary's journey to Bethlehem, the

historical grounds, on which its accuracy has been impugned, are

equally insufficient. They resolve themselves into this: that (beyond

the Gospel-narrative) we have no solid evidence that Cyrenius was at

that time occupying the needful official position in the East, to

order such a registration for Herod to carry out. But even this feeble

contention is by no means historically unassailable.[935]935 At any

rate, there are two facts, which render any historical mistake by St.

Luke on this point extremely difficult to believe. First, he was

evidently aware of a Census under Cyrenius, ten years later;[936]936

secondly, whatever rendering of St. Luke ii. 2 may be adopted, it will

at least be admitted, that the intercalated sentence about Cyrenius

was not necessary for the narrative, and that the writer must have

intended thereby emphatically to mark a certain event. But an author

would not be likely to call special attention to a fact, of which he

had only indistinct knowledge; rather, if it must be mentioned, would

he do so in the most indefinite terms. This presumption in favour of

St. Luke's statement is strengthened by the consideration, that such

an event as the taxing of Judæa must have been so easily ascertainable

by him.

We are, however, not left to the presumptive reasoning just set forth.

That the Emperor Augustus made registers of the Roman Empire, and of

subject and tributary states, is now generally admitted. This

registration - for the purpose of future taxation - would also embrace

Palestine. Even if no actual order to that effect had been issued

during the lifetime of Herod, we can understand that he would deem it

most expedient, both on account of his relations to the Emperor, and

in view of the probable excitement which a heathen Census would cause

in Palestine, to take steps for making a registration, and that rather

according to the Jewish than the Roman manner. This Census, then,

arranged by Augustus, and taken by Herod in his own manner, was,

according to St. Luke, 'first [really] carried out when Cyrenius was

Governor of Syria,' some years after Herod's death and when Judæa had

become a Roman province.[937]937

We are now prepared to follow the course of the Gospel-narrative. In

consequence of 'the decree of Cæsar Augustus,' Herod directed a

general registration to be made after the Jewish, rather than the

Roman, manner. Practically the two would, indeed, in this instance, be

very similar. According to the Roman law, all country-people were to

be registered in their 'own city' - meaning thereby the town to which

the village or place, where they were born, was attached. In so doing,

the 'house and lineage' (the nomen and cognomen) of each were

marked.[938]938 According to the Jewish mode of registration, the

people would have been enrolled according to tribes {hebrew}, families

or clans {hebrew}, and the house of their fathers {hebrew}. But as the

ten tribes had not returned to Palestine, this could only take place

to a very limited extent,[939]939 while it would be easy for each to

be registered in 'his own city.' In the case of Joseph and Mary, whose

descent from David was not only known, but where, for the sake of the

unborn Messiah, it was most important that this should be distinctly

noted, it was natural that, in accordance with Jewish law, they should

have gone to Bethlehem. Perhaps also, for many reasons which will

readily suggest themselves, Joseph and Mary might be glad to leave

Nazareth, and seek, if possible, a home in Bethlehem. Indeed, so

strong was this feeling, that it afterwards required special Divine

direction to induce Joseph to relinquish this chosen place of

residence, and to return into Galilee.[940]940 In these circumstances,

Mary, now the 'wife' of Joseph, though standing to him only in the

actual relationship of 'betrothed,'[941]941 would, of course,

accompany her husband to Bethlehem. Irrespective of this, every

feeling and hope in her must have prompted such a course, and there is

no need to discuss whether Roman or Jewish Census-usage required her

presence - a question which, if put, would have to be answered in the

negative.

The short winter's day was probably closing in,[942]942 as the two

travellers from Nazareth, bringing with them the few necessaries of a

poor Eastern household, neared their journey's end. If we think of

Jesus as the Messiah from heaven, the surroundings of outward poverty,

so far from detracting, seem most congruous to His Divine character.

Earthly splendor would here seem like tawdry tinsel, and the utmost

simplicity like that clothing of the lilies, which far surpassed all

the glory of Solomon's court. But only in the East would the most

absolute simplicity be possible, and yet neither it, nor the poverty

from which it sprang, necessarily imply even the slightest taint of

social inferiority. The way had been long and weary - at the very

least, three days' journey, whatever route had been taken from

Galilee. Most probably it would be that so commonly followed, from a

desire to avoid Samaria, along the eastern banks of the Jordan, and by

the fords of Jericho.[943]943 Although passing through one of the

warmest parts of the country, the season of the year must, even in

most favorable circumstances, have greatly increased the difficulties

of such a journey. A sense of rest and peace must, almost

unconsciously, have crept over the travellers when at last they

reached the rich fields that surrounded the ancient 'House of Bread,'

and, passing through the valley which, like an amphitheatre, sweeps up

to the twain heights along which Bethlehem stretches (2,704 feet above

the sea), ascended through the terraced vineyards and gardens. Winter

though it was, the green and silvery foliage of the olive might, even

at that season, mingle with the pale pink of the almond - nature's

'early waker'[944]944 - and with the darker coloring of the opening

peach-buds. The chaste beauty and sweet quiet of the place would

recall memories of Boaz, of Jesse, and of David. All the more would

such thoughts suggest themselves, from the contrast between the past

and the present. For, as the travellers reached the heights of

Bethlehem, and, indeed, long before, the most prominent object in view

must have been the great castle which Herod had built, and called

after his own name. Perched on the highest hill south-east of

Bethlehem, it was, at the same time magnificent palace, strongest

fortress, and almost courtier-city.[945]945 With a sense of relief the

travellers would turn from this, to mark the undulating outlines of

the highland wilderness of Judæa, till the horizon was bounded by the

mountain-ridges of Tekoa. Through the break of the hills eastward the

heavy molten surface of the Sea of Judgement would appear in view;

westward wound the road to Hebron; behind them lay the valleys and

hills which separated Bethlehem from Jerusalem, and concealed the Holy

City.

But for the present such thoughts would give way to the pressing

necessity of finding shelter and rest. The little town of Bethlehem

was crowded with those who had come from all the outlying district to

been personally acquainted with any one in Bethlehem, who could have

shown them hospitality, they would have found every house fully

occupied. The very inn was filled, and the only available space was,

where ordinarily the cattle were stabled.[946]946 Bearing in mind the

simple habits of the East, this scarcely implies, what it would in the

West; and perhaps the seclusion and privacy from the noisy, chattering

crowd, which thronged the khan, would be all the more welcome. Scanty

as these particulars are, even thus much is gathered rather by

inference than from the narrative itself. Thus early in this history

does the absence of details, which painfully increases as we proceed,

remind us, that the Gospels were not intended to furnish a biography

of Jesus, nor even the materials for it; but had only this twofold

object: that those who read them 'might believe that Jesus is the

Christ, the Son of God,' and that believing they 'might have life

through His Name.'[947]947 The Christian heart and imagination,

indeed, long to be able to localise the scene of such surpassing

importance, and linger with fond reverence over that Cave, which is

now covered by 'the Church of the Nativity.' It may be - nay, it seems

likely - that this, to which the most venerable tradition points, was

the sacred spot of the world's greatest event.[948]948 But certainly

we have not. It is better, that it should be so. As to all that passed

in the seclusion of that 'stable' - the circumstances of the

'Nativity,' even its exact time after the arrival of Mary (brief as it

must have been) - the Gospel-narrative is silent. This only is told,

that then and there the Virgin-Mother 'brought forth her first-born

Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger.'

Beyond this announcement of the bare fact, Holy Scripture, with

indescribable appropriateness and delicacy, draws a veil over that

most sacred mystery. Two impressions only are left on the mind: that

of utmost earthly humility, in the surrounding circumstances; and that

of inward fitness, in the contrast suggested by them. Instinctively,

reverently, we feel that it is well it should have been so. It best

befits the birth of the Christ - if He be what the New Testament

declares Him.

On the other hand, the circumstances just noted afford the strongest

indirect evidence of the truth of this narrative. For, if it were the

outcome of Jewish imagination, where is the basis for it in

contemporary expectation? Would Jewish legend have ever presented its

Messiah as born in a stable, to which chance circumstances had

consigned His Mother? The whole current of Jewish opinion would run in

the contrary direction. The opponents of the authenticity of this

narrative are bound to face this. Further, it may safely be asserted,

that no Apocryphal or legendary narrative of such a (legendary) event

would have been characterised by such scantiness, or rather absence,

of details. For, the two essential features, alike of legend and of

tradition, are, that they ever seek to surround their heroes with a

halo of glory, and that they attempt to supply details, which are

otherwise wanting. And in both these respects a more sharply-marked

contrast could scarcely be presented, than in the Gospel-narrative.

But as we pass from the sacred gloom of the cave out into the night,

its sky all aglow with starry brightness, its loneliness is peopled,

and its silence made vocal from heaven. There is nothing now to

conceal, but much to reveal, though the manner of it would seem

strangely incongruous to Jewish thinking. And yet Jewish tradition may

here prove both illustrative and helpful. That the Messiah was to be

born in Bethlehem,[949]949 was a settled conviction. Equally so was

the belief, that He was to be revealed from Migdal Eder, 'the tower of

the flock.'[950]950 This Migdal Eder was not the watchtower for the

ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheepground beyond

Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to Jerusalem. A

passage in the Mishnah[951]951 leads to the conclusion, that the

flocks, which pastured there, were destined for

Temple-sacrifices,[952]952 and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who

watched over them, were not ordinary shepherds. The latter were under

the ban of Rabbinism,[953]953 on account of their necessary isolation

from religious ordinances, and their manner of life, which rendered

strict legal observance unlikely, if not absolutely impossible. The

same Mishnic passage also leads us to infer, that these flocks lay out

all the year round, since they are spoken of as in the fields thirty

days before the Passover - that is, in the month of February, when in

Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest.[954]954 Thus,

Jewish tradition in some dim manner apprehended the first revelation

of the Messiah from that Migdal Eder, where shepherds watched the

Temple-flocks all the year round. Of the deep symbolic significance of

such a coincidence, it is needless to speak.

It was, then, on that 'wintry night' of the 25th of December,[955]955

that shepherds watched the flocks destined for sacrificial services,

in the very place consecrated by tradition as that where the Messiah

was to be first revealed. Of a sudden came the long-delayed,

unthought-of announcement. Heaven and earth seemed to mingle, as

suddenly an Angel stood before their dazzled eyes, while the

outstreaming glory of the Lord seemed to enwrap them, as in a mantle

of light.[956]956 Surprise, awe, fear would be hushed into calm and

expectancy, as from the Angel they heard, that what they saw boded not

judgment, but ushered in to waiting Israel the great joy of those good

tidings which he brought: that the long-promised Saviour, Messiah,

Lord, was born in the City of David, and that they themselves might go

and see, and recognize Him by the humbleness of the circumstances

surrounding His Nativity.

It was, as if attendant angels had only waited the signal. As, when

the sacrifice was laid on the altar, the Temple-music burst forth in

three sections, each marked by the blast of the priests' silver

trumpets, as if each Psalm were to be a Tris-Hagion;[957]957 so, when

the Herald-Angel had spoken, a multitude of heaven's host[958]958

stood forth to hymn the good tidings he had brought. What they sang

was but the reflex of what had been announced. It told in the language

of praise the character, the meaning, the result, of what had taken

place. Heaven took up the strain of 'glory;' earth echoed it as

'peace;' it fell on the ears and hearts of men as 'good pleasure:'

Glory to God in the highest -

And upon earth peace -

Among men good pleasure![959]959

Only once before had the words of the Angels' hymn fallen upon

mortal's ears, when, to Isaiah's rapt vision, Heaven's high Temple had

opened, and the glory of Jehovah swept its courts, almost breaking

down the trembling posts that bore its boundary gates. Now the same

glory enwrapt the shepherds on Bethlehem's plains. Then the Angels'

hymn had heralded the announcement of the Kingdom coming; now that of

the King come. Then it had been the Tris-Hagion of prophetic

anticipation; now that of Evangelic fulfilment.

The hymn had ceased; the light faded out of the sky; and the shepherds

were alone. But the Angelic message remained with them; and the sign,

which was to guide them to the Infant Christ, lighted their rapid way

up the terraced height to where, at the entering of Bethlehem, the

lamp swinging over the hostelry directed them to the strangers of the

house of David, who had come from Nazareth. Though it seems as if, in

the hour of her utmost need, the Virgin, Mother had not been

ministered to by loving hands,[960]960 yet what had happened in the

stable must soon have become known in the Khan. Perhaps friendly women

were still passing to and fro on errands of mercy, when the shepherds

reached the 'stable.'[961]961 There they found, perhaps not what they

had expected, but as they had been told. The holy group only consisted

of the humble Virgin-Mother, the lowly carpenter of Nazareth, and the

Babe laid in the manger. What further passed we know not, save that,

having seen it for themselves, the shepherds told what had been spoken

to them about this Child, to all around[962]962 - in the 'stable' in

the fields, probably also in the Temple, to which they would bring

their flocks, thereby preparing the minds of a Simeon, of an Anna, and

of all them that looked for salvation in Israel.[963]963

And now the hush of wondering expectancy fell once more on all, who

heard what was told by the shepherds - this time not only in the

hill-country of Judæa, but within the wider circle that embraced

Behtlehem and the Holy City. And yet it seemed all so sudden, so

strange. That such slender thread, as the feeble throb of an

Infant-life, the salvation of the world should hang - and no special

care watch over its safety, no better shelter be provided it than a

'stable,' no other cradle than a manger! And still it is ever so. On

what slender thread has the continued life of the Church often seemed

to hang; on what feeble throbbing that of every child of God - with no

visible outward means to ward off danger, no home of comfort, no rest

of ease. But, 'Lo, children are Jehovah's heritage!' - and: 'So giveth

He to His beloved in his sleep!'[964]964

CHAPTER VII.

THE PURIFICATION OF THE VIRGIN AND THE PRESENTATION IN THE TEMPLE

(St. Luke ii. 21-38.)

FOREMOST amongst those who, wondering, had heard what the shepherds

told, was she whom most it concerned, who laid it up deepest in her

heart, and brought to it treasured stores of memory. It was the Mother

of Jesus. These many months, all connected with this Child could never

have been far away form her thoughts. And now that He was hers yet not

hers - belonged, yet did not seem to belong, to her - He would be the

more dear to her Mother-heart for what made Him so near, and yet

parted Him so far from her. And upon all His history seemed to lie

such wondrous light, that she could only see the path behind, so far

as she had trodden it; while upon that on which she was to move, was

such dazzling brightness, that she could scare look upon the present,

and dared not gaze towards the future.

At the very outset of this history, and increasingly in its course,

the question meets us, how, if the Angelic message to the Virgin was a

reality, and her motherhood so supernatural, she could have been

apparently so ignorant of what was to come - nay, so often have even

misunderstood it? Strange, that she should have 'pondered in her

heart' the shepherd's account; stranger, that afterwards she should

have wondered at His lingering in the Temple among Israel's teachers;

strangest, that, at the very first of His miracles, a mother's fond

pride should have so harshly broken in upon the Divine melody of His

work, by striking a keynote so different from that, to which His life

had been set; or that afterwards, in the height of his activity,

loving fears, if not doubts, should have prompted her to interrupt,

what evidently she had not as yet comprehended in the fulness of its

meaning. Might we not rather have expected, that the Virgin-Mother

from the inception of this Child's life would have understood, that He

was truly the Son of God? The question, like so many others, requires

only to be clearly stated, to find its emphatic answer. For, had it

been so His history, His human life, of which every step is of such

importance to mankind, would not have been possible. Apart from all

thoughts of the deeper necessity, both as regarded His Mission and all

the salvation of the world, of a true human development of gradual

consciousness and personal life, Christ could not, in any true sense,

have been subject to His Parents, if they had fully understood that He

was Divine; nor could He, in that case, have been watched, as He 'grew

in wisdon and in favour with God and men.' Such knowledge would have

broken the bond of His Humanity to ours, by severing that which bound

Him as a child to His mother. We could not have become His brethren,

had He not been truly the Virgin's Son. The mystery of the Incarnation

would have been needless and fruitless, had His humanity not been

subject to all its right and ordinary conditions. And, applying the

same principle more widely, we can thus, in some measure, understand

why the mystery of His Divinity had to be kept while He was on earth.

Had it been otherwise, the thought of His Divinity would have proved

so all-absorbing, as to render impossible that of His Humanity, with

all its lessons. The Son of God Most High, Whom they worshipped, could

never have been the loving Man, with Whom they could hold such close

converse. The bond which bound the Master to His disciples - the Son

of Man to humanity - would have been dissolved; His teaching as a Man,

the Incarnation, and the Tabernacling among men, in place of the

former Old Testament Revelation from heaven, would have become wholly

impossible. In short, one, and that the distinctive New Testament,

element in our salvation would have been taken away. At the beginning

of His life He would have anticipated the lessons of its end - nay,

not those of His Death only, but of His Resurrection and Ascension,

and of the coming of the Holy Ghost.

In all this we have only been taking the subjective, not the

objective, view of the question; considered the earthward, not the

heavenward, aspect of His life. The latter, though very real, lies

beyond our present horizon. Not so the question as to the development

of the Virgin-Mother's spiritual knowledge. Assuming her to have

occupied, in the fullest sense, the standpoint of Jewish Messianic

expectancy, and remembering, also, that she was so 'highly favoured'

of God, still, there was not as yet anything, nor could there be for

many years, to lead her beyond what might be called the utmost height

of Jewish belief. On the contrary, there was much connected with His

true Humanity to keep her back. For narrow as, to our retrospective

thinking, the boundary-line seems between Jewish belief and that in

the hypostatic union of the two Natures, the passage from the one to

the other represented such tremendous mental revolution, as to imply

direct Divine teaching.[965]965 An illustrative instance will prove

this better than argument. We read, in a commentary on the opening

words of Gen. xv. 18,[966]966 that when God made the covenant with

Abram, He 'revealed to him both this Olam (dispensation) and the Olam

to come,' which latter expression is correctly explained as referring

to the days of the Messiah. Jewish tradition, therefore, here asserts

exactly what Jesus stated in these words: 'Your father Abraham

rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad.'[967]967 Yet we

know what storm of indignation the enunciation of it called forth

among the Jews!

Thus it was, that every event connected with the Messianic

manifestation of Jesus would come to the Virgin-Mother as a fresh

discovery and a new surprise. Each event, as it took place, stood

isolated in her mind; not as part of a whole which she would

anticipate, nor as only one link in a chain; but as something quite by

itself. She knew the beginning, and she knew the end; but she knew not

the path which led from the one to the other; and each step in it was

a new revelation. Hence it was, that she so carefully treasured in her

heart every new fact,[968]968 piecing each to the other, till she

could read from it the great mystery that He, Whom Incarnate she had

borne, was, indeed, the Son of the living God. And as it was natural,

so it was well that it should be so. For, thus only could she truly,

because self-unconsciously, as a Jewish woman and mother, fulfil all

the requirements of the Law, alike as regarded herself and her Child

The first of these was Circumcision, representing voluntary subjection

to the conditions of the Law, and acceptance of the obligations, but

also of the privileges, of the Covenant between God and Abraham and

his seed. Any attempt to show the deep siginificance of such a rite in

the case of Jesus, could only weaken the impression which the fact

itself conveys. The ceremony took place, as in all ordinary

circumstances, on the eight day, when the Child received the

Angel-given name Jeshua (Jesus). Two other legal ordinances still

remained to be observed. The firstborn son of every household was,

according to the Law, to be 'redeemed' of the priest at the price of

five shekels of the Sanctuary.[969]969 Rabbinic casuistry here added

many needless, and even repulsive, details. The following, however,

are of practical interest. The earliest period of presentation was

thirty-one days after birth so as to make the legal month quite

complete. The child must have been the firstborn of his mother

(according to some writers, of his father also);[970]970 neither

father nor mother[971]971 must be of Levitic descent; and the child

must be free from all such bodily blemishes as would have disqualified

him for the priesthood - or, as it was expressed: 'the firstborn for

the priesthood.' It was a thing much dreaded, that the child should

die before his redemption; but if his father died in the interval, the

child had to redeem himself when of age. As the Rabbinic law expressly

states, that the shekels were to be of 'Tyrian weight,'[972]972 the

value of the 'redemption money' would amount to about ten or twelve

shillings. The redemption could be made from any priest, and

attendance in the Temple was not requisite. It was otherwise with the

'purification' of the mother.[973]973 The Rabbinic law fixed this at

forty-one days after the birth of a son, and eighty-one after that of

a daughter,[974]974 so as to make the Biblical terms quite

complete.[975]975 But it might take place any time later - notably,

when attendance on any of the great feasts brought a family to

Jerusalem. Thus, we read of cases when a mother would offer several

sacrifices of purification at the same time.[976]976 But, indeed, the

woman was not required to be personally present at all, when her

offering was presented, or, rather (as we shall see), provided for -

say, by the representatives of the laity, who daily took part in the

services for the various districts from which they came. This also is

specially provided for in the Tulmud.[977]977 But mothers who were

within convenient distance of the Temple, and especially the more

earnest among them, would naturally attend personally in the

Temple;[978]978 and in such cases, when practicable, the redemption of

the firstborn, and the purification of his mother, would be combined.

Such was undoubtedly the case with the Virgin-Mother and her Son.

For this twofold purpose the Holy Family went up to the Temple, when

the prescribed days were completed.[979]979 The ceremony at the

redemption of a firstborn son was, no doubt, more simple than that at

present in use. It consisted of the formal presentation of the child

to the priest, accompanied by two short 'benedictions,' the one for

the law of redemption money was paid.[980]980 Most solemn, as in such

a place, and remembering its symbolic significance as the expression

of God's claim over each family in Israel, must this rite have been.

As regards the rite at the purification of the mother, the scantiness

of information has led to serious misstatements. Any comparison with

our modern 'churching' of women[981]981 is inapplicable, since the

latter consists of thanksgiving, and the former primarily of a

sin-offering for the Levitical defilement symbolically attaching to

the beginning of life, and a burnt-offering, that marked the

restoration of communion with God. Besides, as already stated, the

sacrifice for purification might be brought in the absence of the

mother. Similar mistakes prevail as to the rubric. It is not case, as

generally stated, that the woman was sprinkled with blood, and then

pronounced clean by the priest, or that prayers were offered on the

occasion.[982]982 The service simply consisted of the statutory

sacrifice. This was what, in ecclesiastical language, was termed an

offering oleh veyored, that is, 'ascending and descending,' according

to the means of the offerer. The sin-offering was, in all cases, a

turtle-dove or a young pigeon. But, while the more wealthy brought a

lamb for a burnt-offering the poor might substitute for it a

turtle-dove, or a young pigeon.[983]983 The ribric directed that the

neck of the sin-offering was to be broken, but the head not wholly

severed; that some of the blood should be sprinkled at the

south-western angle of the altar,[984]984 below the red line,[985]985

which ran round the middle of the altar, and that the rest should be

poured out at the base of the altar. The whole of the flesh belonged

to the priests, and had to be eaten within the enclosure of the

Sanctuary. The rubric for the burnt-offering of a turtle-dove or a

young pigeon was somewhat more intricate.[986]986 The substitution of

the latter for a young lamb was expressly designated 'the poor's

offering.' And rightly so, since, while a lamb would probably cost

about three shillings, the average value of a pair of turtle-doves,

for both the sin-and burnt-offering, would be about

eightpence,[987]987 and on one occasion fell so low as twopence. The

Temple-price of the meat-and drink-offerings was fixed once a month;

and special officials instructed the intending offerers, and provided

them with what was needed.[988]988 There was also a special

'superintendent of turtle-doves and pigeons,' required for certain

purifications, and the holder of that office is mentioned with praise

in the Mishnah.[989]989 Much, indeed, depended upon his uprightness.

For, at any rate as regarded those who brought the poor's offering,

the purchasers of pigeons or turtle-doves would, as a rule, have to

deal with him. In the Court of the Women there were thirteen

trumpet-shaped chests for pecuniary contributions, called

'trumpets.'[990]990 Into the third of these they who brought the

poor's offering, like the Virgin-Mother, were to drop the price of the

sacrifices which were needed for their purification.[991]991 As we

infer,[992]992 the superintending priest must have been stationed

here, alike to inform the offerer of the price of the turtle-doves,

and to see that all was in order. For, the offerer of the poor's

offering would not require to deal directly with the sacrificing

priest. At a certain time in the day this third chest was opened, and

half of its contents applied to burnt, the other half to

sin-offerings. Thus sacrifices were provided for a corresponding

number of those who were to be purified, without either shaming the

poor, needlessly disclosing the character of impurity, or causing

unnecessary bustle and work. Though this mode of procedure could, of

course, not be obligatory, it would, no doubt, be that generally

followed.

We can now, in imagination, follow the Virgin-Mother in the

Temple.[993]993 Her child had been given up to the Lord, and received

back from Him. She had entered the Court of the Women, probably by the

'Gate of the Women,'[994]994 on the north side, and deposited the

price of her sacrifices in Trumpet No. 3, which was close to the

raised dais or gallery where the women worshipped, apart from the men.

And now the sound of the organ, which announced throughout the vast

Temple-buildings that the incense was about to be kindled on the

Golden Altar, summoned those who were to be purified. The chief of the

ministrant lay-representatives of Israel on duty (the so-called

'station-men') ranged those, who presented themselves before the Lord

as offerers of special sacrifices, within the wickets on either side

the great Nicanor Gate, at the top of the fifteen steps which led up

from the Court of the Women to that of Israel. It was, as if they were

to be brought nearest to the Sanctuary; as if theirs were to be

specially the 'prayers' that rose in the cloud of incense from the

Golden Altar; as if for them specially the sacrifices were laid on the

Altar of Burnt-offering; as if theirs was a larger share of the

benediction which, spoken by the lips of the priests, seemed like

Jehovah's answer to the prayers of the people; theirs especially the

expression of joy symbolised in the drink-offering, and the hymn of

praise whose Tris-Hagion filled the Temple. From where they stood they

could see it all,[995]995 share in it, rejoice in it. And now the

general service was over, and only those remained who brought special

sacrifices, or who lingered near them that had such, or whose loved

abode was ever in the Temple. The purification-service, with such

unspoken prayer and praise as would be the outcome of a grateful

heart,[996]996 was soon ended, and they who had shared in it were

Levitically clean. Now all stain was removed, and, as the Law put it,

they might again partake of sacred offerings.

And in such sacred offering, better than any of which priest's family

had ever partaken, was the Virgin-Mother immediately to share. It has

been observed, that by the side of every humiliation connected with

the Humanity of the Messiah, the glory of His Divinity was also made

to shine forth. The coincidences are manifestly undesigned on the part

of the Evangelic writers, and hence all the more striking. Thus, if he

was born of the humble Maiden of Nazareth, an Angel announced His

birth; if the Infant-Saviour was cradled in a manger, the shining host

of heaven hymned His Advent. And so afterwards - if He hungered and

was tempted in the wilderness, Angels ministered to Him, even as an

Angel strengthened Him in the agony of the garden. If He submitted to

baptism, the Voice and vision from heaven attested His Sonship; if

enemies threatened. He could miraculously pass through them; if the

Jews assailed, there was the Voice of God to glorify Him; if He was

nailed to the cross, the sun craped his brightness, and earth quaked;

if He was laid in the tomb, Angels kept its watches, and heralded His

rising. And so, when now the Mother of Jesus, in her humbleness, could

only bring the 'poor's offering,' the witness to the greatness of Him

Whom she had borne was not wanting. A 'eucharistic offering' - so to

speak - was brought, the record of which is the more precious that

Rabbinic writings make no allusion to the existence of the party,

whose representatives we here meet. Yet they were the true outcome of

the spirit of the Old Testament, and, as such, at this time, the

special recipients of the 'Spirit' of the Old Testament.

The 'parents' of Jesus had brought Him into the Temple for

presentation and redemption, when they were met by one, whose

venerable figure must have been well known in the city and the

Sanctuary. Simeon combined the three characteristics of Old Testament

piety: 'Justice,' as regarded his relation and bearing to God and

man;[997]997 'fear of God,'[998]998 in opposition to the boastful

self-righteousness of Pharisaism; and, above all, longing expectancy

of the near fulfilment of the great promises, and that in their

spiritual import as 'the Consolation of Israel.'[999]999 The Holy

Spirit was upon him; and by that same Spirit[1000]1000 the gracious

Divine answer to his heart's longing had been communicated him. And

now it was as had been promised him. Coming 'in the Spirit' into the

Temple, just as His parents were bringing the Infant Jesus, he took

Him into his arms, and burst into rapt thanksgiving. Now, indeed, had

God fulfilled His word. He was not to see death, till he had seen the

Lord's Christ. Now did his Lord 'dismiss' him 'in peace'[1001]1001 -

release him[1002]1002 in blessed comfort from work and watch - since

he had actually seen that salvation,[1003]1003 so long preparing for a

waiting weary world: a glorious light, Whose rising would light up

heathen darkness, and be the outshining glory around Israel's mission.

With this Infant in his arms, it was as if he stood on the

mountain-height of prophetic vision, and watched the golden beams of

sunrise far away over the isles of the Gentiles, and then gathering

their full glow over his own beloved land and people. There was

nothing Judiac - quite the contrary: only what was of the Old

Testament - in what he first said.[1004]1004

But his unexpected appearance, the more unexpected deed and words, and

that most unexpected form in which what was said of the Infant Christ

was presented to their minds, filled the hearts of His parents with

wonderment. And it was, as if their silent wonderment had been an

unspoken question, to which the answer now came in words of blessing

from the aged watcher. Mystic they seemed, yet prophetic. But now it

was the personal, or rather the Judaic, aspect which, in broken

utterances, was set before the Virgin-Mother - as if the whole history

of the Christ upon earth were passing in rapid vision before Simeon.

That Infant, now again in the Virgin-Mother's arms: It was to be a

stone of decision; a foundation and corner-stone,[1005]1005 for fall

or for uprising; a sign spoken against; the sword of deep personal

sorrow would pierce the Mother's heart; and so to the terrible end,

when the veil of externalism which had so long covered the hearts of

Israel's leaders would be rent, and the deep evil of their

thoughts[1006]1006 laid bare. Such, as regarded Israel, was the

history of Jesus, from His Baptism to the Cross; and such is still the

history of Jesus, as ever present to the heart of the believing,

loving Church.

Nor was Simeon's the only hymn of praise on that day. A special

interest attaches to her who, coming that very moment, responded in

praise to God[1007]1007 for the pledge she saw of the near redemption.

A kind of mystery seems to invest this Anna (Channah). A widow, whose

early desolateness had been followed by a long life of solitary

mourning; one of those in whose home the tribal genealogy had been

preserved.[1008]1008 We infer from this, and from the fact that it

was that of a tribe which had not returned to Palestine, that hers was

a family of some distinction. Curiously enough, the tribe of Asher

alone is celebrated in tradition for the beauty of its women, and

their fitness to be wedded to High-Priest or King.[1009]1009

But Anna had better claim to distinction than family-descent, or long,

faithful memory of brief home-joys. These many years she had spent in

the Sanctuary,[1010]1010 and spent in fasting and prayer - yet not of

that self-righteous, self-satisfied kind which was of the essence of

popular religion. Nor, as to the Pharisees around, was it the

Synagogue which was her constant and loved resort; but the Temple,

with its symbolic and unspoken worship, which Rabbinic self-assertion

and rationalism were rapidly superseding, and for whose services,

indeed, Rabbinism could find no real basis. Nor yet were 'fasting and

prayer' to her the all-in-all of religion, sufficient in themselves;

sufficient also before God. Deepest in her soul was longing waiting

for the 'redemption' promised, and now surely nigh. To her widowed

heart the great hope of Israel appeared not so much, as to Simeon, in

the light of 'consolation,' as rather in that of 'redemption.' The

seemingly hopeless exile of her own tribe, the political state of

Judæa, the condition - social, moral, and religious - of her own

Jerusalem: all kindled in her, as in those who were like-minded, deep,

earnest longing for the time of promised 'redemption.' No place so

suited to such an one as the Temple, with its services, the only thing

free, pure, undefiled, and pointing forward and upward; no occupation

so befitting as 'fasting and prayer.' And, blessed be God, there were

others, perhaps many such, in Jerusalem. Though Rabbinic tradition

ignored them, they were the salt which preserved the mass from

festering corruption. To her as the representative, the example,

friend, and adviser of such, was it granted as prophetess to recognise

Him, Whose Advent had been the burden of Simeon's praise. And, day by

day, to those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem, would she speak

of Him Whom her eyes had seen, though it must be in whispers and with

bated breath. For they were in the city of Herod, and the stronghold

of Pharisaism.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE VISIT AND HOMAGE OF THE MAGI, AND THE FLIGHT INTO EGYPT

(St. Matt. ii. 1-8.)

With the Presentation of the Infant Saviour in the Temple, and His

acknowledgment - not indeed by the leaders of Israel, but,

characteristically, by the representatives of those earnest men and

women who looked for His Advent - the Prologue, if such it may be

called, to the third Gospel closes. From whatever source its

information was derived - perhaps, as has been suggested, its earlier

portion from the Virgin-Mother, the later from Anna; or else both

alike from her, who with loving reverence and wonderment treasured it

all in her heart - its marvellous details could not have been told

with greater simplicity, nor yet with more exquisitely delicate

grace.[1011]1011 On the other hand, the Prologue to the first Gospel,

while omitting these, records other incidents of the infancy of the

Saviour. The plan of these narratives, or the sources whence they may

originally have been derived, may account for the omissions in either

case. At first sight it may seem strange, that the cosmopolitan Gospel

by St. Luke should have described what took place in the Temple, and

the homage of the Jews, while the Gospel by St. Matthew, which was

primarily intended for Hebrews, records only the homage of the

Gentiles, and the circumstances which led to the flight into Egypt.

But of such seeming contrasts there are not a few in the

Gospel-history - discords, which soon resolve themselves into glorious

harmony.

The story of the homage to the Infant Saviour by the Magi is told by

St. Matthew, in language of which the brevity constitutes the chief

difficulty. Even their designation is not free from ambiguity. The

term Magi is used in the LXX., by Philo, Josephus, and by profane

writers, alike in an evil and, so to speak, in a good sense[1012]1012

- in the former case as implying the practice of magical

arts;[1013]1013 in the latter, as referring to the those Eastern

(especially Chaldee) priest-sages, whose researches, in great measure

as yet mysterious and unknown to us, seem to have embraced much deep

knowledge, though not untinged with superstition. It is to these

latter, that the Magi spoken of by St. Matthew must have belonged.

Their number - to which, however, no importance attaches - cannot be

ascertained.[1014]1014 Various suggestions have been made as to the

country of 'the East,' whence they came. At the period in question the

sacerdotal caste of the Medes and Persians was dispersed over various

parts of the East,[1015]1015 and the presence in those lands of a

large Jewish diaspora, through which they might, and probably would,

gain knowleded of the great hope of Israel,[1016]1016 is sufficiently

attested by Jewish history. The oldest opinion traces the Magi -

though partially on insufficient grounds[1017]1017 - to Arabia. And

there is this in favor of it, that not only the closest intercourse

existed between Palestine and Arabia, but that from about 120 b.c. to

the sixth century of our era, the kings of Yemen professed the Jewish

faith.[1018]1018 For if, on the one hand, it seems unlikely, that

Eastern Magi would spontaneously connect a celestial phenomenon with

the birth of a Jewish king, evidence will, on the other hand, be

presented to connect the meaning attached to the appearance of 'the

star' at that particular time with Jewish expectancy of the Messiah.

But we are anticipating.

Shortly after the Presentation of the Infant Saviour in the Temple,

certain Magi from the East arrived in Jerusalem with strange tidings.

They had seen at its 'rising'[1019]1019 a sidereal

appearance,[1020]1020 which they regarded as betokening the birth of

the Messiah King of the Jews, in the sense which at the time attached

to that designation. Accordingly, they had come to Jerusalem to pay

homage[1021]1021 to Him, probably not because they imagined He must be

born in the Jewish capital[1022]1022 but because they would naturally

expect there to obtain authentic information, 'where' He might be

found. In their simplicity of heart, the Magi addressed themselves in

the first place to the official head of the nation. The rumor of such

an inquiry, and by such persons, would rapidly spread throughout the

city. But it produced on King Herod, and in the capital, a far

different impression from the feeling of the Magi. Unscrupulously

cruel as Herod had always proved, even the slightest suspicion of

danger to his rule - the bare possibility of the Advent of One, Who

had such claims upon the allegiance of Israel, and Who, if

acknowledged, would evoke the most intense movement on their part -

must have struck terror to his heart. Not that he could believe the

tidings, though a dread of their possibility might creep over a nature

such as Herod's; but the bare thought of a Pretender, with such

claims, would fill him with suspicion, apprehension, and impotent

rage. Nor is it difficult to understand, that the whole city should,

although on different grounds, have shared the 'trouble' of the king.

It was certainly not, as some have suggested, from apprehension of

'the woes' which, according to popular notions, were to accompany the

Advent of Messiah. Throughout the history of Christ the absence of

such 'woes' was never made a ground of objection to His Messianic

claims; and this, because these 'woes' were not associated with the

first Advent of the Messiah, but with His final manifestation in

power. And between these two periods a more or less long interval was

supposed to intervene, during which the Messiah would be 'hidden,'

either in the literal sense, or perhaps as to His power, or else in

both respects.[1023]1023 This enables us to understand the question of

the disciples, as to the sign of His coming and the end of the world,

and the answer of the Master.[1024]1024 But the people of Jerusalem

had far other reason to fear. They knew only too well the character of

Herod, and what the consequences would be to them, or to any one who

might be suspected, however unjustly, of sympathy with any claimant to

the royal throne of David.[1025]1025

Herod took immediate measures, characterised by his usual cunning. He

called together all the High-Priests - past and present - and all the

learned Rabbis,[1026]1026 and, without committing himself as to

whether the Messiah was already born, or only expected,[1027]1027

simply propounded to them the question of His birthplace. This would

show him where Jewish expectancy looked for the appearance of his

rival, and thus enable him to watch alike that place and the people

generally, while it might possibly bring to light the feelings of the

leaders of Israel. At the same time he took care diligently to inquire

the precise time, when the sidereal appearance had first attracted the

attention of the Magi.[1028]1028 This would enable him to judge, how

far back he would have to make his own inquiries, since the birth of

the Pretender might be made to synchronise with the earliest

appearance of the sidereal phenomenon. So long as any one lived, who

was born in Bethlehem between the earliest appearance of this 'star'

and the time of the arrival of the Magi, he was not safe. The

subsequent conduct of Herod[1029]1029 shows, that the Magi must have

told him, that their earliest observation of the sidereal phenomenon

had taken place two years before their arrival in Jerusalem.

The assembled authorities of Israel could only return one answer to

the question submitted by Herod. As shown by the rendering of the

Targum Jonathan, the prediction in Micah v. 2 was at the time

universally understood as pointing to Bethlehem, as the birthplace of

the Messiah. That such was the general expectation, appears from the

Talmud,[1030]1030 where, in an imaginary conversation between an Arab

and a Jew, Bethlehem is authoritatively named as Messiah's birthplace.

St. Matthew reproduces the prophetic utterance of Micah, exactly as

such quotations were popularly made at that time. It will be

remembered that, Hebrew being a dead language so far as the people

were concerned, the Holy Scriptures were always translated into the

popular dialect, the person so doing being designated Methurgeman

(dragoman) or interpreter. These renderings, which at the time of St.

Matthew were not yet allowed to be written down, formed the precedent

for, if not the basis of, our later Targum. In short, at that time

each one Targumed for himself, and these Targumim (as our existing one

on the Prophets shows) were neither literal versions,[1031]1031 nor

yet paraphrases, but something between them, a sort of interpreting

translation. That, when Targuming, the New Testament writers should in

preference make use of such a well-known and widely-spread version as

the Translation of the LXX. needs no explanation. That they did not

confine themselves to it, but, when it seemed necessary, literally or

Targumically rendered a verse, appears from the actual quotations in

the New Testament. Such Targuming of the Old Testament was entirely in

accordance with the then universal method of setting Holy Scripture

before a popular audience. It is needless to remark, that the New

Testament writers would Targum as Christians. These remarks apply not

only to the case under immediate consideration,[1032]1032 but

generally to the quotations from the Old Testament in the

New.[1033]1033

The further conduct of Herod was in keeping with his plans. He sent

for the Magi - for various reasons, secretly. After ascertaining the

precise time, when they had first observed the 'star,' he directed

them to Bethlehem, with the request to inform him when they had found

the Child; on pretence, that he was equally desirous with them to pay

Him homage. As they left Jerusalem[1034]1034 for the goal of their

pilgrimage, to their surprise and joy, the 'star,' which had attracted

their attention at its 'rising,'[1035]1035 and which, as seems implied

in the narrative, they had not seen of late, once more appeared on the

horizon, and seemed to move before them, till 'it stood over where the

young child was' - that is, of course, over Bethlehem, not over any

special house in it. Whether at a turn of the road, close to

Bethlehem, they lost sight of it, or they no longer heeded its

position, since it had seemed to go before them to the goal that had

been pointed out - for, surely, they needed not the star to guide them

to Bethlehem - or whether the celestial phenomenon now disappeared, is

neither stated in the Gospel-narrative, nor is indeed of any

importance. Sufficient for them, and for us: they had been

auhoritatively directed to Bethlehem; as they had set out for it, the

sidereal phenomenon had once more appeared; and it had seemed to go

before them, till it actually stood over Bethlehem. And, since in

ancient times such extraordinary 'guidance' by a 'star' was matter of

belief and expectancy,[1036]1036 the Magi would, from their

standpoint, regard it as the fullest confirmation that they had been

rightly directed to Bethlehem, and 'they rejoiced with exceeding great

joy.' It could not be difficult to learn in Bethlehem, where the

Infant, around Whose Birth marvels had gathered, might be found. It

appears that the temporary shelter of the 'stable' had been exchanged

by the Holy Family for the more permanent abode of a

'house;'[1037]1037 and there the Magi found the Infant-Saviour with

His Mother. With exquisite tact and reverence the narrative attempts

not the faintest description of the scene. It is as if the sacred

writer had fully entered into the spirit of St. Paul, 'Yea, though we

have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no

more.'[1038]1038 And thus it should ever be. It is the great fact of

the manifestation of Christ - not its outward surroundings, however

precious or touching they might be in connection with any ordinary

earthly being - to which our gaze must be directed. The externals may,

indeed, attract our sensuous nature; but they detract from the

unmatched glory of the great supersensuous Reality.[1039]1039 Around

the Person of the God-Man, in the hour when the homage of the heathen

world was first offered Him, we need not, and want not, the drapery of

outward circumstances. That scene is best realized, not by

description, but by silently joining in the silent homage and the

silent offerings of 'the wise men from the East.'

Before proceeding further, we must ask ourselves two questions: What

relationship does this narrative bear to Jewish expectancy? and, Is

there any astronomical confirmation of this account? Besides their

intrinsic interest, the answer to the first question will determine,

whether any legendary basis could be assigned to the narrative; while

on the second will depend, whether the account can be truthfully

charged with an accommodation on the part of God to the superstitions

and errors of astrology. For, if the whole was extranatural, and the

sidereal appearance specially produced in order to meet the

astrological views of the Magi, it would not be a sufficient answer to

the difficulty, 'that great catastrophes and unusual phenomena in

nature have synchronised in a remarkable manner with great events in

human history.'[1040]1040 On the other hand, if the sidereal

appearance was not of supernatural origin, and would equally have

taken place whether or not there had been Magi to direct to Bethlehem,

the difficulty is not only entirely removed, but the narrative affords

another instance, alike of the condescension of God to the lower

standpoint of the Magi, and of His wisdom and goodness in the

combination of circumstances.

As regards the question of Jewish expectancy, sufficient has been said

in the preceding pages, to show that Rabbinism looked for a very

different kind and manner of the world's homage to the Messiah than

that of a few Magi, guided by a star to His Infant-Home. Indeed, so

far from serving as historical basis for the orgin of such a 'legend'

a more gross caricature of Jewish Messianic anticipation could

scarcely be imagined. Similarly futile would it be to seek a

background for this narrative in Balaam's prediction,[1041]1041 since

it is incredible that any one could have understood it as referring to

a brief sidereal apparition to a few Magi, in order to bring them to

look for the Messiah.[1042]1042 Nor can it be represented as intended

to fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah,[1043]1043 [1044]1044 that 'they

shall bring gold and incense, and they shall show forth the praises of

the Lord.' For, supposing this figurative language to have been

grossly literalised,[1045]1045 what would become of the other part of

that prophecy,[1046]1046 which must, of course, have been treated in

the same manner; not to speak of the fact, that the whole evidently

refers not to the Messiah (least of all in His Infancy), but to

Jerusalem in her latter-day glory. Thus, we fail to perceive any

historical basis for a legendary origin of St. Matthew's narrative,

either in the Old Testament or, still less, in Jewish tradition. And

we are warranted in asking: If the account be not true, what rational

explanation can be given of its origin, since its invention would

never have occurred to any contemporary Jew?

But this is not all. There seems, indeed, no logical connection

between this astrological interpretation of the Magi, and any supposed

practice of astrology among the Jews. Yet, strange to say, writers

have largely insisted on this.[1047]1047 The charge is, to say the

least, grossly exaggerated. That Jewish - as other Eastern - impostors

pretended to astrological knowledge, and that such investigations may

have been secretly carried on by certain Jewish students, is readily

admitted. But the language of disapproval in which these pursuits are

referred to - such as that knowledge of the Law is not found with

astrologers[1048]1048 - and the emphatic statement, that he who

learned even one thing from a Mage deserved death, show what views

were authoritatively held.[1049]1049 [1050]1050 Of course, the Jews

(or many of them), like most ancients, believed in the influence of

the planets upon the destiny of man.[1051]1051 But it was a principle

strongly expressed, and frequently illustrated in the Talmud, that

such planetary influence did not extend to Israel.[1052]1052 It must

be admitted, that this was not always consistently carried out; and

there were Rabbis who computed a man's future from the constellation

(the Mazzal), either of the day, or the hour, under which he was

born.[1053]1053 It was supposed, that some persons had a star of their

own,[1054]1054 and the (representative) stars of all proselytes were

said to have been present at Mount Sinai. Accordingly, they also, like

Israel, had lost the defilement of the serpent (sin).[1055]1055 One

Rabbi even had it, that success, wisdom, the duration of life, and a

posterity, depended upon the constellation.[1056]1056 Such views were

carried out till they merged in a kind of fatalism,[1057]1057 or else

in the idea of a 'natal affinity,' by which persons born under the

same constellation were thought to stand in sympathetic

rapport.[1058]1058 The further statement, that conjunctions of the

planets[1059]1059 affected the products of the earth[1060]1060 is

scarcely astrological; nor perhaps this, that an eclipse of the sun

betokened evil to the nations, an eclipse of the moon to Israel,

because the former calculated time by the sun, the latter by the moon.

But there is one illustrative Jewish statement which, though not

astrological, is of the greatest importance, although it seems to have

been hitherto overlooked. Since the appearance of Münter's well known

tractate on the Star of the Magi,[1061]1061 writers have endeavoured

to show, that Jewish expectancy of a Messiah was connected with a

peculiar sidereal conjunction, such as that which occurred two years

before the birth of our Lord,[1062]1062 and this on the ground of a

quotation from the well-known Jewish commentator Abarbanel (or rather

Abrabanel).[1063]1063 In his Commentary on Daniel that Rabbi laid it

down, that the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation

Pisces betokened not only the most important events, but referred

especially to Israel (for which he gives five mystic reasons). He

further argues that, as that conjunction had taken place three years

before the birth of Moses, which heralded the first deliverance of

Israel, so it would also precede the birth of the Messiah, and the

final deliverance of Israel. But the argument fails, not only because

Abarbanel's calculations are inconclusive and even

erroneous,[1064]1064 but because it is manifestly unfair to infer the

state of Jewish belief at the time of Christ from a haphazard

astrological conceit of a Rabbi of the fifteenth century. There is,

however, testimony which seems to us not only reliable, but embodies

most ancient Jewish tradition. It is contained in one of the smaller

Midrashim, of which a collection has lately been published.[1065]1065

On account of its importance, one quotation at least from it should be

made in full. The so-called Messiah-Haggadah (Aggadoth Mashiach) opens

as follows: 'A star shall come out of Jacob. There is a Boraita in the

name of the Rabbis: The heptad in which the Son of David cometh - in

the first year, there will not be sufficient nourishment; in the

second year the arrows of famine are launched; in the third, a great

famine; in the fourth, neither famine nor plenty; in the fifth, great

abundance, and the Star shall shine forth from the East, and this is

the Star of the Messiah. And it will shine from the East for fifteen

days, and if it be prolonged, it will be for the good of Israel; in

the sixth, sayings (voices), and announcements (hearings); in the

seventh, wars, and at the close of the seventh the Messiah is to be

expected.' A similar statement occurs at the close of a collection of

three Midrashim - respectively entitled, 'The Book of Elijah,'

'Chapters about the Messiah,' and 'The Mysteries of R. Simon, the son

of Jochai'[1066]1066 - where we read that a Star in the East was to

appear two years before the birth of the Messiah. The statement is

almost equally remarkable, whether it represents a tradition previous

to the birth of Jesus, or originated after that event. But two years

before the birth of Christ, which, as we have calculated, took place

in December 749 a.u.c., or 5 before the Christian era, brings us to

the year 747 a.u.c., or 7 before Christ, in which such a Star should

appear in the East.[1067]1067

Did such a Star, then, really appear in the East seven years before

the Christian era? Astronomically speaking, and without any reference

to controversy, there can be no doubt that the most remarkable

conjunction of planets - that of Jupiter and Saturn in the

constellation of Pices, which occurs only once in 800 years - did take

place no less than three times in the year 747 a.u.c., or two years

before the birth of Christ (in May, October and December). This

conjunction is admitted by all astronomers. It was not only

extraordinary, but presented the most brilliant spectacle in the

night-sky, such as could not but attract the attention of all who

watched the sidereal heavens, but especially of those who busied

themselves with astrology. In the year following, that is, in 748

a.u.c., another planet, Mars, joined this conjunction. The merit of

first discovering these facts - of which it is unnecessary here to

present the literary history[1068]1068 - belongs to the great

Kepler,[1069]1069 who, accordingly, placed the Nativity of Christ in

the year 748 a.u.c. This date, however, is not only well nigh

impossible; but it has also been shown that such a conjunction would,

for various reasons, not answer the requirements of the Evangelical

narrative, so far as the guidance to Bethlehem is concerned. But it

does fully account for the attention of the Magi being aroused, and -

even if they had not possessed knowledge of the Jewish expectancy

above described - for their making inquiry of all around, and

certainly, among others, of the Jews. Here we leave the domain of the

certain, and enter upon that of the probable. Kepler, who was led to

the discovery by observing a similar conjunction in 1603-4, also

noticed, that when the three planets came into conjunction, a new,

extraordinary, brilliant, and peculiarly colored evanescent star was

visible between Jupiter and Saturn, and he suggested that a similar

star had appeared under the same circumstances in the conjunction

preceding the Nativity. Of this, of course, there is not, and cannot

be, absolute certainty. But, if so, this would be 'the star' of the

Magi, 'in its rising.' There is yet another remarkable statement,

which, however, must also be assigned only to the domain of the

probable. In the astronomical tables of the Chinese - to whose general

trustworthiness so high an authority as Humboldt bears

testimony[1070]1070 - the appearance of an evanescent star was noted.

Pingre and others have designated it as a comet, and calculated its

first appearance in February 750 a.u.c., which is just the time when

the Magi would, in all probability, leave Jerusalem for Bethlehem,

since this must have preceded the death of Herod, which took place in

March 750. Moreover, it has been astronomically ascertained, that such

a sidereal apparition would be visible to those who left Jerusalem,

and that it would point - almost seem to go before - in the direction

of, and stand over, Bethlehem.[1071]1071 Such, impartially stated, are

the facts of the case - and here the subject must, in the present

state of our information, be left.[1072]1072

Only two things are recorded of this visit of the Magi to Bethlehem:

their humblest Eastern homage, and their offerings.[1073]1073 Viewed

as gifts, the incense and the myrrh would, indeed, have been strangely

inappropriate. But their offerings were evidently intended as

specimens of the products of their country, and their presentation

was, even as in our own days, expressive of the homage of their

country to the new-found King. In this sense, then, the Magi may truly

be regarded as the representatives of the Gentile world; their homage

as the first and typical acknowledgment of Christ by those who

hitherto had been 'far off;' and their offerings as symbolic of the

world's tribute. This deeper significance the ancient Church has

rightly apprehended, though, perhaps, mistaking its grounds. Its

symbolism, twining, like the convolvulus, around athe Divine Plant,

has traced in the gold the emblem of His Royalty; in the myrrh, of His

Humanity, and that in the fullest evidence of it, in His burying; and

in the incense, that of His Divinity.[1074]1074

As always in the history of Christ, so here also, glory and suffering

appear in juxtaposition. It could not be, that these Magi should

become the innocent instruments of Herod's murderous designs; nor yet

that the Infant-Saviour should fall a victim to the tyrant. Warned of

God in a dream, the 'wise men' returned 'into their own country

another way;' and, warned by the angel of the Lord in a dream, the

Holy Family sought temporary shelter in Egypt. Baffled in the hope of

attaining his object through the Magi, the reckless tyrant sought to

secure it by an indiscriminate slaughter of all the children in

Bethlehem and its immediate neighborhood, from two years and under.

True, considering the population of Bethlehem, their number could only

have been small, probably twenty at most.[1075]1075 But the deed was

none the less atrocious; and these infants may justly be regarded as

the 'protomartyrs,' the first witnesses, of Christ, 'the blossom of

martydom' ('flores martyrum,' as Prudentius calls them). The slaughter

was entirely in accordance with the character and former measures of

Herod.[1076]1076 Nor do we wonder, that it remained unrecorded by

Josephus, since on other occasions also he has omitted events which to

us seem important.[1077]1077 The murder of a few infants in an

insignificant village might appear scarcely worth notice in a reign

stained by so much bloodshed. Besides, he had, perhaps, a special

motive for this silence. Josephus always carefully suppresses, so far

as possible, all that refers to the Christ[1078]1078 - probably not

only in accordance with his own religious views, but because mention

of a Christ might have been dangerous, certainly would have been

inconvenient, in a work written by an intense self-seeker, mainly for

readers in Rome.

Of two passages in his own Old Testament Scriptures the Evangelist

sees a fulfilment in these events. The flight into Egypt is to him the

fulfilment of this expression by Hosea, 'Out of Egypt have I called My

Son.'[1079]1079 In the murder of 'the Innocents,' he sees the

fulfilment of Rachel's lament[1080]1080 (who died and was buried in

Ramah)[1081]1081 over her children, the men of Benjamin, when the

exiles to Babylon met in Ramah,[1082]1082 and there was bitter wailing

at the prospect of parting for hopeless captivity, and yet bitterer

lament, as they who might have encumbered the onward march were

pitilessly slaughtered. Those who have attentively followed the course

of Jewish thinking, and marked how the ancient Synagogue, and that

rightly, read the Old Testament in its unity, as ever pointing to the

Messiah as the fulfilment of Israel's history, will not wonder at, but

fully accord with, St. Matthew's retrospective view. The words of

Hosea were in the highest sense 'fulfilled' in the flight to, and

return of, the Saviour from Egypt.[1083]1083 To an inspired writer,

nay, to a true Jewish reader of the Old Testament, the question in

regard to any prophecy could not be: What did the prophet - but, What

did the prophecy - mean? And this could only be unfolded in the course

of Israel's history. Similarly, those who ever saw in the past the

prototype of the future, and recognized in events, not only the

principle, but the very features, of that which was to come, could not

fail to perceive, in the bitter wail of the mothers of Bethlehem over

their slaughtered children, the full realisation of the prophetic

description of the scene enacted in Jeremiah's days. Had not the

prophet himself heard, in the lament of the captives to Babylon, the

echoes of Rachel's voice in the past? In neither one nor the other

case had the utterances of the prophets (Hosea and Jeremiah) been

predictions: they were prophetic. In neither one nor the other case

was the 'fulfilment' literal: it was Scriptural, and that in the

truest Old Testament sense.

CHAPTER IX.

THE CHILD-LIFE IN NAZARETH

(St. Matt. ii. 19-23; St. Luke ii. 39, 40.)

THE stay of the Holy Family in Egypt must have been of brief duration.

The cup of Herod's misdeeds, but also of his misery, was full. During

the whole latter part of his life, the dread of a rival to the throne

had haunted him, and he had sacrificed thousands, among them those

nearest and dearest to him, to lay that ghost.[1084]1084 And still the

tyrant was not at rest. A more terrible scene is not presented in

history than that of the closing days of Herod. Tormented by nameless

fears; ever and again a prey to vain remorse, when he would

frantically call for his passionately-loved, murdered wife Mariamme,

and her sons; even making attempts on his own life; the delirium of

tyranny, the passion for blood, drove him to the verge of madness. The

most loathsome disease, such as can scarcely be described, had

fastened on his body,[1085]1085 and his sufferings were at times

agonizing. By the advice of his physicians, he had himself carried to

the baths of Callirhoe (east of the Jordan), trying all remedies with

the determination of one who will do hard battle for life. It was in

vain. The namelessly horrible distemper, which had seized the old man

of seventy, held him fast in its grasp, and, so to speak, played death

on the living. He knew it, that his hour was come, and had himself

conveyed back to his palace under the palm-trees of Jericho. They had

known it also in Jerusalem, and, even before the last stage of his

disease, two of the most honored and loved Rabbis - Judas and Matthias

- had headed the wild band, which would sweep away all traces of

Herod's idolatrous rule. They began by pulling down the immense golden

eagle, which hung over the great gate of the Temple. The two

ringleaders, and forty of their followers, allowed themselves to be

taken by Herod's guards. A mock public trial in the theatre at Jericho

followed. Herod, carried out on a couch, was both accuser and judge.

The zealots, who had made noble answer to the tyrant, were burnt

alive; and the High-Priest, who was suspected of connivance, deposed.

After that the end came rapidly. On his return from Callirhoe, feeling

his death approaching, the King had summoned the noblest of Israel

throughout the land of Jericho, and shut them up in the Hippodrome,

with orders to his sister to have them slain immediately upon his

death, in the grim hope that the joy of the people at his decease

would thus be changed into mourning. Five days before his death one

ray of passing joy lighted his couch. Terrible to say, it was caused

by a letter from Augustus allowing Herod to execute his son Antipater

- the false accuser and real murderer of his half-brothers Alexander

and Aristobulus. The death of the wretched prince was hastened by his

attempt to bribe the jailer, as the noise in the palace, caused by an

attempted suicide of Herod, led him to suppose his father was actually

dead. And now the terrible drama was hastening to a close. The fresh

access of rage shortened the life which was already running out. Five

days more, and the terror of Judæa lay dead. He had reigned

thirty-seven years - thirty-four since his conquest of Jerusalem. Soon

the rule for which he had so long plotted, striven, and stained

himself with untold crimes, passed from his descendants. A century

more, and the whole race of Herod had been swept away.

We pass by the empty pageant and barbaric splendor of his burying in

the Castle of Herodium, close to Bethlehem. The events of the last few

weeks formed a lurid back-ground to the murder of 'the Innocents.' As

we have reckoned it, the visit of the Magi took place in February 750

a.u.c. On the 12th of March the Rabbis and their adherents suffered.

On the following night (or rather early morning) there was a lunar

eclipse; the execution of Antipater preceded the death of his father

by five days, and the latter occurred from seven to fourteen days

before the Passover, which in 750 took place on the 12th of

April.[1086]1086

It need scarcely be said, that Salome (Herod's sister) and her husband

were too wise to execute Herod's direction in regard to the noble Jews

shut up in the Hippodrome. Their liberation, and the death of Herod,

were marked by the leaders of the people as joyous events in the

so-called Megillath Taanith, or Roll of Fasts, although the date is

not exactly marked.[1087]1087 Henceforth this was to be a Yom Tobh

(feast-day), on which mourning was interdicted.[1088]1088

Herod had three times before changed his testament. By the first will

Antipater, the successful calumniator of Alexander and Aristobulus,

had been appointed his successor, while the latter two were named

kings, though we know not of what districts.[1089]1089 After the

execution of the two sons of Mariamme, Antipater was named king, and,

in case of his death, Herod, the son of Mariamme II. When the

treachery of Antipater was proved, Herod made a third will, in which

Antipas (the Herod Antipas of the New Testament) was named his

successor.[1090]1090 But a few days before his death he made yet

another disposition, by which Archelaus, the elder brother of Antipas

(both sons of Malthake, a Samaritan), was appointed king; Antipas

tetrarch of Galilee and Peræa; and Philip (the son of Cleopatra, of

Jerusalem[1091]1091), tetrarch of the territory east of the

Jordan.[1092]1092 These testaments reflected the varying phases of

suspicion and family-hatred through which Herod had passed. Although

the Emperor seems to have authorised him to appoint his

successor,[1093]1093 Herod wisely made his disposition dependent on

the approval of Augustus.[1094]1094 But the latter was not by any

means to be taken for granted. Archelaus had, indeed, been immediately

proclaimed King by the army; but he prudently declined the title, till

it had been confirmed by the Emperor. The night of his father's death,

and those that followed, were characteristically spent by Archelaus in

rioting with his friends.[1095]1095 But the people of Jerusalem were

not easily satisfied. At first liberal promises of amnesty and reforms

had assuaged the populace.[1096]1096 But the indignation excited by

the late murder of the Rabbis soon burst into a storm of lamentation,

and then of rebellion, which Archelaus silenced by the slaughter of

not less than three thousand, and that within the sacred precincts of

the Temple itself.[1097]1097

Other and more serious difficulties awaited him in Rome, whither he

went in company with his mother, his aunt Salome, and other relatives.

These, however, presently deserted him to espouse the claims of

Antipas, who likewise appeared before Augustus to plead for the royal

succession, assigned to him in a former testament. The Herodian

family, while intriguing and clamouring each on his own account, were,

for reasons easily understood, agreed that they would rather not have

a king at all, but be under the suzerainty of Rome; though, if king

there must be, they preferred Antipas to Archelaus. Meanwhile, fresh

troubles broke out in Palestine, which were suppressed by fire, sword,

and crucifixions. And now two other deputations arrived in the

Imperial City. Philip, the step-brother of Archelaus, to whom the

latter had left the administration of his kingdom, came to look after

his own interests, as well as to support Archelaus.[1098]1098

[1099]1099 At the same time, a Jewish deputation of fifty, from

Palestine, accompanied by eight thousand Roman Jews, clamoured for the

deposition of the entire Herodian race, on account of their

crimes,[1100]1100 and the incorporation of Palestine with Syria - no

doubt in hope of the same semi-independence under their own

authorities, enjoyed by their fellow-religionists in the Grecian

cities. Augustus decided to confirm the last testament of Herod, with

certain slight modifications, of which the most important was that

Archelaus should bear the title of Ethnarch, which, if he deserved it,

would by-and-by be exchanged for that of King. His dominions were to

be Judæa, Idumæa, and Samaria, with a revenue of 600 talents[1101]1101

(about 230,000l. to 240,000l). It is needless to follow the fortunes

of the new Ethnarch. He began his rule by crushing all resistance by

the wholesale slaughter of his opponents. Of the High-Priestly office

he disposed after the manner of his father. But he far surpassed him

in cruelty, oppression, luxury, the grossest egotism, and the lowest

sensuality, and that, without possessing the talent or the energy of

Herod.[1102]1102 His brief reign ceased in the year 6 of our era, when

the Emperor banished him, on account of his crimes to Gaul.

It must have been soon after the accession of Archelaus,[1103]1103 but

before tidings of it had actually reached Joseph in Egypt, that the

Holy Family returned to Palestine. The first intention of Joseph seems

to have been to settle in Bethlehem, where he had lived since the

birth of Jesus. Obvious reasons would incline him to choose this, and,

if possible, to avoid Nazareth as the place of his residence. His

trade, even had he been unknown in Bethlehem, would have easily

supplied the modest wants of his household. But when, on reaching

Palestine, he learned who the successor of Herod was, and also, no

doubt, in what manner he had inaugurated his reign, common prudence

would have dictated the withdrawal of the Infant-Saviour from the

dominions of Archelaus. But it needed Divine direction to determine

his return to Nazareth.[1104]1104

Of the many years spent in Nazareth, during which Jesus passed from

infancy to childhood, from childhood to youth, and from youth to

manhood, the Evangelic narrative has left us but briefest notice. Of

His childhood: that 'He grew and waxed strong in spirit, filled with

wisdom, and the grace of God was upon Him;'[1105]1105 of His youth:

besides the account of His questioning the Rabbis in the Temple, the

year before he attained Jewish majority - that 'He was subject to His

parents,' and that 'He increased in wisdom and in stature, and in

favour with God and man.' Considering what loving care watched over

Jewish child-life, tenderly marking by not fewer than eight

designations the various stages of its development,[1106]1106 and the

deep interest naturally attaching to the early life of the Messiah,

that silence, in contrast to the almost blasphemous absurdities of the

Apocryphal Gospels, teaches us once more, and most impressively, that

the Gospels furnish a history of the Saviour, not a biography of Jesus

of Nazareth.

St. Matthew, indeed, summarises the whole outward history of the life

in Nazareth in one sentence. Henceforth Jesus would stand out before

the Jews of His time - and, as we know, of all times,[1107]1107 by the

distinctive designation: 'of Nazareth,' {hebrew} (Notsri), Nazwra_ov,

the Nazarene.' In the mind of a Palestinian a peculiar significance

would attach to the by-Name of the Messiah, especially in its

connection with the general teaching of prophetic Scripture. And here

we must remember, that St. Matthew primarily addressed his Gospel to

Palestinian readers, and that it is the Jewish presentation of the

Messiah as meeting Jewish expectancy. In this there is nothing

derogatory to the character of the Gospel, no accommodation in the

sense of adaptation, since Jesus was not only the Saviour of the

world, but especially also the King of the Jews, and we are now

considering how He would stand out before the Jewish mind. On one

point all were agreed: His Name was Notsri (of Nazareth). St. Matthew

proceeds to point out, how entirely this accorded with prophetic

Scripture - not, indeed, with any single prediction, but with the

whole language of the prophets. From this[1108]1108 the Jews derived

not fewer than eight designations or Names by which the Messiah was to

be called. The most prominent among them was that of Tsemach, or

'Branch.'[1109]1109 We call it the most prominent, not only because it

is based upon the clearest Scripture-testimony, but because it

evidently occupied the foremost rank in Jewish thinking, being

embodied in this earliest portion of their daily liturgy: 'The Branch

of David, Thy Servant, speedily make to shoot forth, and His Horn

exalt Thou by Thy Salvation....Blessed art Thou Jehovah, Who causeth

to spring forth (literally: to branch forth) the Horn of Salvation'

(15th Eulogy). Now, what is expressed by the word Tsemach is also

conveyed by the term Netser, 'Branch,' in such passages as Isaiah

xi,1, which was likewise applied to the Messiah.[1110]1110 Thus,

starting from Isaiah xi. 1, Netser being equivalent to Tsemach, Jesus

would, as Notsri or Ben Netser,[1111]1111 [1112]1112 bear in popular

parlance, and that on the ground of prophetic Scriptures, the exact

equivalent of the best-known designation of the Messiah.[1113]1113 The

more significant this, that it was not a self-chosen nor man-given

name, but arose, in the providence of God, from what otherwise might

have been called the accident of His residence. We admit that this is

a Jewish view; but then this Gospel is the Jewish view of the Jewish

Messiah.

But, taking this Jewish title in its Jewish significance, it has also

a deeper meaning, and that not only to Jews, but to all men. The idea

of Christ as the Divinely placed 'Branch' (symbolised by His

Divinely-appointed early residence), small and despised in its

forthshooting, or then visible appearance (like Nazareth and the

Nazarenes), but destined to grow as the Branch sprung out of Jesse's

roots, is most marvellously true to the whole history of the Christ,

alike as sketched 'by the prophets,' and as exhibited in reality. And

thus to us all, Jews or Gentiles, the Divine guidance to Nazareth and

the name Nazarene present the truest fulfilment of the prophecies of

His history.

Greater contrast could scarcely be imagined than between the intricate

scholastic studies of the Judæans, and the active pursuits that

engaged men in Galilee. It was a common saying: 'If a person wishes to

be rich, let him go north; if he wants to be wise, let him come south'

- and to Judæa, accordingly, flocked, from ploughshare and workshop,

whoever wished to become 'learned in the Law.' The very neighbourhood

of the Gentile world, the contact with the great commercial centres

close by, and the constant intercourse with foreigners, who passed

through Galilee along one of the world's great highways, would render

the narrow exclusiveness of the Southerners impossible. Galilee was to

Judaism 'the Court of the Gentiles' - the Rabbinic Schools of Judæa

its innermost Sanctuary. The natural disposition of the people, even

the soil and climate of Galilee, were not favourable to the

all-engrossing passion for Rabbinic study. In Judæa all seemed to

invite to retrospection and introspection; to favour habits of

solitary thought and study, till it kindled into fanaticism. Mile by

mile as you travelled southwards, memories of the past would crowd

around, and thoughts of the future would rise within. Avoiding the

great towns as the centres of hated heathenism, the traveller would

meet few foreigners, but everywhere encounter those gaunt

representatives of what was regarded as the superlative excellency of

his religion. These were the embodiment of Jewish piety and

asceticism, the possessors and expounders of the mysteries of his

faith, the fountain-head of wisdom, who were not only sure of heaven

themselves, but knew its secrets, and were its very aristocracy; men

who could tell him all about his own religion, practised its most

minute injunctions, and could interpret every stroke and letter of the

Law - nay, whose it actually was to 'loose and to bind,' to pronounce

an action lawful or unlawful, and to 'remit or retain sins,' by

declaring a man liable to, or free from, expiatory sacrifices, or else

punishment in this or the next world. No Hindoo fanatic would more

humbly bend before Brahmin saints, nor devout Romanist more venerate

the members of a holy fraternity, than the Jew his great

Rabbis.[1114]1114 Reason, duty, and precept, alike bound him to

reverence them, as he reverenced the God Whose interpreters,

representatives, deputies, intimate companions, almost colleagues in

the heavenly Sanhedrin, they were. And all around, even nature itself,

might seem to foster such tendencies. Even at that time Judæa was

comparatively desolate, barren, grey. The decaying cities of ancient

renown; the lone highland scenery; the bare, rugged hills; the rocky

terraces from which only artificial culture could woo a return; the

wide solitary plains, deep glens, limestone heights - with distant

glorious Jerusalem ever in the far background, would all favour

solitary thought and religious abstraction.

It was quite otherwise in Galilee. The smiling landscape of Lower

Galilee invited the easy labour of the agriculturist. Even the

highlands of Upper Galilee[1115]1115 were not, like those of Judæa,

sombre, lonely, enthusiasm-killing, but gloriously grand, free, fresh,

and bracing. A more beautiful country - hill, dale, and lake - could

scarcely be imagined than Galilee Proper. It was here that Asher had

'dipped his foot in oil.' According to the Rabbis, it was easier to

rear a forest of olive-trees in Galilee than one child in Judæa. Corn

grew in abundance; the wine, though not so plentiful as the oil, was

rich and generous. Proverbially, all fruit grew in perfection, and

altogether the cost of living was about one-fifth that in Judæa. And

then, what a teeming, busy population! Making every allowance for

exaggeration, we cannot wholly ignore the account of Josephus about

the 240 towns and villages of Galilee, each with not less than 15,000

inhabitants. In the centres of industry all then known trades were

busily carried on; the husbandman pursued his happy toil on genial

soil, while by the Lake of Gennesaret, with its unrivalled beauty, its

rich villages, and lovely retreats, the fisherman plied his healthy

avocation. By those waters, overarched by a deep blue sky, spangled

with the brilliancy of innumerable stars, a man might feel constrained

by nature itself to meditate and pray; he would not be likely to

indulge in a morbid fanaticism.

Assuredly, in its then condition, Galilee was not the home of

Rabbinism, though that of generous spirits, of warm, impulsive hearts,

of intense nationalism, of simple manners, and of earnest piety. Of

course, there would be a reverse side to the picture. Such a race

would be excitable, passionate, violent. The Talmud accuses them of

being quarrelsome,[1116]1116 but admits that they cared more for

honour than for money. The great ideal teacher of Palestinian schools

was Akiba, and one of his most outspoken opponents a Galilean, Rabbi

José.[1117]1117 In religious observances their practice was simpler;

as regarded canon-law they often took independent views, and generally

followed the interpretations of those who, in opposition to Akiba,

inclined to the more mild and rational - we had almost said, the more

human - application of traditionalism.[1118]1118 The Talmud mentions

several points in which the practice of the Galileans differed from

that of Judæa - all either in the direction of more practical

earnestness,[1119]1119 or of alleviation of Rabbinic

rigorism.[1120]1120 On the other hand, they were looked down upon as

neglecting traditionalism, unable to rise to its speculative heights,

and preferring the attractions of the Haggadah to the logical

subtleties of the Halakhah.[1121]1121 There was a general contempt in

Rabbinic circles for all that was Galilean. Although the Judæan or

Jerusalem dialect was far from pure,[1122]1122 the people of Galilee

were especially blamed for neglecting the study of their language,

charged with error in grammar, and especially with absurd

malpronunciation, sometimes leading to ridiculous mistakes.[1123]1123

'Galilean - Fool!' was so common an expression, that a learned lady

turned with it upon so great a man as R. José, the Galilean, because

he had used two needless words in asking her the road to

Lydda.[1124]1124 [1125]1125 Indeed, this R. José had considerable

prejudices to overcome, before his remarkable talents and learning

were fully acknowledged.[1126]1126

Among such a people, and in that country, Jesus spent by far the

longest part of His life upon earth. Generally, this period may be

described as that of His true and full Human Development - physical,

intellectual, spiritual - of outward submission to man, and inward

submission to God, with the attendant results of 'wisdom,' 'favour,'

and 'grace.' Necessary, therefore, as this period was, if the Christ

was to be True Man, it cannot be said that it was lost, even so far as

His Work as Saviour was concerned. It was more than the preparation

for that work; it was the commencement of it: subjectively (and

passively), the self-abnegation of humiliation in His willing

submission; and objectively (and actively), the fulfilment of all

righteousness through it. But into this 'mystery of piety' we may only

look afar off - simply remarking, that it almost needed for us also

these thirty years of Human Life, that the overpowering thought of His

Divinity might not overshadow that of His Humanity. But if He was

subject to such conditions, they must, in the nature of things, have

affected His development. It is therefore not presumption when,

without breaking the silence of Holy Scripture, we follow the various

stages of the Nazareth life, as each is, so to speak, initialled by

the brief but emphatic summaries of the third Gospel.

In regard to the Child-Life,[1127]1127 we read: 'And the Child grew,

and waxed strong in spirit,[1128]1128 being filled with wisdom, and

the grace of God was upon Him.'[1129]1129 This marks, so to speak, the

lowest rung in the ladder. Having entered upon life as the Divine

Infant, He began it as the Human Child, subject to all its conditions,

yet perfect in them.

These conditions were, indeed, for that time, the happiest

conceivable, and such as only centuries of Old Testament life-training

could have made them. The Gentile world here presented terrible

contrast, alike in regard to the relation of parents and children, and

the character and moral object of their upbringing. Education begins

in the home, and there were not homes like those in Israel; it is

imparted by influence and example, before it comes by teaching; it is

acquired by what is seen and heard, before it is laboriously learned

from books; its real object becomes instinctively felt, before its

goal is consciously sought. What Jewish fathers and mothers were; what

they felt towards their children; and with what reverence, affection,

and care the latter returned what they had received, is known to every

reader of the Old Testament. The relationship of father has its

highest sanction and embodiment in that of God towards Israel; the

tenderness and care of a mother in that of the watchfulness and pity

of the Lord over His people. The semi-Divine relationship between

children and parents appears in the location, the far more than

outward duties which it implies in the wording, of the Fifth

Commandment. No punishment more prompt than that of its

breach;[1130]1130 no description more terribly realistic than that of

the vengeance which overtakes such sin.[1131]1131

From the first days of its existence, a religious atmosphere

surrounded the child of Jewish parents. Admitted in the number of

God's chosen people by the deeply significant rite of circumcision,

when its name was first spoken in the accents of prayer,[1132]1132 it

was henceforth separated unto God. Whether or not it accepted the

privileges and obligations implied in this dedication, they came to

him directly from God, as much as the circumstances of his birth. The

God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of Israel, the God of the

promises, claimed him, with all of blessing which this conveyed, and

of responsibility which resulted from it. And the first wish expressed

for him was that, 'as he had been joined to the covenant,' so it might

also be to him in regard to the 'Torah' (Law), to 'the Chuppah' (the

marriage-baldachino), and 'to good works;' in other words, that he

might live 'godly, soberly, and righteously in this present world' - a

holy, happy, and God-devoted life. And what this was, could not for a

moment be in doubt. Putting aside the overlying Rabbinic

interpretations, the ideal of life was presented to the mind of the

Jew in a hundred different forms - in none perhaps more popularly than

in the words, 'These are the things of which a man enjoys the fruit in

this world, but their possession continueth for the next: to honour

father and mother, pious works, peacemaking between man and man, and

the study of the Law, which is equivalent to them all.'[1133]1133 This

devotion to the Law was, indeed, to the Jew the all in all - the sum

of intellectual pursuits, the aim of life. What better thing could a

father seek for his child than this inestimable boon?

The first education was necessarily the mother's.[1134]1134 Even the

Talmud owns this, when, among the memorable sayings of the sages, it

records one of the School of Rabbi Jannai, to the effect that

knowledge of the Law may be looked for in those, who have sucked it in

at their mother's breast.[1135]1135 And what the true mothers in

Israel were, is known not only from instances in the Old Testament,

from the praise of woman in the Book of Proverbs, and from the sayings

of the son of Sirach (Ecclus. iii.[1136]1136), but from the Jewish

women of the New Testament.[1137]1137 If, according to a somewhat

curious traditional principle, women were dispensed from all such

positive obligations as were incumbent at fixed periods of time (such

as putting on phylacteries), other religious duties devolved

exclusively upon them. The Sabbath meal, the kindling of the Sabbath

lamp, and the setting apart a portion of the dough from the bread for

the household, these are but instances, with which every 'Taph,' as he

clung to his mother's skirts, must have been familiar. Even before he

could follow her in such religious household duties, his eyes must

have been attracted by the Mezuzah attached to the door-post, as the

name of the Most High on the outside of the little folded

parchment[1138]1138 was reverently touched by each who came or went,

and then the fingers kissed that had come in contact with the Holy

Name.[1139]1139 Indeed, the duty of the Mezuzah was incumbent on women

also, and one can imagine it to have been in the heathen-home of Lois

and Euice in the far-off 'dispersion,' where Timothy would first learn

to wonder at, then to understand, its meaning. And what lessons for

the past and for the present might not be connected with it! In

popular opinion it was the symbol of the Divine guard over Israel's

homes, the visible emblem of this joyous hymn: 'The Lord shall

preserve thy going out and coming in, from this time forth, and even

for evermore.'[1140]1140

There could not be national history, nor even romance, to compare with

that by which a Jewish mother might hold her child entranced. And it

was his own history - that of his tribe, clan, perhaps family; of the

past, indeed, but yet of the present, and still more of the glorious

future. Long before he could go to school, or even Synagogue, the

private and united prayers and the domestic rites, whether of the

weekly Sabbath or of festive seasons, would indelibly impress

themselves upon his mind. In mid-winter there was the festive

illumination in each home. In most houses, the first night only one

candle was lit, the next two, and so on to the eighth day; and the

child would learn that this was symbolic, and commemorative of the

Dedication of the Temple, its purgation, and the restoration of its

services by the lion-hearted Judas the Maccabee. Next came, in

earliest spring, the merry time of Purim, the Feast of Esther and of

Israel's deliverance through her, with its good cheer and boisterous

enjoyments.[1141]1141 Although the Passover might call the rest of the

family to Jerusalem, the rigid exclusion of all leaven during the

whole week could not pass without its impressions. Then, after the

Feast of Weeks, came bright summer. But its golden harvest and its

rich fruits would remind of the early dedication of the first and best

to the Lord, and of those solemn processions in which it was carried

up to Jerusalem. As autumn seared the leaves, the Feast of the New

Year spoke of the casting up of man's accounts in the great Book of

Judgment, and the fixing of destiny for good or for evil. Then

followed the Fast of the Day of Atonement, with its tremendous

solemnities, the memory of which could never fade from mind or

imagination; and, last of all, in the week of the Feast of

Tabernacles, there were the strange leafy booths in which they lived

and joyed, keeping their harvest-thanksgiving; and praying and longing

for the better harvest of a renewed world.

But it was not only through sight and hearing that, from its very

inception, life in Israel became religious. There was also from the

first positive teaching, of which the commencement would necessarily

devolve on the mother. It needed not the extravagant laudations, nor

the promises held out by the Rabbis, to incite Jewish women to this

duty. If they were true to their descent, it would come almost

naturally to them. Scripture set before them a continuous succession

of noble Hebrew mothers. How well they followed their example, we

learn from the instance of her, whose son, the child of a Gentile

father, and reared far away, where there was not even a Synagogue to

sustain religious life, had 'from an infant[1142]1142 known the Holy

Scriptures,' and that in their life-moulding influence.[1143]1143 It

was, indeed, no idle boast that the Jews 'were from their

swaddling-clothes...trained to recognise God as their Father, and as

the Maker of the world;' that, 'having been taught the knowledge (of

the laws) from earliest youth, they bore in their souls the image of

the commandments;'[1144]1144 that 'from their earliest consciousness

they learned the laws, so as to have them, as it were, engraven upon

the soul;'[1145]1145 and that they were 'brought up in learning,'

'exercised in the laws,' 'and made acquainted with the acts of their

predecessors in order to their imitation of them.'[1146]1146

But while the earliest religious teaching would, of necessity, come

from the lips of the mother, it was the father who was 'bound to teach

his son.'[1147]1147 To impart to the child knowledge of the Torah

conferred as great spiritual distinction, as if a man had received the

Law itself on Mount Horeb.[1148]1148 Every other engagement, even the

necessary meal, should give place to this paramount duty;[1149]1149

nor should it be forgotten that, while here real labour was necessary,

it would never prove fruitless.[1150]1150 That man was of the profane

vulgar (an Am ha-arets), who had sons, but failed to bring them up in

knowledge of the Law.[1151]1151 Directly the child learned to speak,

his religious instruction was to begin[1152]1152 - no doubt, with such

verses of Holy Scripture as composed that part of the Jewish liturgy,

which answers to our Creed.[1153]1153 Then would follow other passages

from the Bible, short prayers, and select sayings of the sages.

Special attention was given to the culture of the memory, since

forgetfulness might prove as fatal in its consequences as ignorance or

neglect of the Law.[1154]1154 Very early the child must have been

taught what might be called his birthday-text - some verse of

Scripture beginning, or ending with, or at least containing, the same

letters as his Hebrew name. This guardian-promise the child would

insert in its daily prayers.[1155]1155 The earliest hymns taught would

be the Psalms for the days of the week, or festive Psalms, such as the

Hallel,[1156]1156 or those connected with the festive pilgrimages to

Zion.

The regular instruction commenced with the fifth or sixth year

(according to strength), when every child was sent to

school.[1157]1157 There can be no reasonable doubt that at that time

such schools existed throughout the land. We find references to them

at almost every period; indeed, the existence of higher schools and

Academies would not have been possible without such primary

instruction. Two Rabbis of Jerusalem, specially distinguished and

beloved on account of their educational labours, were among the last

victims of Herod's cruelty.[1158]1158 Later on, tradition ascribes to

Joshua the son of Gamla the introduction of schools in every town, and

the compulsory education in them of all children above the age of

six.[1159]1159 Such was the transcendent merit attaching to this act,

that it seemed to blot out the guilt of the purchase for him of the

High-Priestly office by his wife Martha, shortly before the

commencement of the great Jewish war.[1160]1160 [1161]1161 To pass

over the fabulous number of schools supposed to have existed in

Jerusalem, tradition had it that, despite of this, the City only fell

because of the neglect of the education of children.[1162]1162 It was

even deemed unlawful to live in a place where there was no

school.[1163]1163 Such a city deserved to be either destroyed or

excommunicated.[1164]1164

It would lead too far to give details about the appointment of, and

provision for, teachers, the arrangements of the schools, the method

of teaching, or the subjects of study, the more so as many of these

regulations date from a period later than that under review. Suffice

it that, from the teaching of the alphabet or of writing, onwards to

the farthest limit of instruction in the most advanced Academies of

the Rabbis, all is marked by extreme care, wisdom, accuracy, and a

moral and religious purpose as the ultimate object. For a long time it

was not uncommon to teach in the open air;[1165]1165 but this must

have been chiefly in connection with theological discussions, and the

instruction of youths. But the children were gathered in the

Synagogues, or in School-houses,[1166]1166 where at first they either

stood, teacher and pupils alike, or else sat on the ground in a

semicircle, facing the teacher, as it were, literally to carry into

practice the prophetic saying: 'Thine eyes shall see thy

teachers.'[1167]1167 The introduction of benches or chairs was of

later date; but the principle was always the same, that in respect of

accommodation there was no distinction between teacher and

taught.[1168]1168 Thus, encircled by his pupils, as by a crown of

glory (to use the language of Maimonides), the teacher - generally the

Chazzan, or Officer of the Synagogue[1169]1169 - should impart to them

the precious knowledge of the Law, with constant adaptation to their

capacity, with unwearied patience, intense earnestness, strictness

tempered by kindness, but, above all, with the highest object of their

training ever in view. To keep children from all contact with vice; to

train them to gentleness, even when bitterest wrong had been received;

toshow sin in its repulsiveness, rather than to terrify by its

consequences; to train to strict truthfulness; to avoid all that might

lead to disagreeable or indelicate thoughts; and to do all this

without showing partiality, without either undue severity, or laxity

of discipline, with judicious increase of study and work, with careful

attention to thoroughness in acquiring knowledge - all this and more

constituted the ideal set before the teacher, and made his office of

such high esteem in Israel.

Roughly classifying the subjects of study, it was held, that, up to

ten years of age, the Bible exclusively should be the text-book; from

ten to fifteen, the Mishnah, or traditional law; after that age, the

student should enter on those theological discussions which occupied

time and attention in the higher Academies of the Rabbis.[1170]1170

Not that this progression would always be made. For, if after three,

or, at most, five years of tuition - that is, after having fairly

entered on Mishnic studies - the child had not shown decided aptitude,

little hope was to be entertained of his future. The study of the

Bible commenced with that of the Book of Leviticus.[1171]1171 Thence

it passed to the other parts of the Pentateuch; then to the Prophets;

and, finally, to the Hagiographa. What now constitutes the Gemara or

Talmud was taught in the Academies, to which access could not be

gained till after the age of fifteen. Care was taken not to send a

child too early to school, nor to overwork him when there. For this

purpose the school-hours were fixed, and attendance shortened during

the summer-months.

The teaching in school would, of course, be greatly aided by the

services of the Synagogue, and the deeper influences of home-life. We

know that, even in the troublous times which preceded the rising of

the Maccabees, the possession of parts or the whole of the Old

Testament (whether in the original or the LXX. rendering) was so

common, that during the great persecutions a regular search was made

throughout the land for every copy of the Holy Scriptures, and those

punished who possessed them.[1172]1172 After the triumph of the

Maccabees, these copies of the Bible would, of course, be greatly

multiplied. And, although perhaps only the wealthy could have

purchased a MS. of the whole Old Testament in Hebrew, yet some portion

or portions of the Word of God, in the original, would form the most

cherished treasure of every pious household. Besides, a school for

Bible-study was attached to every academy,[1173]1173 in which copies

of the Holy Scripture would be kept. From anxious care to preserve the

integrity of the text, it was deemed unlawful to make copies of small

portions of a book of Scripture.[1174]1174 But exception was made of

certain sections which were copied for the instruction of children.

Among them, the history of the Creation to that of the Flood; Lev.

i.-ix.; and Numb. i.-x. 35, are specially mentioned.[1175]1175

It was in such circumstances, and under such influences, that the

early years of Jesus passed. To go beyond this, and to attempt lifting

the veil which lies over His Child-History, would not only be

presumptuous,[1176]1176 but involve us in anachronisms. Fain would we

know it, whether the Child Jesus frequented the Synagogue School; who

was His teacher, and who those who sat beside Him on the ground,

earnestly gazing on the face of Him Who repeated the sacrificial

ordinances in the Book of Leviticus, that were all to be fulfilled in

Him. But it is all 'a mystery of Godliness.' We do not even know quite

certainly whether the school-system had, at that time, extended to

far-off Nazareth; nor whether the order and method which have been

described were universally observed at that time. In all probability,

however, there was such a school in Nazareth, and, if so, the

Child-Saviour would conform to the general practice of attendance. We

may thus, still with deepest reverence, think of Him as learning His

earliest earthly lesson from the Book of Leviticus. Learned Rabbis

there were not in Nazareth - either then or afterwards.[1177]1177 He

would attend the services of the Synagogue, where Moses and the

prophets were read, and, as afterwards by Himself,[1178]1178

occasional addresses delivered.[1179]1179 That His was pre-eminently a

pious home in the highest sense, it seems almost irreverent to say.

From His intimate familiarity with Holy Scripture, in its every

detail, we may be allowed to infer that the home of Nazareth, however

humble, possessed a precious copy of the Sacred Volume in its

entirety. At any rate, we know that from earliest childhood it must

have formed the meat and drink of the God-Man. The words of the Lord,

as recorded by St. Matthew[1180]1180 and St. Luke,[1181]1181 also

imply that the Holy Scriptures which He read were in the original

Hebrew, and that they were written in the square, or Assyrian,

characters.[1182]1182 Indeed, as the Pharisees and Sadducees always

appealed to the Scriptures in the original, Jesus could not have met

them on any other ground, and it was this which gave such point to His

frequent expostulations with them: 'Have ye not read?'

But far other thoughts than theirs gathered around His study of the

Old Testament Scriptures. When comparing their long discussions on the

letter and law of Scripture with His references to the Word of God, it

seems as if it were quite another book which was handled. As we gaze

into the vast glory of meaning which He opens to us; follow the

shining track of heavenward living to which He points; behold the

lines of symbol, type, and prediction converging in the grand unity of

that Kingdom which became reality in Him; or listen as, alternately,

some question of His seems to rive the darkness, as with flash of

sudden light, or some sweet promise of old to lull the storm, some

earnest lesson to quiet the tossing waves - we catch faint, it may be

far-off, glimpses of how, in that early Child-life, when the Holy

Scriptures were His special study, He must have read them, and what

thoughts must have been kindled by their light. And thus better than

before can we understand it: 'And the Child grew, and waxed strong in

spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon Him.'

CHAPTER X.

IN THE HOUSE OF HIS HEAVENLY, AND IN THE HOME OF HIS EARTHLY FATHER -

THE

TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM - THE RETIREMENT AT NAZARETH.

(St. Luke ii. 41-52.)

Once only is the great silence, which lies on the history of Christ's

early life, broken. It is to record what took place on His first visit

to the Temple. What this meant, even to an ordinary devout Jew, may

easily be imagined. Where life and religion were so intertwined, and

both in such organic connection with the Temple and the people of

Israel, every thoughtful Israelite must have felt as if his real life

were not in what was around, but ran up into the grand unity of the

people of God, and were compassed by the halo of its sanctity. To him

it would be true in the deepest sense, that, so to speak, each

Israelite was born in Zion, as, assuredly, all the well-springs of his

life were there.[1183]1183 It was, therefore, not merely the natural

eagerness to see the City of their God and of their fathers, glorious

Jerusalem; nor yet the lawful enthusiasm, national or religious, which

would kindle at the thought of 'our feet' standing within those gates,

through which priests, prophets, and kings had passed; but far deeper

feelings which would make glad, when it was said: 'Let us go into the

house of Jehovah.' They were not ruins to which precious memories

clung, nor did the great hope seem to lie afar off, behind the

evening-mist. But 'glorious things were spoken of Zion, the City of

God' - in the past, and in the near future 'the thrones of David' were

to be set within her walls, and amidst her palaces.[1184]1184

In strict law, personal observance of the ordinances, and hence

attendance on the feasts at Jerusalem, devolved on a youth only when

he was of age, that is, at thirteen years. Then he became what was

called 'a son of the Commandment,' or 'of the Torah.'[1185]1185 But,

as a matter of fact, the legal age was in this respect anticipated by

two years, or at least by one.[1186]1186 It was in accordance with

this custom, that,[1187]1187 on the first Pascha after Jesus had

passed His twelfth year, His Parents took Him with them in the

'company' of the Nazarenes to Jerusalem. The text seems to indicate,

that it was their wont[1188]1188 to go up to the Temple; and we mark

that, although women were not bound to make such personal

appearance,[1189]1189 Mary gladly availed herself of what seems to

have been the direction of Hillel (followed also by other religious

women, mentioned in Rabbinic writings), to go up to the solemn

services of the Sanctuary. Politically, times had changed. The weak

and wicked rule of Archelaus had lasted only nine years,[1190]1190

when, in consequence of the charges against him, he was banished to

Gaul. Judæa, Samaria and Idumæa were now incorporated into the Roman

province of Syria, under its Governor, or Legate. The special

administration of that part of Palestine was, however, entrusted to a

Procurator, whose ordinary residence was at Cæsarea. It will be

remembered, that the Jews themselves had desired some such

arrangement, in te vain hope that, freed from the tyranny of the

Herodians, they might enjoy the semi-independence of their brethren in

the Grecian cities. But they found it otherwise. Their privileges were

not secured to them; their religious feelings and prejudices were

constantly, though perhaps not intentionally, outraged;[1191]1191 and

their Sanhedrin shorn of its real power, though the Romans would

probably not interfere in what might be regarded as purely religious

questions. Indeed, the very presence of the Roman power in Jerusalem

was a constant offence, and must necessarily have issued in a life and

death struggle. One of the first measures of the new Legate of Syria,

P. Sulpicius Quirinius,[1192]1192 after confiscating the ill-gotten

wealth of Archelaus, was to order a census in Palestine, with the view

of fixing the taxation of the country.[1193]1193 The popular

excitement which this called forth was due, probably, not so much to

opposition on principle,[1194]1194 as to this, that the census was

regarded as the badge of servitude, and incompatible with the

Theocratic character of Israel.[1195]1195 Had a census been considered

absolutely contrary to the Law, the leading Rabbis would never have

submitted to it;[1196]1196 nor would the popular resistance to the

measure of Quirinius have been quelled by the representations of the

High-Priest Joazar. But, although through his influence the census was

allowed to be taken, the popular agitation was not suppressed. Indeed,

that movement formed part of the history of the time, and not only

affected political and religious parties in the land, but must have

been presented to the mind of Jesus Himself, since, as will be shown,

it had a representative within His own family circle.

This accession of Herod, misnamed the Great, marked a period in Jewish

history, which closed with the war of despair against Rome and the

flames of Jerusalem and the Temple. It gave rise to the appearance of

what Josephus, despite his misrepresentation of them, rightly calls a

fourth party - besides the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes - that of

the Nationalists.[1197]1197 A deeper and more independent view of the

history of the times would, perhaps, lead us to regard the whole

country as ranged either with or against that party. As afterwards

expressed in its purest and simplest form, their watchword was,

negatively, to call no human being their absolute lord;[1198]1198

positively, that God alone was to lead as absolute Lord.[1199]1199 It

was, in fact, a revival of the Maccabean movement, perhaps more fully

in its national than in its religious aspect, although the two could

scarcely be separated in Israel, and their motto almost reads like

that which according to some, furnished the letters whence the name

Maccabee[1200]1200 was composed: Mi Camochah Baelim Jehovah, 'Who like

Thee among the gods, Jehovah?'[1201]1201 It is characteristic of the

times and religious tendencies, that their followers were no more

called, as before, Assideans or Chasidim, 'the pious,' but Zealots

(zjlwtai) or by the Hebrew equivalent Qannaim (Cananæans, not

'Canaanites,' as in A.V.) The real home of that party was not Judæa

nor Jerusalem, but Galilee.

Quite other, and indeed antagonistic, tendencies prevailed in the

stronghold of the Herodians, Sadducees, and Pharisees. Of the latter

only a small portion had any real sympathy with the national movement.

Each party followed its own direction. The Essenes, absorbed in

theosophic speculations, not untinged with Eastern mysticism, withdrew

from all contact with the world, and practiced an ascetic life. With

them, whatever individuals may have felt, no such movement could have

originated; nor yet with the Herodians or Boethusians, who combined

strictly Pharisaic views with Herodian political partisanship; nor yet

with the Sadducees; nor, finally, with what constituted the great bulk

of the Rabbinist party, the School of Hillel. But the brave, free

Highlanders of Galilee, and of the region across their glorious lake,

seemed to have inherited the spirit of Jephthah,[1202]1202 and to have

treasured as their ideal - alas! often wrongly apprehended - their own

Elijah, as, descending in wild, shaggy garb from the mountains of

Gilead, he did battle against all the might of Ahab and Jezebel. Their

enthusiasm could not be kindled by the logical subtleties of the

Schools, but their hearts burned within them for their God, their

land, their people, their religion, and their freedom.

It was in Galilee, accordingly, that such wild, irregular resistance

to Herod at the outset of his career, as could be offered, was

organised by guerilla bands, which traversed the country, and owned

one Ezekias as their leader. Although Josephus calls them 'robbers,' a

far different estimate of them obtained in Jerusalem, where, as we

remember, the Sanhedrin summoned Herod to answer for the execution of

Esekias. What followed is told in substantially the same manner,

though with difference of form[1203]1203 and, sometimes, nomenclature,

by Josephus,[1204]1204 and in the Talmud.[1205]1205 The story has

already been related in another connection. Suffice it that, after the

accession of Herod, the Sanhedrin became a shadow of itself. It was

packed with Sadducees and Priests of the King's nomination, and with

Doctors of the canon-law, whose only aim was to pursue in peace their

subtleties; who had not, and, from their contempt of the people, could

not have, any real sympathy with national aspirations; and whose ideal

heavenly Kingdom was a miraculous, heaven-instituted, absolute rule of

Rabbis. Accordingly, the national movement, as it afterwards

developed, received neither the sympathy nor the support of leading

Rabbis. Perhaps the most gross manifestation of this was exhibited,

shortly before the taking of Jerusalem, by R. Jochanan ben Saccai, the

most renowned among its teachers. Almost unmoved he had witnessed the

portent of the opening of the Temple-doors by an unseen Hand, which,

by an interpretation of Zech. xi. 1, was popularly regarded as

betokening its speedy destruction.[1206]1206 [1207]1207 There is

cynicism, as well as want of sympathy, in the story recorded by

tradition, that when, in the straits of famine during the siege,

Jochanan saw people eagerly feasting on soup made from straw, he

scouted the idea of such a garrison resisting Vespasian and

immediately resolved to leave the city.[1208]1208 In fact, we have

distinct evidence that R. Jochanan had, as leader of the School of

Hillel, used all his influence, although in vain, to persuade the

people to submission to Rome.[1209]1209

We can understand it, how this school had taken so little interest in

anything purely national. Generally only one side of the character of

Hillel has been presented by writers, and even this in greatly

exaggerated language. His much lauded gentleness, peacefulness, and

charity were rather negative than positive qualities. He was a

philosophic Rabbi, whose real interest lay in a far other direction

than that of sympathy with the people - and whose motto seemed,

indeed, to imply, 'We, the sages, are the people of God; but this

people, who know not the Law, are curse.'[1210]1210 A far deeper

feeling, and intense, though misguided earnestness pervaded the School

of Shammai. It was in the minority, but it sympathised with the

aspirations of the people. It was not philosophic nor eclectic, but

intensely national. It opposed all approach to, and by, strangers; it

dealt harshly with proselytes,[1211]1211 even the most distinguished

(such as Akylas or Onkelos);[1212]1212 it passed, by first murdering a

number of Hillelites who had come to the deliberative assembly,

eighteen decrees, of which the object was to prevent all intercourse

with Gentiles;[1213]1213 and it furnished leaders or supporters of the

national movement.

We have marked the rise of the Nationalist party in Galilee at the

time of Herod's first appearance on the scene, and learned how

mercilessly he tried to suppress it: first, by the execution of

Ezekias and his adherents, and afterwards, when he became King of

Judæa, by the slaughter of the Sanhedrists. The consequence of this

unsparing severity was to give Rabbinism a different direction. The

School of Hillel which henceforth commanded the majority, were men of

no political colour, theological theorists, self-seeking Jurists, vain

rather than ambitious. The minority, represented by the School of

Shammai, were Nationalists. Defective and even false as both

tendencies were, there was certainly more hope, as regarded the

Kingdom of God, of the Nationalists than of the Sophists and Jurists.

It was, of course, the policy of Herod to suppress all national

aspirations. No one understood the meaning of Jewish Nationalism so

well as he; no one ever opposed it so sytematically. There was

internal fitness, so to speak, in his attempt to kill the King of the

Jews among the infants of Bethlehem. The murder of the Sanhedrists,

with the consequent new anti-Messianic tendency of Rabbinism, was one

measure in that direction; the various appointments which Herod made

to the High-Priesthood another. And yet it was not easy, even in those

times, to deprive the Pontificate of its power and influence. The

High-Priest was still the representative of the religious life of the

people, and he acted on all occasions, when the question under

discussion was not one exclusively of subtle canon-law, as the

President of the Sanhedrin, in which, indeed, the members of his

family had evidently seat and vote.[1214]1214 The four

families[1215]1215 from which, with few exceptions, the High-Priest -

however often changed - were chosen, absorbed the wealth, and

commanded the influence, of a state-endowed establishment, in its

worst times. It was, therefore, of the utmost importance to make wise

choice of theHigh-Priest. With the exception of the brief tenure by

Aristobulus, the last of the Maccabees - whose appointment, too soon

followed by his murder, was at the time a necessity - all the Herodian

High-Priests were non-Palestinians. A keener blow than this could not

have been dealt at Nationalism.

The same contempt for the High-Priesthood characterised the brief

reign of Archelaus. On his death-bed, Herod had appointed to the

Pontificate Joazar, a son of Boethos, the wealthy Alexandrian priest,

whose daughter, Mariamme II., he had married. The Boethusian family,

allied to Herod, formed a party - the Herodians - who combined strict

Pharisaic views with devotion to the reigning family.[1216]1216 Joazar

took the popular part against Archelaus, on his accession. For this he

was deprived of his dignity in favour of another son of Boethos,

Eleazar by name. But the mood of Archelaus was fickle - perhaps he was

distrustful of the family of Boethos. At any rate, Eleazar had to give

place to Jesus, the son of Sië, an otherwise unknown individual. At

the time of the taxing of Quirinius we find Joazar again in

office,[1217]1217 apparently restored to it by the multitude, which,

having taken matters into its own hands at the change of government,

recalled one who had formerly favoured national aspirations.[1218]1218

It is thus that we explain his influence with the people, in

persuading them to submit to the Roman taxation.

But if Joazar had succeeded with the unthinking populace, he failed to

conciliate the more advanced of his own party, and, as the event

proved, the Roman authorities also, whose favour he had hoped to gain.

It will be remembered, that the Nationalist party - or 'Zealots,' as

they were afterwards called - first appeared in those guerilla-bands

which traversed Galilee under the leadership of Ezekias, whom Herod

executed. But the National party was not destroyed, only held in

check, during his iron reign. It was once more the family of Ezekias

that headed the movement. During the civil war which followed the

accession of Archelaus, or rather was carried on while he was pleading

his cause in Rome, the standard of the Nationalists was again raised

in Galilee. Judas, the son of Ezekias, took possession of the city of

Sepphoris, and armed his followers from the royal arsenal there. At

that time, as we know, the High-Priest Joazar sympathised, at least

indirectly, with the Nationalists. The rising, which indeed was

general throughout Palestine, was suppressed by fire and sword, and

the sons of Herod were enabled to enter on their possessions. But

when, after the deposition of Archelaus, Joazar persuaded the people

to submit to the taxing of Quirinius, Judas was not disposed to follow

what he regarded as the treacherous lead of the Pontiff. In

conjunction with a Shammaite Rabbi, Sadduk, he raised again the

standard of revolt, although once more unsuccessfully.[1219]1219 How

the Hillelites looked upon this movement, we gather even from the

slighting allusion of Gamaliel.[1220]1220 The family of Ezekias

furnished other martyrs to the National cause. The two sons of Judas

died for it on the cross in 46 a.d.[1221]1221 Yet a third son,

Manahem, who, from the commencement of the war against Rome, was one

of the leaders of the most fanatical Nationalists, the Sicarii - the

Jacobins of the party, as they have been aptly designated - died under

unspeakable sufferings,[1222]1222 while a fouth member of the family,

Eleazar, was the leader of Israel's forlorn hope, and nobly died at

Masada, in the closing drama of the Jewish war of

independence.[1223]1223 Of such stuff were the Galilean Zealots made.

But we have to take this intense Nationalist tendency also into

account in the history of Jesus, the more so that at least one of His

disciples, and he a member of His family, had at one time belonged to

the party. Only the Kingdom of which Jesus was the King was, as He

Himself said, not of this world, and of far different conception from

that for which the Nationalists longed.

At the time when Jesus went up to the feast, Quirinius was, as already

stated, Governor of Syria. The taxing and the rising of Judas were

alike past; and the Roman Governor, dissatisfied with the trimming of

Joazar, and distrustful of him, had appointed in his stead Ananos, the

son of Seth, the Annas of infamous memory in the New Testament. With

brief interruption, he or his son held the Pontifical office till,

under the Procuratorship of Pilate, Caiaphas, the son-in-law of Annas,

succeeded to that dignity. It has already been stated that, subject to

the Roman Governors of Syria, the rule of Palestine devolved on

Procurators, of whom Coponius was the first. Of him and his immediate

successors - Marcus Ambivius,[1224]1224 Annius Rufus,[1225]1225 and

Valerius Gratus,[1226]1226 we know little. They were, indeed, guilty

of the most grievous fiscal oppressions, but they seem to have

respected, so far as was in them, the religious feelings of the Jews.

We know, that they even removed the image of the Emperor from the

standards of the Roman soldiers before marching them into Jerusalem,

so as to avoid the appearance of a cultus of the Cæsars. It was

reserved for Pontius Pilate to force this hated emblem on the Jews,

and otherwise to set their most sacred feelings at defiance. But we

may notice, even at this stage, with what critical periods in Jewish

history the public appearance of Christ synchronised. His first visit

to the Temple followed upon the Roman possession of Judæa, the taxing,

and the national rising, as also the institution of Annas to the

High-Priesthood. And the commencement of His public Ministry was

contemporaneous with the accession of Pilate, and the institution of

Caiaphas. Whether viewed subjectively or objectively, these things

also have a deep bearing upon the history of the Christ.

It was, as we reckon it, in spring a.d. 9, that Jesus for the first

time went up to the Paschal Feast in Jerusalem. Coponius would be

there as the Procurator; and Annas ruled in the Temple as High-Priest,

when He appeared among its doctors. But far other than political

thoughts must have occupied the mind of Christ. Indeed, for a time a

brief calm had fallen upon the land. There was nothing to provoke

active resistance, and the party of the Zealots, although existing,

and striking deeper root in the hearts of the people, was, for the

time, rather what Josephus called it, 'the philosphical party' - their

minds busy with an ideal, which their hands were not yet preparing to

make a reality. And so, when, according to ancient wont,[1227]1227 the

festive company from Nazareth, soon swelled by other festive bands,

went up to Jerusalem, chanting by the way those 'Psalms of

Ascent'[1228]1228 to the accompaniment of the flute, they might

implicitly yeild themselves to the spiritual thoughts kindled by such

words.

When the pilgrims' feet stood within the gates of Jerusalem, there

could have been no difficulty in finding hospitality, however crowded

the City may have been on such occasions[1229]1229 - the more so when

we remember the extreme simplicity of Eastern manners and wants, and

the abundance of provisions which the many sacrifices of the season

would supply. But on this subject, also, the Evangelic narrative keeps

silence. Glorious as a view of Jerusalem must have seemed to a child

coming to it for the first time from the retirement of a Galilean

village, we must bear in mind, that He Who now looked upon it was not

an ordinary Child. Nor are we, perhaps, mistaken in the idea that the

sight of its grandeur would, as on another occasion,[1230]1230 awaken

in Him not so much feelings of admiration, which might have been akin

to those of pride, as of sadness, though He may as yet have been

scarcely conscious of its deeper reason. But the one all-engrossing

thought would be of the Temple. This, his first visit to its halls,

seems also to have called out the first outspoken - and may we not

infer, the first conscious - thought of that Temple as the House of

His Father, and with it the first conscious impulse of his Mission and

Being. Here also it would be the higher meaning, rather than the

structure and appearance, of the Temple, that would absorb the mind.

And yet there was sufficient, even in the latter, to kindle

enthusiasm. As the pilgrim ascended the Mount, crested by that

symmetrically proportioned building, which could hold within its

gigantic girdle not fewer than 210,000 persons, his wonder might well

increase at every step. The Mount itself seemed like an island,

abruptly rising from out deep valleys, surrounded by a sea of walls,

palaces, streets, and houses, and crowned by a mass of snowy marble

and glittering gold, rising terrace upon terrace. Altogether it

measured a square of about 1,000 feet, or, to give a more exact

equivalent of the measurements furnished by the Rabbis, 927 feet. At

its north-western angle, and connected with it, frowned the Castle of

Antonia, held by the Roman garrison. The lofty walls were pierced by

massive gates - the unused gate (Tedi) on the north; the Susa Gate on

the east, which opened on the arched roadway to the Mount of

Olives;[1231]1231 the two so-called 'Huldah' (probably, 'weasel')

gates, which led by tunnels[1232]1232 from the priest-suburb Ophel

into the outer Court; and, finally, four gates on the west.

Within the gates ran all around covered double colonnades, with here

are there benches for those who resorted thither for prayer or for

conference. The most magnificent of those was the southern, or twofold

double colonnade, with a wide space between; the most venerable, the

ancient 'Solomon's Porch,' or eastern colonnade. Entering from the

Xystus bridge, and under the tower of John,[1233]1233 one would pass

along the southern colonnade (over the tunnel of the Huldah-gates) to

its eastern extremity, over which another tower rose, probably 'the

pinnacle' of the history of the Temptation. From this height yawned

the Kedron valley 450 feet beneath. From that lofty pinnacle the

priest each morning watched and announced the earliest streak of day.

Passing along the eastern colonnade, or Solomon's Porch, we would, if

the description of the Rabbis is trustworthy, have reached the Susa

Gate, the carved representation of that city over the gateway

reminding us of the Eastern Dispersion. Here the standard measures of

the Temple are said to have been kept; and here, also, we have to

locate the first or lowest of the three Sanhedrins, which, according

to the Mishnah,[1234]1234 held their meetings in the Temple; the

second, or intermediate Court of Appeal, being in the 'Court of the

Priests' (probably close to the Nicanor Gate); and the highest, that

of the Great Sanhedrin, at one time in the 'Hall of Hewn Square

Stones' (Lishkath ha-Gazith.)

Passing out of these 'colonnades,' or 'porches,' you entered the

'Court of the Gentiles,' or what the Rabbis called 'the Mount of the

House,' which was widest on the west side, and more and more narrow

respectively on the east, the south, and the north. This was called

the Chol, or 'profane' place to which Gentiles had access. Here must

have been the market for the sale of sacrificial animals, the tables

of the money-changers, and places for the sale of other needful

articles.[1235]1235 [1236]1236 Advancing within this Court, you

reached a low breast-wall (the Soreg), which marked the space beyond

which no Gentile, nor Levitically unclean person, might proceed -

tablets, bearing inscriptions to that effect, warning them off.

Thirteen openings admitted into the inner part of the Court. Thence

fourteen steps led up to the Chel or Terrace, which was bounded by the

wall of the Temple-buildings in the stricter sense. A flight of steps

led up to the massive, splendid gates. The two on the west side seem

to have been of no importance, so far as the worshippers were

concerned, and probably intended for the use of workmen. North and

south were four gates.[1237]1237 But the most splendid gate was that

to the east, termed 'the Beautiful.'[1238]1238

Entering by the latter, you came into the Court of the Women, so

called because the women occupied in it two elevated and separated

galleries, which, however, filled only part of the Court. Fifteen

steps led up to the Upper Court, which was bounded by a wall, and

where was the celebrated Nicanor Gate, covered with Corinthian brass.

Here the Levites, who conducted the musical part of the service, were

placed. In the Court of the Women were the Treasury and the thirteen

'Trumpets,' while at each corner were chambers or halls, destined for

various purposes. Similarly, beyond the fifteen steps, there were

repositories for the musical instruments. The Upper Court was divided

into two parts by a boundary - the narrow part forming the Court of

Israel, and the wider that of the Priests, in which were the great

Altar and the Laver.

The Sanctuary itself was on a higher terrace than that Court of the

Priests. Twelve steps led up to its Porch, which extended beyond it on

either side (north and south). Here, in separate chambers, all that

was necessary for the sacrificial service was kept. On two marble

tables near the entrance the old shewbread which was taken out, and

the new that was brought in, were respectively placed. The Porch was

adorned by votive presents, conspicuous among them a massive golden

vine. A two-leaved gate opened into the Sanctuary itself, which was

divided into two parts. The Holy Place had the Golden Candlestick

(south), the Table of Shewbread (north), and the Golden Altar of

Incense between them. A heavy double veil concealed the entrance to

the Most Holy Place, which in the second Temple was empty, nothing

being there but the piece of rock, called the Ebhen Shethiyah, or

Foundation Stone, which, according to tradition, covered the mouth of

the pit, and on which, it was thought, the world was founded. Nor does

all this convey an adequate idea of the vastness of the

Temple-buildings. For all around the Sanctuary and each of the Courts

were various chambers and out-buildings, which served different

purposes connected with the Services of the Temple.[1239]1239

In some part of this Temple, 'sitting in the midst of the

Doctors,[1240]1240 both hearing them and asking them questions,' we

must look for the Child Jesus on the third and the two following days

of the Feast on which He first visited the Sanctuary. Only on the two

first days of the Feast of Passover was personal attendance in the

Temple necessary. With the third day commenced the so-called

half-holydays, when it was lawful to return to one's home[1241]1241 -

a provision of which, no doubt, many availed themselves. Indeed, there

was really nothing of special interest to detain the pilgrims. For,

the Passover had been eaten, the festive sacrifice (or Chagigah)

offered, and the first ripe barely reaped and brought to the Temple,

and waved as the Omer of first flour before the Lord. Hence, in view

of the well-known Rabbinic provision, the expression in the

Gospel-narrative concerning the 'Parents' of Jesus, 'when they had

fulfilled the days,'[1242]1242 cannot necessarily imply that Joseph

and the Mother of Jesus had remained in Jerusalem during the whole

Paschal week.[1243]1243 On the other hand, the circumstances connected

with the presence of Jesus could not have been found among the Doctors

after the close of the Feast. The first question here is as to the

locality in the Temple, where the scene has to be laid. It has,

indeed, been commonly supposed that there was a Synagogue in the

Temple; but of this there is, to say the least, no historical

evidence.[1244]1244 But even if such had existed, the worship and

addresses of the Synagogue would not have offered any opportunity for

the questioning on the part of Jesus which the narrative implies.

Still more groundless is the idea that there was in the Temple

something like a Beth ha-Midrash, or theological Academy, not to speak

of the circumstance that a child of twelve would not, at any time,

have been allowed to take part in its discussions. But there were

occasions on which the Temple became virtually, though not formally, a

Beth ha-Midrash. For we read in the Talmud,[1245]1245 that the members

of the Temple-Sanhedrin, who on ordinary days sat as a Court of

Appeal, from the close of the Morning-to the time of the

Evening-Sacrifice, were wont on Sabbaths and feast-days to come out

upon 'the Terrace' of the Temple, and there to teach. In such popular

instruction the utmost latitude of questioning would be given. It is

in this audience, which sat on the ground, surrounding and mingling

with the Doctors - and hence during, not after the Feast - that we

must seek the Child Jesus.

But we have yet to show that the presence and questioning of a Child

of that age did not necessarily imply anything so extraordinary, as to

convey the idea of supernaturalness to those Doctors or others in the

audience. Jewish tradition gives other instances of precocious and

strangely advanced students. Besides, scientific theological learning

would not be necessary to take part in such popular discussions. If we

may judge from later arrangements, not only in Babylon, but in

Palestine, there were two kinds of public lectures, and two kinds of

students. The first, or more scientific class, was designated Kallah

(literally, bride), and its attendants Beney-Kallah (children of the

bride). These lectures were delivered in the last month of summer

(Elul), before the Feast of the New Year, and in the last winter month

(Adar), immediately before the Feast of Passover. They implied

considerable preparation on the part of the lecturing Rabbis, and at

least some Talmudic knowledge on the part of the attendants. On the

other hand, there were Students of the Court (Chatsatsta, and in

Babylon Tarbitsa), who during ordinary lectures sat separated from the

regular students by a kind of hedge, outside, as it were in the Court,

some of whom seem to have been ignorant even of the Bible. The

lectures addressed to such a general audience would, of course, be of

a very different character.[1246]1246

But if there was nothing so unprecedented as to render His Presence

and questioning marvellous, yet all who heard Him 'were amazed' at His

'combinative insight'[1247]1247 and 'discerning answers.'[1248]1248 We

scarcely venture to inquire towards what His questioning had been

directed. Judging by what we know of such discussion, we infer that

they may have been connected with the Paschal solemnities. Grave

Paschal questions did arise. Indeed, the great Hillel obtained his

rank as chief when he proved to the assembled Doctors that the

Passover might be offered even on the Sabbath.[1249]1249 Many other

questions might arise on the subject of the Passover. Or did the Child

Jesus - as afterwards, in connection with the Messianic

teaching[1250]1250 - lead up by His questions to the deeper meaning of

the Paschal solemnities, as it was to be unfolded, when Himself was

offered up, 'the Lamb of God, Which taketh away the sin of the world?'

Other questions also almost force themselves on the mind - most

notably this: whether on the occasion of this His first visit to the

Temple, the Virgin-Mother had told her Son the history of His Infancy,

and of what had happened when, for the first time, He had been brought

to the Temple. It would almost seem so, if we might judge from the

contrast between the Virgin-Mother's complaint about the search of His

father and of her, and His own emphatic appeal to the business of His

Father. But most surprising, truly wonderful it must have seemed to

Joseph, and even to the Mother of Jesus, that the meek, quiet Child

should have been found in such company, and so engaged. It must have

been quite other than what, from His past, they would have expected;

or they would not have taken it for granted, when they left Jerusalem,

that He was among their kinsfolk and acquaintance, perhaps mingling

with the children. Nor yet would they, in such case, after they missed

Him at the first night's halt - at Sichem,[1251]1251 if the direct

road north, through Samaria,[1252]1252 was taken (or, according to the

Mishnah, at Akrabah[1253]1253) - have so anxiously sought Him by the

way,[1254]1254 and in Jerusalem; nor yet would they have been 'amazed'

when they found Him in the assembly of the Doctors. The reply of Jesus

to the half-reproachful, half-relieved expostulation of them who had

sought Him 'sorrowing' these three days,[1255]1255 sets clearly these

three things before us. He had been so entirely absorbed by the

awakening thought of His Being and Mission, however kindled, as to be

not only neglectful, but forgetful of all around. Nay, it even seemed

to Him impossible to understand how they could have sought Him, and

not known where He had lingered. Secondly: we may venture to say, that

He now realised that this was emphatically His Father's House. And,

thirdly: so far as we can judge, it was then and there that, for the

first time, He felt the strong and irresistible impulse - that Divine

necessity of His Being - to be 'about His Father's

business.'[1256]1256 We all, when first awakening to spiritual

consciousness - or, perhaps, when for the first time taking part in

the feast of the Lord's House - may, and, learning from His example,

should, make this the hour of decision, in which heart and life shall

be wholly consecrated to the 'business' of our Father. But there was

far more than this in the bearing of Christ on this occasion. That

forgetfulness of His Child-life was a sacrifice - a sacrifice of self;

that entire absorption in His Father's business, without a thought of

self, either in the gratification of curiosity, the acquisition of

knowledge, or personal ambition - a consecration of Himself unto God.

It was the first manifestation of His passive and active obedience to

the Will of God. Even at this stage, it was the forth-bursting of the

inmost meaning of His Life: 'My meat is to do the Will of Him that

sent Me, and to finish His work.' And yet this awakening of the

Christ-consciousness on His first visit to the Temple, partial, and

perhaps even temporary, as it may have been, seems itself like the

morning-dawn, which from the pinnacle of the Temple the Priest

watched, ere he summoned his waiting brethren beneath to offer the

early sacrifice.

From what we have already learned of this History, we do not wonder

that the answer of Jesus came to His parents as a fresh surprise. For,

we can only understand what we perceive in its totality. But here each

fresh manifestation came as something separate and new - not as part

of a whole; and therefore as a surprise, of which the purport and

meaning could not be understood, except in its organic connection and

as a whole. And for the true human development of the God-Man, what

was the natural was also the needful process, even as it was best for

the learning of Mary herself, and for the future reception of His

teaching. These three subsidiary reasons may once more be indicated

here in explanation of the Virgin-Mother's seeming ignorance of her

Son's true character: the necessary gradualness of such a revelation;

the necessary development of His own consciousness; and the fact, that

Jesus could not have been subject to His Parents, nor had true and

proper human training, if they had clearly known that He was the

essential Son of God.

A further, though to us it seems a downward step, was His quiet,

immediate, unquestioning return to Nazareth with His Parents, and His

willing submission[1257]1257 to them while there. It was self-denial,

self-sacrifice, self-consecration to His Mission, with all that it

implied. It was not self-exinanition but self-submission, all the more

glorious in proportion to the greatness of that Self. This constant

contrast before her eyes only deepened in the heart of Mary the

everpresent impression of 'all those matters,'[1258]1258 of which she

was the most cognisant. She was learning to spell out the word

Messiah, as each of 'those matters' taught her one fresh letter in it,

and she looked at them all in the light of the Nazareth-Sun.

With His return to Nazareth began Jesus' Life of youth and early

manhood, with all of inward and outward development, of heavenly and

earthly approbation which it carried.[1259]1259 Whether or not He went

to Jerusalem on recurring Feasts, we know not, and need not inquire.

For only once during that period - on His first visit to the Temple,

and in the awakening of His Youth-Life - could there have been such

outward forth-bursting of His real Being and Mission. Other influences

were at their silent work to weld His inward and outward development,

and to determine the manner of His later Manifesting of Himself. We

assume that the School-education of Jesus must have ceased soon after

His return to Nazareth. Henceforth the Nazareth-influences on the Life

and Thinking of Jesus may be grouped - and progressively as He

advanced from youth to manhood - under these particulars: Home,

Nature, and Prevailing Ideas.

1. Home. Jewish Home-Life, especially in the country, was of the

simplest. Even in luxurious Alexandria it seems often to have been

such, alike as regarded the furnishing of the house, and the

provisions of the table.[1260]1260 The morning and midday meal must

have been of the plainest, and even the larger evening meal of the

simplest, in the home at Nazareth. Only the Sabbath and festivals,

whether domestic or public, brought what of the best lay within reach.

But Nazareth was not the city of the wealthy or influential, and such

festive evening-entertainments, with elaborate ceremoniousness of

reception, arranging of guests according to rank, and rich spread of

board, would but rarely, if ever, be witnessed in those quiet homes.

The same simplicity would prevail in dress and manners.[1261]1261 But

close and loving were the bonds which drew together the members of a

family, and deep the influence which they exercised on each other. We

cannot here discuss the vexed question whether 'the brothers and

sisters' of Jesus were such in the real sense, or step-brothers and

sisters, or else cousins, though it seems to us as if the primary

meaning of the terms would scarcely have been called in question, but

for a theory of false asceticism, and an undervaluing of the sanctity

of the married estate.[1262]1262 But, whatever the precise

relationship between Jesus and these 'brothers and sisters,' it must,

on any theory, have been of the closest, and exercised its influence

upon Him.[1263]1263

Passing over Joses or Joseph, of whose history we know next to

nothing, we have sufficient materials to enable us to form some

judgment of what must have been the tendencies and thoughts of two of

His brothers James and Jude, before they were heart and soul followers

of the Messiah, and of His cousin Simon.[1264]1264 If we might venture

on a general characterisation, we would infer from the Epistle of St.

James, that his religious views had originally been cast in the mould

of Shammai. Certainly, there is nothing of the Hillelite direction

about it, but all to remind us of the earnestness, directness, vigour,

and rigour of Shammai. Of Simon we know that he had belonged to the

Nationalist party, since he is expressly so designated

(Zelotes,[1265]1265 Cananæan).[1266]1266 Lastly, there are in the

Epistle of St. Jude, one undoubted, and another probable reference to

two of those (Pseudepigraphic) Apocalyptic books, which at that time

marked one deeply interesting phase of the Messianic outlook of

Israel.[1267]1267 We have thus within the narrow circle of Christ's

Family-Life - not to speak of any intercourse with the sons of

Zebedee, who probably were also His cousins[1268]1268 - the three most

hopeful and pure Jewish tendencies, brought into constant contact with

Jesus: in Pharisaism, the teaching of Shammai; then, the Nationalist

ideal; and, finally, the hope of a glorious Messianic future. To these

there should probably be added, at least knowledge of the lonely

preparation of His kinsman John, who, though certainly not an Essene,

had, from the necessity of his calling, much in his outward bearing

that was akin to them.

But we are anticipating. From what are, necessarily, only suggestions,

we turn again to what is certain in connection with His Family-Life

and its influences. From St. Mark vi. 3, we may infer with great

probability, though not with absolute certainty,[1269]1269 that He had

adopted the trade of Joseph. Among the Jews the contempt for manual

labour, which was one of the painful[1270]1270 characteristics of

heathenism, did not exist. On the contrary, it was deemed a religious

duty, frequently and most earnestly insisted upon, to learn some

trade, provided it did not minister to luxury, nor tend to lead away

from personal observance of the Law.[1271]1271 There was not such

separation between rich and poor as with us, and while wealth might

confer social distinction, the absence of it in no way implied social

inferiority. Nor could it be otherwise where wants were so few, life

was so simple, and its highest aim so ever present to the mind.

We have already spoken of the religious influences in the family, so

blessedly different from that neglect, exposure, and even murder of

children among the heathen, or their education by slaves, who

corrupted the mind from its earliest opening.[1272]1272 The love of

parents to children, appearing even in the curse which was felt to

attach to childlessness; the reverence towards parents, as a duty

higher than any of outward observance; and the love of brethren, which

Jesus had learned in His home, form, so to speak, the natural basis of

many of the teachings of Jesus. They give us also an insight into the

family-life of Nazareth. And yet there is nothing sombre nor morose

about it; and even the joyous games of children, as well as festive

gatherings of families, find their record in the words and the life of

Christ. This also is characteristic of His past. And so are His deep

sympathy with all sorrow and suffering, and His love for the family

circle, as evidenced in the home of Lazarus. That He spoke Hebrew, and

used and quoted the Scriptures in the original, has already been

shown, although, no doubt, He understood Greek, possibly also Latin.

Secondly: Nature and Every-day Life. The most superficial perusal of

the teaching of Christ must convince how deeply sympathetic He was

with nature, and how keenly observant of man. Here there is no

contrast between love of the country and the habits of city life; the

two are found side by side. On His lonely walks He must have had an

eye for the beauty of the lilies of the field, and thought of it, how

the birds of the air received their food from an Unseen Hand, and with

what maternal affection the hen gathered her chickens under her wing.

He had watched the sower or the vinedresser as he went forth to his

labour, and read the teaching of the tares which sprang up among the

wheat. To Him the vocation of the shepherd must have been full of

meaning, as he led, and fed, and watched his flock, spoke to his sheep

with well-known voice, brought them to the fold, or followed, and

tenderly carried back, those that had strayed, ever ready to defend

them, even at the cost of his own life. Nay, He even seems to have

watched the habits of the fox in its secret lair. But he also equally

knew the joys, the sorrows, the wants and sufferings of the busy

multitude. The play in the market, the marriage processions, the

funeral rites, the wrongs of injustice and oppression, the urgent

harshness of the creditor, the bonds and prison of the debtor, the

palaces and luxury of princes and courtiers, the self-indulgence of

the rich, the avarice of the covetous, the exactions of the

tax-gatherer, and the oppression of the widow by unjust judges, had

all made an indelible impression on His mind. And yet this evil world

was not one which He hated, and from which He would withdraw Himself

with His disciples, though ever and again He felt the need of periods

of meditation and prayer. On the contrary, while He confronted all the

evil in it, He would fain pervade the mass with the new leaven; not

cast it away, but renew it. He recognised the good and the hopeful,

even in those who seemed most lost. He quenched not the dimly burning

flax, nor brake the bruised reed. It was not contempt of the world,

but sadness over it; not condemnation of man, but drawing him to His

Heavenly Father; not despising of the little and the poor, whether

ontwardly or inwardly such, but encouragement and adoption of them,

together with keen insight into the real under the mask of the

apparent, and withering denunciation and unsparing exposure of all

that was evil, mean, and unreal, wherever it might appear. Such were

some of the results gathered from His past life, as presented in His

teaching.

Thirdly: Of the prevailing ideas around, with which He was brought in

contact, some have already been mentioned. Surely, the earnestness of

His Shammaite brother, if such we may venture to designate him; the

idea of the Kingdom suggested by the Nationalists, only in its purest

and most spiritual form, as not of this world, and as truly realising

the sovereignty of God in the individual, whoever he might be; even

the dreamy thoughts of the prophetic literature of those times, which

sought to read the mysteries of the coming Kingdom; as well as the

prophet-like asceticism of His forerunner and kinsman, formed at least

so many points of contact for His teaching. Thus, Christ was in

sympathy with all the highest tendencies of His people and time. Above

all, there was His intimate converse with the Scriptures of the Old

Testament. If, in the Synagogue, He saw much to show the hollowness,

self-seeking, pride, and literalism which a mere external observance

of the Law fostered, He would ever turn from what man or devils said

to what He read, to what was 'written.' Not one dot or hook of it

could fall to the ground - all must be established and fulfilled. The

Law of Moses in all its bearings, the utterances of the prophets -

Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Micah, Zechariah, Malachi -

and the hopes and consolations of the Psalms, were all to Him

literally true, and cast their light upon the building which Moses had

reared. It was all one, a grand unity; not an aggregation of different

parts, but the unfolding of a living organism. Chiefest of all, it was

the thought of the Messianic bearing of all Scripture to its unity,

the idea of the Kingdom of God and the King of Zion, which was the

life and light of all. Beyond this, into the mystery of His inner

converse with God, the unfolding of His spiritual receptiveness, and

the increasing communication from above, we dare not enter. Even what

His bodily appearance may have been, we scarcely venture to

imagine.[1273]1273 It could not but be that His outer man in some

measure bodied forth His 'Inner Being.' Yet we dread gathering around

our thoughts of Him the artificial flowers of legend.[1274]1274 What

His manner and mode of receiving and dealing with men were, we can

portray to ourselves from His life. And so it is best to remain

content with the simple account of the Evangelic narrative: 'Jesus

increased in favour with God and Man.'

CHAPTER XI.

IN THE FIFTEENTH YEAR OF TIBERIUS CÆSAR AND UNDER THE PONTIFICATE OF

ANNAS

AND CAIAPHAS - A VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS

(St. Matthew iii. 1-12; St. Mark i. 2-8; St. Luke iii. 1-18.)

THERE is something grand, even awful, in the almost absolute silence

which lies upon the thirty years between the Birth and the first

Messianic Manifestation of Jesus. In a narrative like that of the

Gospels, this must have been designed; and, if so, affords presumptive

evidence of the authenticity of what follows, and is intended to

teach, that what had preceded concerned only the inner History of

Jesus, and the preparation of the Christ. At last that solemn silence

was broken by an appearance, a proclamation, a rite, and a ministry as

startling as that of Elijah had been. In many respects, indeed, the

two messengers and their times bore singular likeness. It was to a

society secure, prosperous, and luxurious, yet in imminent danger of

perishing from hidden, festering disease; and to a religious community

which presented the appearance of hopeless perversion, and yet

contained the germs of a possible regeneration, that both Elijah and

John the Baptist came. Both suddenly appeared to threaten terrible

judgment, but also to open unthought-of possibilities of good. And, as

if to deepen still more the impression of this contrast, both appeared

in a manner unexpected, and even antithetic to the habits of their

contemporaries. John came suddenly out of the wilderness of Judæa, as

Elijah from the wilds of Gilead; John bore the same strange ascetic

appearance as his predecessor; the message of John was the counterpart

of that of Elijah; his baptism that of Elijah's novel rite on Mount

Carmel. And, as if to make complete the parallelism, with all of

memory and hope which it awakened, even the more minute details

surrounding the life of Elijah found their counterpart in that of

John. Yet history never repeats itself. It fulfils in its development

that of which it gave indication at its commencement. Thus, the

history of John the Baptist was the fulfilment of that of Elijah in

'the fulness of time.'

For, alike in the Roman world and in Palestine, the time had fully

come; not, indeed, in the sense of any special expectancy, but of

absolute need. The reign of Augustus marked, not only the climax, but

the crisis, of Roman history. Whatever of good or of evil the ancient

world contained, had become fully ripe. As regarded politics,

philosophy, religion, and society, the utmost limits had been

reached.[1275]1275 Beyond them lay, as only alternatives, ruin or

regeneration. It was felt that the boundaries of the Empire could be

no further extended, and that henceforth the highest aim must be to

preserve what had been conquered. The destinies of Rome were in the

hands of one man, who was at the same time general-in-chief of a

standing army of about three hundred and forty thousand men, head of a

Senate (now sunk into a mere court for registering the commands of

Cæsar), and High-Priest of a religion, of which the highest expression

was the apotheosis of the State in the person of the Emperor. Thus,

all power within, without, and above lay in his hands. Within the

city, which in one short reign was transformed from brick into marble,

were, side by side, the most abject misery and almost boundless

luxury. Of a population of about two millions, well-nigh one half were

slaves; and, of the rest, the greater part either freedmen and their

descendants, or foreigners. Each class contributed its share to the

common decay. Slavery was not even what we know it, but a seething

mass of cruelty and oppression on the one side, and of cunning and

corruption on the other. More than any other cause, it contributed to

the ruin of Roman society. The freedmen, who had very often acquired

their liberty by the most disreputable courses, and had prospered in

them, combined in shameless manner the vices of the free with the

vileness of the slave. The foreigners - especially Greeks and Syrians

- who crowded the city, poisoned the springs of its life by the

corruption which they brought. The free citizens were idle,

dissipated, sunken; their chief thoughts of the theatre and the arena;

and they were mostly supported at the public cost. While, even in the

time of Augustus, more than two hundred thousand persons were thus

maintained by the State, what of the old Roman stock remained was

rapidly decaying, partly from corruption, but chiefly from the

increasing cessation of marriage, and the nameless abominations of

what remained of family-life.

The state of the provinces was in every respect more favourable. But

it was the settled policy of the Empire, which only too surely

succeeded, to destroy all separate nationalities, or rather to absorb

and to Grecianise all. The only real resistance came from the Jews.

Their tenacity was religious, and, even in its extreme of intolerant

exclusiveness, served a most important Providential purpose. And so

Rome became to all the centre of attraction, but also of

fast-spreading destructive corruption. Yet this unity also, and the

common bond of the Greek language, served another important

Providential purpose. So did, in another direction, the conscious

despair of any possible internal reformation. This, indeed, seemed the

last word of all the institutions in the Roman world: It is not in me!

Religion, philosophy, and society had passed through every stage, to

that of despair. Without tracing the various phases of ancient

thought, it may be generally said that, in Rome at least, the issue

lay between Stoicism and Epicureanism. The one flattered its pride,

the other gratified its sensuality; the one was in accordance with the

original national character, the other with its later decay and

corruption. Both ultimately led to atheism and despair - the one, by

turning all higher aspirations self-ward, the other, by quenching them

in the enjoyment of the moment; the one, by making the extinction of

all feeling and self-deification, the other, the indulgence of every

passion and the worship of matter, its ideal.

That, under such conditions, all real belief in a personal continuance

after death must have ceased among the educated classes, needs not

demonstration. If the older Stoics held that, after death, the soul

would continue for some time a separate existence - in the case of

sages till the general destruction of the world by fire, it was the

doctrine of most of their successors that, immediately after death,

the soul returned into 'the world-soul' of which it was part. But even

this hope was beset by so many doubts and misgivings, as to make it

practically without influence or comfort. Cicero was the only one who,

following Plato, defended the immortality of the soul, while the

Peripatetics denied the existence of a soul, and leading Stoics at

least its continuance after death. But even Cicero writes as one

overwhelmed by doubts. With his contemporaries this doubt deepened

into absolute despair, the only comfort lying in present indulgence of

the passions. Even among the Greeks, who were most tenacious of belief

in the non-extinction of the individual, the practical upshot was the

same. The only healthier tendency, however mixed with error, came from

the Neo-Platonic School, which accordingly offered a point of contact

between ancient philosophy and the new faith.

In such circumstances, anything like real religion was manifestly

impossible. Rome tolerated, and, indeed, incorporated, all national

rites. But among the populace religion had degenerated into abject

superstition. In the East, much of it consisted of the vilest rites;

while, among the philosophers, all religions were considered equally

false or equally true - the outcome of ignorance, or else the

unconscious modifications of some one fundamental thought. The only

religion on which the State insisted was the deification and worship

of the Emperor.[1276]1276 These apotheoses attained almost incredible

development. Soon not only the Emperors, but their wives, paramours,

children, and the creatures of their vilest lusts, were deified; nay,

any private person might attain that distinction, if the survivors

possessed sufficient means.[1277]1277 Mingled with all this was an

increasing amount of superstition - by which term some understood the

worship of foreign gods, the most part the existence of fear in

religion. The ancient Roman religion had long given place to foreign

rites, the more mysterious and unintelligible the more enticing. It

was thus that Judaism made its converts in Rome; its chief

recommendation with many being its contrast to the old, and the

unknown possibilities which its seemingly incredible doctrines opened.

Among the most repulsive symptoms of the general religious decay may

be reckoned prayers for the death of a rich relative, or even for the

satisfaction of unnatural lusts, along with horrible blasphemies when

such prayers remained unanswered. We may here contrast the spirit of

the Old and New Testaments with such sentiments as this, on the tomb

of a child: 'To the unjust gods who robbed me of life;' or on that of

a girl of twenty: 'I lift my hands against the god who took me away,

innocent as I am.'

It would be unsavoury to describe how far the worship of indecency was

carried; how public morals were corrupted by the mimic representations

of everything that was vile, and even by the pandering of a corrupt

art. The personation of gods, oracles, divination, dreams, astrology,

magic, necromancy, and theurgy,[1278]1278 all contributed to the

general decay. It has been rightly said, that the idea of conscience,

as we understand it, was unknown to heathenism. Absolute right did not

exist. Might was right. The social relations exhibited, if possible,

even deeper corruption. The sanctity of marriage had ceased. Female

dissipation and the general dissoluteness led at last to an almost

entire cessation of marriage. Abortion, and the exposure and murder of

newly-born children, were common and tolerated; unnatural vices, which

even the greatest philosophers practised, if not advocated, attained

proportions which defy description.

But among these sad signs of the times three must be specially

mentioned: the treatment of slaves; the bearing towards the poor; and

public amusements. The slave was entirely unprotected; males and

females were exposed to nameless cruelties, compared to which death by

being thrown to the wild beasts, or fighting in the arena, might seem

absolute relief. Sick or old slaves were cast out to perish from want.

But what the influence of the slaves must have been on the free

population, and especially upon the young - whose tutors they

generally were - may readily be imagined. The heartlessness towards

the poor who crowded the city is another well-known feature of ancient

Roman society. Of course, there was neither hospitals, nor provision

for the poor; charity and brotherly love in their every manifestation

are purely Old and New Testament ideas. But even bestowal of the

smallest alms on the needy was regarded as very questionable; best,

not to afford them the means of protracting a useless existence.

Lastly, the account which Seneca has to give of what occupied and

amused the idle multitude - for all manual labour, except agriculture,

was looked upon with utmost contempt - horrified even himself. And so

the only escape which remained for the philosopher, the satiated, or

the miserable, seemed the power of self-destruction! What is worse,

the noblest spirits of the time of self-destruction! What is worse,

the noblest spirits of the time felt, that the state of things was

utterly hopeless. Society could not reform itself; philosophy and

religion had nothing to offer: they had been tried and found wanting.

Seneca longed for some hand from without to lift up from the mire of

despair; Cicero pictured the enthusiasm which would greet the

embodiment of true virtue, should it ever appear on earth; Tacitus

declared human life one great farce, and expressed his conviction that

the Roman world lay under some terrible curse. All around, despair,

conscious need, and unconscious longing. Can greater contrast be

imagined, than the proclamation of a coming Kingdom of God amid such a

world; or clearer evidence be afforded of the reality of this Divine

message, than that it came to seek and to save that which was thus

lost? One synchronism, as remarkable as that of the Star in the East

and the Birth of the Messiah, here claims the reverent attention of

the student of history. On the 19th of December a.d. 69, the Roman

Capitol, with its ancient sanctuaries, was set on fire. Eight months

later, on the 9th of Ab a.d. 70, the Temple of Jerusalem was given to

the flames. It is not a coincidence but a conjunction, for upon the

ruins of heathenism and of apostate Judaism was the Church of Christ

to be reared.

A silence, even more complete than that concerning the early life of

Jesus, rests on the thirty years and more, which intervened between

the birth and the open forthshowing[1279]1279 of John in his character

as Forerunner of the Messiah. Only his outward and inward development,

and his being 'in the deserts,'[1280]1280 are briefly

indicated.[1281]1281 The latter, assuredly, not in order to learn from

the Essenes,[1282]1282 but to attain really, in lonely fellowship with

God, what they sought externally. It is characteristic that, while

Jesus could go straight from the home and workshop of Nazareth to the

Baptism of Jordan, His Forerunner required so long and peculiar

preparation: characteristic of the difference of their Persons and

Mission, characteristic also of the greatness of the work to be

inaugurated. St. Luke furnishes precise notices of the time of the

Baptist's public appearance - not merely to fix the exact chronology,

which would not have required so many details, but for a higher

purpose. For, they indicate, more clearly than the most elaborate

discussion, the fitness of the moment for the Advent of 'the Kingdom

of Heaven.' For the first time since the Babylonish Captivity, the

foreigner, the Chief of the hated Roman Empire - according to the

Rabbis, the fourth beast of Daniel's vision[1283]1283 - was absolute

and undisputed master of Judæa; and the chief religious office divided

between two, equally unworthy of its functions. And it deserves, at

least, notice, that of the Rulers mentioned by St. Luke, Pilate

entered on his office[1284]1284 only shortly before the public

appearance of John, and that they all continued till after the

Crucifixion of Christ. There was thus, so to speak, a continuity of

these powers during the whole Messianic period.

As regards Palestine, the ancient kingdom of Herod was now divided

into four parts, Judæa being under the direct administration of Rome,

two other tetrarchies under the rule of Herod's sons (Herod Antipas

and Philip), while the small principality of Abilene was governed by

Lysanias.[1285]1285 Of the latter no details can be furnished, nor are

they necessary in this history. It is otherwise as regards the sons of

Herod, and especially the character of the Roman government at that

time.

Herod Antipas, whose rule extended over forty-three years, reigned

over Galilee and Peræa - the districts which were respectively the

principal sphere of the Ministry of Jesus and of John the Baptist.

Like his brother Archelaus, Herod Antipas possessed in an even

aggravated form most of the vices, without any of the greater

qualities, of his father. Of deeper religious feelings or convictions

he was entirely destitute, though his conscience occasionally

misgrave, if it did not restrain, him. The inherent weakness of his

character left him in the absolute control of his wife, to the final

ruin of his fortunes.He was covetous, avaricious, luxurious, and

utterly dissipated suspicious, and with a good deal of that

fox-cunning which, especially in the East, often forms the sum total

of state-craft. Like his father, he indulged a taste for building -

always taking care to propitiate Rome by dedicating all to the

Emperor. The most extensive of his undertakings was the building, in

22 a.d., of the city of Tiberias, at the upper end of the Lake of

Galilee. The site was under the disadvantage of having formerly been a

burying-place, which, as implying Levitical uncleanness, for some time

deterred pious Jews from settling there. Nevertheless, it rose in

great magnificence from among the reeds which had but lately covered

the neighbourhood (the ensigns armorial of the city were 'reeds').

Herod Antipas made it his residence, and built there a strong castle

and a palace of unrivalled splendour. The city, which was peopled

chiefly by adventurers, was mainly Grecian, and adorned with an

amphitheatre, of which the ruins can still be traced.

A happier account can be given of Philip, the son of Herod the Great

and Cleopatra of Jerusalem. He was undoubtedly the best of Herod's

sons. He showed, indeed, the same abject submission as the rest of his

family to the Roman Emperor, after whom he named the city of Cæsarea

Philippi, which he built at the sources of the Jordan; just as he

changed the name of Bethsaida, a village of which he made an opulent

city, into Julias, after the daughter of Augustus. But he was a

moderate and just ruler, and his reign of thirty-seven years

contrasted favourably with that of his kinsmen. The land was quiet and

prosperous, and the people contented and happy.

As regards the Roman rule, matters had greatly changed for the worse

since the mild sway of Augustus, under which, in the language of

Philo, no one throughout the Empire dared to molest the

Jews.[1286]1286 The only innovations to which Israel had then to

submit were, the daily sacrifices for the Emperor and the Roman

people, offerings on festive days, prayers for them in the Synagogues,

and such participation in national joy or sorrow as their religion

allowed.[1287]1287

It was far other when Tiberius succeeded to the Empire, and Judæa was

a province. Merciless harshness characterised the administration of

Palestine; while the Emperor himself was bitterly hostile to Judaism

and the Jews, and that although, personally, openly careless of all

religion.[1288]1288 Under his reign the persecution of the Roman Jews

occurred, and Palestine suffered almost to the verge of endurance. The

first Procurator whom Tiberius appointed over Judæa, changed the

occupancy of the High-Priesthood four times, till he found in Caiaphas

a sufficiently submissive instrument of Roman tyranny. The exactions,

and the reckless disregard of all Jewish feelings and interests, might

have been characterised as reaching the extreme limit, if worse had

not followed when Pontius Pilate succeeded to the procuratorship.

Venality, violence, robbery, persecutions, wanton malicious insults,

judicial murders without even the formality of a legal process - and

cruelty, such are the charges brought against his

administration.[1289]1289 If former governors had, to some extent,

respected the religious scruples of the Jews, Pilate set them

purposely at defiance; and this not only once, but again and again, in

Jerusalem,[1290]1290 in Galilee,[1291]1291 and even in

Samaria,[1292]1292 until the Emperor himself interposed.[1293]1293

Such, then, was the political condition of the land, when John

appeared to preach the near Advent of a Kingdom with which Israel

associated all that was happy and glorious, even beyond the dreams of

the religious enthusiast. And equally loud was the call for help in

reference to those who held chief spiritual rule over the people. St.

Luke significantly joins together, as the highest religious authority

in the land, the names of Annas and Caiaphas.[1294]1294 The former had

been appointed by Quirinius. After holding the Pontificate for nine

years, he was deposed, and succeeded by others, of whom the fourth was

his son-in-law Caiaphas. The character of the High-Priests during the

whole of that period is described in the Talmud[1295]1295 in terrible

language. And although there is no evidence that 'the house of

Annas'[1296]1296 was guilty of the same gross self-indulgence,

violence,[1297]1297 luxury, and even public indecency,[1298]1298 as

some of their successors, they are included in the woes pronounced on

the corrupt leaders of the priesthood, whom the Santuary is

represented as bidding depart from the sacred precincts, which their

presence defiled.[1299]1299 It deserves notice, that the special sin

with which the house of Annas is charged is that of 'whispering' - or

hissing like vipers - which seems to refer[1300]1300 to private

influence on the judges in their administration of justice, whereby

'morals were corrupted, judgment perverted and the Shekhinah withdrawn

from Israel.'[1301]1301 In illustration of this, we recall the

terrorism which prevented Sanhedrists from taking the part of

Jesus,[1302]1302 and especially the violence which seems to have

determined the final action of the Sanhedrin,[1303]1303 against which

not only such men as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, but even a

Gamaliel, would feel themselves powerless. But although the expression

'High-Priest' appears sometimes to have been used in a general sense,

as designating the sons of the High-Priests, and even the principal

members of their families,[1304]1304 [1305]1305 there could, of

course, be only one actual High-Priest. The conjunction of the two

names of Annas and Caiaphas[1306]1306 probably indicates that,

although Annas was deprived of the Pontificate, he still continued to

preside over the Sanhedrin - a conclusion not only borne out by Acts

iv. 6, where Annas appears as the actual President, and by the terms

in which Caiaphas is spoken of, as merely 'one of them,'[1307]1307 but

by the part which Annas took in the final condemnation of

Jesus.[1308]1308

Such a combination of political and religious distress, surely,

constituted the time of Israel's utmost need. As yet, no attempt had

been made by the people to right themselves by armed force. In these

circumstances, the cry that the Kingdom of Heaven was near at hand,

and the call to preparation for it, must have awakened echoes

throughout the land, and startled the most careless and unbelieving.

It was, according to St. Luke's exact statement, in the fifteenth year

of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar - reckoning, as provincials would

do,[1309]1309 from his co-regency with Augustus (which commenced two

years before his sole reign), in the year 26 a.d.[1310]1310 According

to our former computation, Jesus would then be in His thirtieth

year.[1311]1311 The scene of John's first public appearance was in

'the wilderness of Judæa,' that is, the wild, desolate district around

the mouth of the Jordan. We know not whether John baptized in this

place,[1312]1312 nor yet how long he continued there; but we are

expressly told, that his stay was not confined to that

locality.[1313]1313 Soon afterwards we find him at

Bethabara,[1314]1314 which is farther up the stream. The outward

appearance and the habits of the Messenger corresponded to the

character and object of his Mission. Neither his dress nor his food

was that of the Essenes;[1315]1315 and the former, at least, like that

of Elijah,[1316]1316 [1317]1317 whose mission he was now to 'fulfil.'

This was evinced alike by what he preached, and by the new symbolic

rite, from which he derived the name of 'Baptist.' The grand burden of

his message was: the announcement of the approach of 'the Kingdom of

Heaven,' and the needed preparation of his hearers for that Kingdom.

The latter he sought, positively, by admonition, and negatively, by

warnings, while he directed all to the Coming One, in Whom that

Kingdom would become, so to speak, individualised. Thus, from the

first, it was 'the good news of the Kingdom,' to which all else in

John's preaching was but subsidiary.

Concerning this 'Kingdom of Heaven,' which was the great message of

John, and the great work of Christ Himself,[1318]1318 we may here say,

that it is the whole Old Testament sublimated, and the whole New

Testament realised. The idea of it did not lie hidden in the Old, to

be opened up in the New Testament - as did the mystery of its

realisation.[1319]1319 But this rule of heaven and Kingship of Jehovah

was the very substance of the Old Testament; the object of the calling

and mission of Israel; the meaning of all its ordinances, whether

civil or religious;[1320]1320 the underlying idea of all its

institutions.[1321]1321 It explained alike the history of the people,

the dealings of God with them, and the prospects opened up by the

prophets. Without it the Old Testament could not be understood; it

gave perpetuity to its teaching, and dignity to its representations.

This constituted alike the real contrast between Israel and the

nations of antiquity, and Israel's real title to distinction. Thus the

whole Old Testament was the preparatory presentation of the rule of

heaven and of the Kingship of its Lord.

But preparatory not only in the sense of typical, but also in that of

inchoative. Even the twofold hindrance - internal and external - which

'the Kingdom' encountered, indicated this. The former arose from the

resistance of Israel to their King; the latter from the opposition of

the surrounding kingdoms of this world. All the more intense became

the longing through thousands of years, that these hindrances might be

swept away by the Advent of the promised Messiah, Who would

permanently establish (by His spirit) the right relationship between

the King and His Kingdom, by bringing in an everlasting righteousness,

and also cast down existing barriers, by calling the kingdoms of this

world to be the Kingdom of our God. This would, indeed, be the Advent

of the Kingdom of God, such as had been the glowing hope held out by

Zechariah,[1322]1322 [1323]1323 the glorious vision beheld by

Daniel.[1324]1324 [1325]1325 Three ideas especially did this Kingdom

of God imply: universality, heavenliness, and permanency. Wide as

God's domain would be His Dominion; holy, as heaven in contrast to

earth, and God to man, would be his character; and triumphantly

lasting its continuance. Such was the teaching of the Old Testament,

and the great hope of Israel. It scarcely needs mental compass, only

moral and spiritual capacity, to see its matchless grandeur, in

contrast with even the highest aspirations of heathenism, and the

blanched ideas of modern culture.

How imperfectly Israel understood this Kingdom, our previous

investigations have shown. In truth, the men of that period possessed

only the term - as it were, the form. What explained its meaning,

filled, and fulfilled it, came once more from heaven. Rabbinism and

Alexandrianism kept alive the thought of it; and in their own way

filled the soul with its longing - just as the distress in church and

State carried the need of it to every heart with the keenness of

anguish. As throughout this history, the form was of that time; the

substance and the spirit were of Him Whose coming was the Advent of

that Kingdom. Perhaps the nearest approach to it lay in the higher

aspirations of the Nationalist party, only that it sought their

realisation, not spiritually, but outwardly. Taking the sword, it

perished by the sword. It was probably to this that both Pilate and

Jesus referred in that memorable question: 'Art Thou then a King?' to

which our Lord, unfolding the deepest meaning of His mission, replied:

'My Kingdom is not of this world: if My Kingdom were of this world,

then would My servants fight.'[1326]1326

According to the Rabbinic views of the time, the terms 'Kingdom,'

'Kingdom of heaven,'[1327]1327 and 'Kingdom of God' (in the Targum on

Micah iv. 7 'Kingdom of Jehovah'), were equivalent. In fact, the word

'heaven' was very often used instead of 'God,' so as to avoid unduly

familiarising the ear with the Sacred Name.[1328]1328 This, probably,

accounts for the exclusive use of the expression 'Kingdom of Heaven'

in the Gospel by St. Matthew.[1329]1329 And the term did imply a

contrast to earth, as the expression 'the Kingdom of God' did to this

world. The consciousness of its contrast to earth or the world was

distinctly expressed in Rabbinic writings.[1330]1330

This 'Kingdom of Heaven,' or 'of God,' must, however, be distinguished

from such terms as 'the Kingdom of the Messiah' (Malkhutha

dimeshicha[1331]1331), 'the future age (world) of the Messiah' (Alma

deathey dimeshicha[1332]1332), 'the days of the Messiah,' 'the age to

come' (soeculum futurum, the Athid labho[1333]1333 - both this and the

previous expression[1334]1334), 'the end of days,'[1335]1335 and 'the

end of the extremity of days' Soph Eqebh Yomaya [1336]1336). This is

the more important, since the 'Kingdom of Heaven' has so often been

confounded with the period of its triumphant manifestation in 'the

days,' or in 'the Kingdom, of the Messiah.' Between the Advent and the

final manifestation of 'the Kingdom,' Jewish expectancy placed a

temporary obscuration of the Messiah.[1337]1337 Not His first

appearance, but His triumphant manifestation, was to be preceded by

the so-called 'sorrows of the Messiah' (the Chebhley shel Mashiach),

'the tribulations of the latter days.'[1338]1338

A review of many passages on the subject shows that, in the Jewish

mind the expression 'Kingdom of Heaven' referred, not so much to any

particular period, as in general to the Rule of God - as acknowledged,

manifested, and eventually perfected. Very often it is the equivalent

for personal acknowledgment of God: the taking upon oneself of the

'yoke' of 'the Kingdom,' or of the commandments - the former preceding

and conditioning the latter.[1339]1339 Accordingly, the

Mishnah[1340]1340 gives this as the reason why, in the collection of

Scripture passages which forms the prayer called 'Shema,'[1341]1341

the confession, Deut. vi. 4 &c., precedes the admonition, Deut. xi. 13

&c., because a man takes upon himself first the yoke of the Kingdom of

Heaven, and afterwards that of the commandments. And in this sense,

the repetition of this Shema, as the personal acknowledgment of the

Rule of Jehovah, is itself often designated as 'taking upon oneself

the Kingdom of Heaven.'[1342]1342 Similarly, the putting on of

phylacteries, and the washing of hands, are also described as taking

upon oneself the yoke of the Kingdom of God.[1343]1343 To give other

instances: Israel is said to have taken up the yoke of the Kingdom of

God at Mount Sinai;[1344]1344 the children of Jacob at their last

interview with their father;[1345]1345 and Isaiah on his call to the

prophetic office,[1346]1346 where it is also noted that this must be

done willingly and gladly. On the other hand, the sons of Eli and the

sons of Ahab are said to have cast off the Kingdom of

Heaven.[1347]1347 While thus the acknowledgment of the Rule of God,

both in profession and practice, was considered to constitute the

Kingdom of God, its full manifestation was expected only in the time

of the Advent of Messiah. Thus in the Targum on Isaiah xl. 9, the

words 'Behold your God!' are paraphrased: 'The Kingdom of your God is

revealed.' Similarly,[1348]1348 we read: 'When the time approaches

that the Kingdom of Heaven shall be manifested, then shall be

fulfilled that "the Lord shall be King over all the earth."'[1349]1349

[1350]1350 On the other hand, the unbelief of Israel would appear in

that they would reject these three things: the Kingdom of Heaven, the

Kingdom of the House of David, and the building of the Temple,

according to the prediction in Hos. iii. 5.[1351]1351 It follows that,

after the period of unbelief, the Messianic deliverances and blessings

of the 'Athid Labho,' or future age, were expected. But the final

completion of all still remained for the 'Olam Habba,' or world to

come. And that there is a distinction between the time of the Messiah

and this 'world to come' is frequently indicated in Rabbinic

writings.[1352]1352

As we pass from the Jewish ideas of the time to the teaching of the

New Testament, we feel that while there is complete change of spirit,

the form in which the idea of the Kingdom of Heaven is presented is

substantially similar. Accordingly, we must dismiss the notion that

the expression refers to the Church, whether visible (according to the

Roman Catholic view) or invisible (according to certain Protestant

writers).[1353]1353 'The Kingdom of God,' or Kingly Rule of God, is an

objective fact. The visible Church can only be the subjective attempt

at its outward realisation, of which the invisible Church is the true

counterpart. When Christ says,[1354]1354 that 'except a man be born

from above, he cannot see the Kingdom of God,' He teaches, in

opposition to the Rabbinic representation of how 'the Kingdom' was

taken up, that a man cannot even comprehend that glorious idea of the

Reign of God, and of becoming, by conscious self-surrender, one of His

subjects, except he be first born from above. Similarly, the meaning

of Christ's further teaching on this subject[1355]1355 seems to be

that, except a man be born of water (profession, with

baptism[1356]1356 as its symbol) and the Spirit, he cannot really

enter into the fellowship of that Kingdom.

In fact, an analysis of 119 passages in the New Testament where the

expression 'Kingdom' occurs, shows that it means the rule of

God;[1357]1357 which was manifested in and through Christ;[1358]1358

is apparent in 'the Church;'[1359]1359 gradually develops amidst

hindrances;[1360]1360 is triumphant at the second coming of

Christ[1361]1361 ('the end'); and, finally, perfected in the world to

come.[1362]1362 Thus viewed, the announcement of John of the near

Advent of this Kingdom had deepest meaning, although, as so often in

the case of prophetism, the stages intervening between the Advent of

the Christ and the triumph of that Kingdom seem to have been hidden

from the preacher. He came to call Israel to submit to the Reign of

God, about to be manifested in Christ. Hence, on the one hand, he

called them to repentance - a 'change of mind' - with all that this

implied; and, on the other, pointed them to the Christ, in the

exaltation of His Person and Office. Or rather, the two combined might

be summed up in the call: 'Change your mind', repent, which implies,

not only a turning from the past, but a turning to the Christ in

newness of mind.[1363]1363 And thus the symbolic action by which this

preaching was accompanied might be designated 'the baptism of

repentance.'

The account given by St. Luke bears, on the face of it, that it was a

summary, not only of the first, but of all John's preaching.[1364]1364

The very presence of his hearers at this call to, and baptism of,

repentance, gave point to his words. Did they who, notwithstanding

their sins,[1365]1365 lived in such security of carelessness and

self-righteousness, really understand and fear the final consequences

of resistance to the coming 'Kingdom'? If so, theirs must be a

repentance not only in profession, but of heart and mind, such as

would yield fruit, both good and visible. Or else did they imagine

that, according to the common notion of the time, the vials of wrath

were to be poured out only on the Gentiles,[1366]1366 while they, as

Abraham's children, were sure of escape - in the words of the Talmud,

that 'the night' (Is. xxi. 12) was 'only to the nations of the world,

but the morning to Israel?'[1367]1367

For, no principle was more fully established in the popular

conviction, than that all Israel had part in the world to come (Sanh.

x. 1), and this, specifically, because of their connection with

Abraham. This appears not only from the New Testament,[1368]1368 from

Philo, and Josephus, but from many Rabbinic passages. 'The merits of

the Fathers,' is one of the commonest phrases in the mouth of the

Rabbis.[1369]1369 Abraham was represented as sitting at the gate of

Gehenna, to deliver any Israelite[1370]1370 who otherwise might have

been consigned to its terrors.[1371]1371 In fact, by their descent

from Abraham, all the children of Israel were nobles,[1372]1372

infinitely higher than any proselytes. 'What,' exclaims the Talmud,

'shall the born Israelite stand upon the earth, and the proselyte be

in heaven?'[1373]1373 In fact, the ships on the sea were preserved

through the merit of Abraham; the rain descended on account of

it.[1374]1374 For his sake alone had Moses been allowed to ascend into

heaven, and to receive the Law; for his sake the sin of the golden

calf had been forgiven;[1375]1375 his righteousness had on many

occasions been the support of Israel's cause;[1376]1376 Daniel had

been heard for the sake of Abraham;[1377]1377 nay, his merit availed

even for the wicked.[1378]1378 [1379]1379 In its extravagance the

Midrash thus apostrophises Abraham: 'If thy children were even

(morally) dead bodies, without blood vessels or bones, thy merit would

avail for them!'[1380]1380

But if such had been the inner thoughts of his bearers, John warned

them, that God was able of those stones that strewed the river-bank to

raise up children unto Abraham;[1381]1381 [1382]1382 or, reverting to

his former illustration of 'fruits meet for repentance,' that the

proclamation of the Kingdom was, at the same time, the laying of the

axe to the root of every tree that bore not fruit. Then making

application of it, in answer to the specific inquiry of various

classes, the preacher gave them such practical advice as applied to

the well-known sins of their past;[1383]1383 yet in this also not

going beyond the merely negative, or preparatory element of

'repentance.' The positive, and all-important aspect of it, was to be

presented by the Christ. It was only natural that the hearers wondered

whether John himself was the Christ, since he thus urged repentance.

For this was so closely connected in their thoughts with the Advent of

the Messiah, that it was said, 'If Israel repented but one day, the

Son of David would immediately come.'[1384]1384 But here John pointed

them to the difference between himself and his work, and the Person

and Mission of the Christ. In deepest reverence he declared himself

not worthy to do Him the service of a slave or of a

disciple.[1385]1385 His Baptism would not be of preparatory repentance

and with water, but the Divine Baptism in[1386]1386 the Holy Spirit

and fire[1387]1387 - in the Spirit Who sanctified, and the Divine

Light which purified,[1388]1388 and so effectively qualified for the

'Kingdom.' And there was still another contrast. John's was but

preparing work, the Christ's that of final decision; after it came the

harvest. His was the harvest, and His the garner; His also the fan,

with which He would sift the wheat from the straw and chaff - the one

to be garnered, the other burned with fire unextinguished and

inextinguishable.[1389]1389 Thus early in the history of the Kingdom

of God was it indicated, that alike that which would prove useless

straw and the good corn were inseparably connected in God's

harvest-field till the reaping time; that both belonged to Him; and

that the final separation would only come at the last, and by His own

Hand.

What John preached, that he also symbolised by a rite which, though

not in itself, yet in its application, was wholly new. Hitherto the

Law had it, that those who had contracted Levitical defilement were to

immerse before offering sacrifice. Again, it was prescribed that such

Gentiles as became 'proselytes of righteousness,' or 'proselytes of

the Covenant' (Gerey hatstsedeq or Gerey habberith), were to be

admitted to full participation in the privileges of Israel by the

threefold rites of circumcision, baptism,[1390]1390 and sacrifice -

the immersion being, as it were, the acknowledgment and symbolic

removal of moral defilement, corresponding to that of Levitical

uncleanness. But never before had it been proposed that Israel should

undergo a 'baptism of repentance,' although there are indications of a

deeper insight into the meaning of Levitical baptisms.[1391]1391 Was

it intended, that the hearers of John should give this as evidence of

their repentance, that, like persons defiled, they sought

purification, and, like strangers, they sought admission among the

people who took on themselves the Rule of God? These two ideas would,

indeed, have made it truly a 'baptism of repentance.' But it seems

difficult to suppose, that the people would have been prepared for

such admissions; or, at least, that there should have been no record

of the mode in which a change so deeply spiritual was brought about.

May it not rather have been that as, when the first Covenant was made,

Moses was directed to prepare Israel by symbolic baptism of their

persons[1392]1392 and their garments,[1393]1393 so the initiation of

the new Covenant, by which the people were to enter into the Kingdom

of God, was preceded by another general symbolic baptism of those who

would be the true Israel, and receive, or take on themselves, the Law

from God?[1394]1394 In that case the rite would have acquired not only

a new significance, but be deeply and truly the answer to John's call.

In such case also, no special explanation would have been needed on

the part of the Baptist, nor yet such spiritual insight on that of the

people as we can scarcely suppose them to have possessed at that

stage. Lastly, in that case nothing could have been more suitable, nor

more solemn, than Israel in waiting for the Messiah and the Rule of

God, preparing as their fathers had done at the foot of Mount

Sinai.[1395]1395

CHAPTER XII.

THE BAPTISM OF JESUS: ITS HIGHER MEANING.

(St. Matt. iii. 13-17; St. Mark i. 7-11; St. Luke iii. 21-23; St. John

i. 32-34.)

The more we think of it, the better do we seem to understand how that

'Voice crying in the wilderness: Repent! for the Kingdom of Heaven is

at hand,' awakened echoes throughout the land, and brought from city,

village, and hamlet strangest hearers. For once, every distinction was

levelled. Pharisee and Sadducee, outcast publican and semi-heathen

soldier, met here as on common ground. Their bond of union was the

common 'hope of Israel' - the only hope that remained: that of 'the

Kingdom.' The long winter of disappointment had not destroyed, nor the

storms of suffering swept away, nor yet could any plant of spurious

growth overshadow, what had struck its roots so deep in the soil of

Israel's heart.

That Kingdom had been the last word of the Old Testament. As the

thoughtful Israelite, whether Eastern or Western,[1396]1396 viewed

even the central part of his worship in sacrifices, and remembered

that his own Scriptures had spoken of them in terms which pointed to

something beyond their offering,[1397]1397 he must have felt that 'the

blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the

unclean,' could only 'sanctify to the purifying of the flesh;' that,

indeed, the whole body of ceremonial and ritual ordinances 'could not

make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the

conscience.' They were only 'the shadow of good things to come;' of 'a

new' and 'better covenant, established upon better

promises.'[1398]1398 It was otherwise with the thought of the Kingdom.

Each successive link in the chain of prophecy bound Israel anew to

this hope, and each seemed only more firmly welded than the other. And

when the voice of prophecy had ceased, the sweetness of its melody

still held the people spell-bound, even when broken in the wild

fantasies of Apocalyptic literature. Yet that 'root of Jesse,' whence

this Kingdom was to spring, was buried deep under ground, as the

remains of ancient Jerusalem are now under the desolations of many

generations. Egyptian, Syrian, Greek, and Roman had trodden it under

foot; the Maccabees had come and gone, and it was not in them; the

Herodian kingdom had risen and fallen; Pharisaism, with its learning,

had overshadowed thoughts of the priesthood and of prophetism; but the

hope of that Davidic Kingdom, of which there was not a single trace or

representative left, was even stronger than before. So closely has it

been intertwined with the very life of the nation, that, to all

believing Israelites, this hope has through the long night of ages,

been like that eternal lamp which burns in the darkness of the

Synagogue, in front of the heavy veil that shrines the Sanctuary,

which holds and conceals the precious rolls of the Law and the

Prophets.

This great expectancy would be strung to utmost tension during the

pressure of outward circumstances more hopeless than any hitherto

experienced. Witness here the ready credence which impostors found,

whose promises and schemes were of the wildest character; witness the

repeated attempts at risings, which only despair could have prompted;

witness, also, the last terrible war against Rome, and, despite the

horrors of its end, the rebellion of Bar-Kokhabh, the false Messiah.

And now the cry had been suddenly raised: 'The Kingdom of Heaven is at

hand!' It was heard in the wilderness of Judæa, within a few hours'

distance from Jerusalem. No wonder Pharisee and Sadducee flocked to

the spot. How many of them came to inquire, how many remained to be

baptized, or how many went away disappointed in their hopes of 'the

Kingdom,' we know not.[1399]1399 But they would not see anything in

the messenger that could have given their expectations a rude shock.

His was not a call to armed resistance, but to repentance, such as all

knew and felt must precede the Kingdom. The hope which he held out was

not of earthly possessions, but of purity. There was nothing negative

or controversial in what he spoke; nothing to excite prejudice or

passion. His appearance would command respect, and his character was

in accordance with his appearance. Not rich nor yet Pharisaic garb

with wide Tsitsith,[1400]1400 bound with many-coloured or even

priestly girdle, but the old prophet's poor raiment held in by a

leathern girdle. Not luxurious life, but one of meanest

fare.[1401]1401 And then, all in the man was true and real. 'Not a

reed shaken by the wind,' but unbendingly firm in deep and settled

conviction; not ambitious nor self-seeking, but most humble in his

self-estimate, discarding all claim but that of lowliest service, and

pointing away from himself to Him Who was to come, and Whom as yet he

did not even know. Above all, there was the deepest earnestess, the

most utter disregard of man, the most firm belief in what he

announced. For himself he sought nothing; for them he had only one

absorbing thought: The Kingdom was at hand, the King was coming - let

them prepare!

Such entire absorption in his mission, which leaves us in ignorance of

even the details of his later activity, must have given force to his

message.[1402]1402 And still the voice, everywhere proclaiming the

same message, travelled upward, along the winding Jordon which cleft

the land of promise. It was probably the autumn of the year 779

(a.u.c.), which, it may be noted, was a Sabbatic year.[1403]1403

Released from business and agriculture, the multitudes flocked around

him as he passed on his Mission. Rapidly the tidings spread from town

and village to distant homestead, still swelling the numbers that

hastened to the banks of the sacred river. He had now reached what

seems to have been the most northern point of his

Mission-journey,[1404]1404 Beth-Abara ('the house of passage,' or 'of

shipping') - according to the ancient reading, Bethany ('the house of

shipping') - one of the best known fords across the Jordan into

Peræa.[1405]1405 Here he baptized.[1406]1406 The ford was little more

than twenty miles from Nazareth. But long before John had reached that

spot, tidings of his word and work must have come even into the

retirement of Jesus' Home-Life.

It was now, as we take it, the early winter of the year 780.[1407]1407

Jesus had waited those months. Although there seems not to have been

any personal acquaintance between Jesus and John - and how could there

be, when their spheres lay so widely apart? - each must have heard and

known of the other. Thirty years of silence weaken most human

impressions - or, if they deepen, the enthusiasm that had accompanied

them passes away. Yet, when the two met, and perhaps had brief

conversation, each bore himself in accordance with his previous

history. With John it was deepest, reverent humility - even to the

verge of misunderstanding his special Mission, and work of initiation

and preparation for the Kingdom. He had heard of Him before by the

hearing of the ear, and when now he saw Him, that look of quiet

dignity, of the majesty of unsullied purity in the only Unfallen,

Unsinning Man, made him forget even the express command of God, which

had sent him from his solitude to preach and baptize, and that very

sign which had been him by which to recognise the Messiah.[1408]1408

[1409]1409 In that Presence it only became to him a question of the

more 'worthy' to the misunderstanding of the nature of his special

calling.

But Jesus, as He had not made haste, so was He not capable of

misunderstanding. To Him it was 'the fulfilling of all righteousness.'

From earliest ages it has been a question why Jesus went to be

baptized. The heretical Gospels put into the mouth of the

Virgin-Mother an invitation to go to that baptism, to which Jesus is

supposed to have replied by pointing to His own sinlessness, except it

might be on the score of ignorance, in regard to a limitation of

knowledge.[1410]1410 Objections lie to most of the explanations

offered by modern writers. They include a bold denial of the fact of

Jesus' Baptism; the profane suggestion of collusion between John and

Jesus; or such suppositions, as that of His personal sinfulness, of

His coming as the Representative of a guilty race, or as the bearer of

the sins of others, or of acting in solidarity with His people - or

else to separate Himself from the sins of Israel; of His surrendering

Himself thereby unto death for man; of His purpose to do honour to the

baptism of John; or thus to elicit a token of His Messiahship; or to

bind Himself to the observance of the Law; or in this manner to

commence His Messianic Work; or to consecrate Himself solemnly to it;

or, lastly, to receive the spiritual qualification for it.[1411]1411

To these and similar views must be added the latest conceit of

Renan,[1412]1412 who arranges a scene between Jesus, who comes with

some disciples, and John, when Jesus is content for a time to grow in

the shadow of John, and to submit to a rite which was evidently so

generally acknowledged. But the most reverent of these explanations

involve a twofold mistake. They represent the Baptism of John as one

of repentance, and they imply an ulterior motive in the coming of

Christ to the banks of Jordan. But, as already shown, the Baptism of

John was in itself only a consecration to, and preparatory initiation

for, the new Covenant of the Kingdom. As applied to sinful men it was

indeed necessarily a 'baptism of repentance;' but not as applied to

the sinless Jesus. Had it primarily and always been a 'baptism of

repentance,' He could not have submitted to it.

Again, and most important of all, we must not seek for any ulterior

motive in the coming of Jesus to this Baptism. He had no ulterior

motive of any kind: it was an act of simple submissive obedience on

the part of the Perfect One - and submissive obedience has no motive

beyond itself. It asks no reasons; it cherishes no ulterior purpose.

And thus it was 'the fulfilment of all righteousness.' And it was in

perfect harmony with all His previous life. Our difficulty here lies -

if we are unbelievers, in thinking simply of the Humanity of the Man

of Nazareth; if we are believers, in making abstraction of his

Divinity. But thus much, at least, all must concede, that the Gospels

always present Him as the God-Man, in an inseparable mystical union of

the two natures, and that they present to us the even more mysterious

idea of His Self-exinanition, of the voluntary obscuration of His

Divinity, as part of His Humiliation. Placing ourselves on this

standpoint - which is, at any rate, that of the Evangelic narrative -

we may arrive at a more correct view of this great event. It seems as

if, in the Divine Self-exinanition, apparently necessarily connected

with the perfect human development of Jesus, some corresponding

outward event were ever the occasion of a fresh advance in the

Messianic consciousness and work. The first event of that kind had

been his appearance in the Temple. These two things then stood out

vividly before Him - not in the ordinary human, but in the Messianic

sense: that the Temple was the House of His Father, and that to be

busy about it was His Life-work. With this He returned to Nazareth,

and in willing subjection to His Parents fulfilled all righteousness.

And still, as He grew in years, in wisdom, and in favour with God and

Man, this thought - rather this burning consciousness, was the inmost

spring of His Life. What this business specially was, He knew not yet,

and waited to learn; the how and the when of His life-consecration, He

left unasked and unanswered in the still waiting for Him. And in this

also we see the Sinless, the Perfect One.

When tidings of John's Baptism reached His home, there could be no

haste on His part. Even with knowledge of all that concerned John's

relation to Him, there was in the 'fulfilment of all righteousness'

quiet waiting. The one question with Him was, as He afterwards put it:

'The Baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?' (St.

Matt. xxi. 25). That question once answered, there could be no longer

doubt nor hesitation. He went - not for any ulterior purpose, nor from

any other motive than that it was of God. He went voluntarily, because

it was such - and because 'it became Him' in so doing 'to fulfill all

righteousness.' There is this great difference between His going to

that Baptism, and afterwards into the wilderness: in the former case,

His act was of preconceived purpose; in the latter it was not so, but

'He was driven' - without previous purpose to that effect - under the

constraining power 'of the Spirit,' without premeditation and resolve

of it; without even knowledge of its object. In the one case He was

active, in the other passive; in the one case He fulfilled

righteousness, in the other His righteousness was tried. But as, on

His first visit to the Temple, this consciousness about His

Life-business came to Him in His Father's House, ripening slowly and

fully those long years of quiet submission and growing wisdom and

grace at Nazareth, so at His Baptism, with the accompanying descent of

the Holy Ghost, His abiding in Him, and the heard testimony from His

Father, the knowledge came to Him, and, in and with[1413]1413 that

knowledge, the qualification for the business of His Father's House.

In that hour He learned the when, and in part the how, of His

Life-business; the latter to be still farther, and from another

aspect, seen in the wilderness, then in His life, in His suffering,

and, finally, in His death. In man the subjective and the objective,

alike intellectually and morally, are ever separate; in God they are

one. What He is, that He wills. And in the God-Man also we must not

separate the subjective and the objective. The consciousness of the

when and the how of His Life-business was necessarily accompanied,

while He prayed, by the descent, and the abiding in Him, of the Holy

Ghost, and by the testifying Voice from heaven. His inner knowledge

was real qualification - the forth-bursting of His Power; and it was

inseparably accompanied by outward qualification, in what took place

at His Baptism. But the first step to all was His voluntary descent to

Jordan, and in it the fulfilling of all righteousness. His previous

life had been that of the Perfect Ideal Israelite - believing,

unquestioning, submissive - in preparation for that which, in His

thirteenth year, He had learned as its business. The Baptism of Christ

was the last act of His private life; and, emerging from its waters in

prayer, He learned: when His business was to commence, and how it

would be done.

That one outstanding thought, then, 'I must be about My Father's

business,' which had been the principle of His Nazareth life, had come

to full ripeness when He knew that the cry, 'The Kingdom of Heaven is

at hand,' was from God. The first great question was now answered. His

Father's business was the Kingdom of Heaven. It only remained for Him

'to be about it,' and in this determination He went to submit to its

initiatory rite of Baptism. We have, as we understand it, distinct

evidence - even if it were not otherwise necessary to suppose this -

that 'all the people had been baptized,'[1414]1414 when Jesus came to

John. Alone the two met - probably for the first time in their lives.

Over that which passed between them Holy Scripture has laid the veil

of reverent silence, save as regards the beginning and the outcome of

their meeting, which it was necessary for us to know. When Jesus came,

John knew Him not. And even when He knew Him, that was not enough. Not

remembrance of what he had heard and of past transactions, nor the

overwhelming power of that spotless Purity and Majesty of willing

submission, were sufficient. For so great a witness as that which John

was to bear, a present and visible demonstration from heaven was to be

given. Not that God sent the Spirit-Dove, or heaven uttered its voice,

for the purpose of giving this as a sign to John. These manifestations

were necessary in themselves, and, we might say, would have taken

place quite irrespective of the Baptist. But, while necessary in

themselves, they were also to be a sign to John. And this may perhaps

explain why one Gospel (that of St. John) seems to describe the scene

as enacted before the Baptist, whilst others (St. Matthew and St.

Mark) tell it as if only visible to Jesus.[1415]1415 The one bears

reference to 'the record,' the other to the deeper and absolutely

necessary fact which underly 'the record.' And, beyond this, it may

help us to perceive at least one aspect of what to man is the

miraculous: as in itself the higher Necessary, with casual and

secondary manifestation to man.

We can understand how what he knew of Jesus, and what he now saw and

heard, must have overwhelmed John with the sense of Christ's

transcendentally higher dignity, and led him to hesitate about, if not

to refuse, administering to Him the rite of Baptism.[1416]1416 Not

because it was 'the baptism of repentance,' but because he stood in

the presence of Him 'the latchet of Whose shoes' he was 'not worthy to

loose.' Had he not so felt, the narrative would not have been

psychologically true; and, had it not been recorded, there would have

been serious difficulty to our reception of it. And yet, withal, in so

'forbidding' Him, and even suggesting his own baptism by Jesus, John

forgot and misunderstood his mission. John himself was never to be

baptized; he only held open the door of the new Kingdom; himself

entered it not, and he that was least in that Kingdom was greater than

he. Such lowliest place on earth seems ever conjoined with greatest

work for God. Yet this misunderstanding and suggestion on the part of

John might almost be regarded as a temptation to Christ. Not perhaps,

His first, nor yet this His first victory, since the 'sorrow' of His

Parents about His absence from them when in the Temple must to the

absolute submissiveness of Jesus have been a temptation to turn aside

from His path, all the more felt in the tenderness of His years, and

the inexperience of a first public appearance. He then overcame by the

clear consciousness of His Life-business, which could not be

contravened by any apparent call of duty, however specious. And He now

overcame by falling back upon the simple and clear principle which had

brought him to Jordan: 'It becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.'

Thus, simply putting aside, without argument, the objection of the

Baptist, He followed the Hand that pointed Him to the open door of

'the Kingdom.'

Jesus stepped out of the baptismal waters 'praying.'[1417]1417 One

prayer, the only one which He taught His disciples, recurs to our

minds.[1418]1418 We must here individualise and emphasise in their

special application its opening sentences: 'Our Father Which art in

heaven, hallowed be Thy Name! Thy Kingdom come! They will be done in

earth, as it is in heaven!' The first thought and the first petition

had been the conscious outcome of the Temple-visit, ripened during the

long years at Nazareth. The others were now the full expression of His

submission to Baptism. He knew His Mission; He had consecrated Himself

to it in His Baptism; 'Father Which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy

Name.' The unlimited petition for the doing of God's Will on earth

with the same absoluteness as in heaven, was His self-consecration:

the prayer of His Baptism, as the other was its confession. And the

'hallowed be Thy Name' was the eulogy, because the ripened and

experimental principle of His Life. How this Will, connected with 'the

Kingdom,' was to be done by Him, and when, He was to learn after His

Baptism. But strange, that the petition which followed those which

must have been on the lips of Jesus in that hour should have been the

subject of the first temptation or assault by the Enemy; strange also,

that the other two temptations should have rolled back the force of

the assault upon the two great experiences He had gained, and which

formed the burden of the petitions, 'Thy Kingdom come; Hallowed be Thy

Name.' Was it then so, that all the assaults which Jesus bore only

concerned and tested the reality of a past and already attained

experience, save those last in the Garden and on the Cross, which were

'sufferigs' by which He 'was made perfect?'

But, as we have already seen, such inward forth-bursting of Messianic

consciousness could not be separated from objective qualification for,

and testimony to it. As the prayer of Jesus winged heavenwards, His

solemn response to the call of the Kingdom - 'Here am I;' 'Lo, I come

to do Thy Will' - the answer came, which at the same time was also the

predicted sign to the Baptist. Heaven seemed cleft, and in bodily

shape like a dove, the Holy Ghost descended on[1419]1419 Jesus,

remaining on him. It was as if, symbolically, in the words of St.

Peter,[1420]1420 that Baptism had been a new flood, and He Who now

emerged from it, the Noah - or rest, and comfort-bringer - Who took

into His Ark the dove bearing the olive-branch, indicative of a new

life. Here, at these waters, was the Kingdom, into which Jesus had

entered in the fulfilment of all righteousness; and from them he

emerged as its Heaven-designated, Heaven-qualified, and

Heaven-proclaimed King. As such he had received the fulness of the

Spirit for His Messianic Work - a fulness abiding in Him - that out of

it we might receive, and grace for grace. As such also the voice from

Heaven proclaimed it, to Him and to John: 'Thou art ('this is') My

Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased.' The ratification of the great

Davidic promise, the announcement of the fulfilment of its predictive

import in Psalm ii.[1421]1421 was God's solemn declaration of Jesus as

the Messiah, His public proclamation of it, and the beginning of

Jesus' Messianic work. And so the Baptist understood it, when he 'bare

record' that He was 'the Son of God.'[1422]1422

Quite intelligible as all this is, it is certainly miraculous; not,

indeed, in the sense of contravention of the Laws of Nature (illogical

as that phrase is), but in that of having nothing analogous in our

present knowledge and experience. But would we not have expected the

supra-empirical, the directly heavenly, to attend such an event - that

is, if the narrative itself be true, and Jesus what the Gospels

represent Him? To reject, therefore, the narrative because of its

supra-empirical accompaniment seems, after all, a sad inversion of

reasoning, and begging the question. But, to go a step further: if

there be no reality in the narrative, whence the invention of the

legend? It certainly had no basis in contemporary Jewish teaching;

and, equally certainly, it would not have spontaneously occurred to

Jewish minds. Nowhere in Rabbinic writings do we find any hint of a

Baptism of the Messiah, nor of a descent upon Him of the Spirit in the

form of a dove. Rather would such views seem, à priori, repugnant to

Jewish thinking. An attempt has, however, been made in the direction

of identifying two traits in this narrative with Rabbinic notices. The

'Voice from heaven' has been represented as the 'Bath-Qol,' or

'Daughter-Voice,' of which we read in Rabbinic writings, as bringing

heaven's testimony or decision to perplexed or hardly bestead Rabbis.

And it has been further asserted, that among the Jews 'the dove' was

regarded as the emblem of the Spirit. In taking notice of these

assertions some warmth of language may be forgiven.

We make bold to maintain that no one, who has impartially examined the

matter,[1423]1423 could find any real analogy between the so-called

Bath-Qol, and the 'Voice from heaven' of which record is made in the

New Testament. However opinions might differ, on one thing all were

agreed: the Bath-Qol had come after the voice of prophecy and the Holy

Ghost had ceased in Israel,[1424]1424 and, so to speak, had taken,

their place.[1425]1425 But at the Baptism of Jesus the descent of the

Holy Ghost was accompanied by the Voice from Heaven. Even on this

ground, therefore, it could not have been the Rabbinic Bath-Qol. But,

further, this 'Daughter-Voice' was regarded rather as the echo of,

than as the Voice of God itself[1426]1426 (Toseph. Sanh. xi. 1). The

occasions on which this 'Daughter-Voice' was supposed to have been

heard are so various and sometimes so shocking, both to common and to

moral sense, that a comparison with the Gospels is wholly out of the

question. And here it also deserves notice, that references to this

Bath-Qol increase the farther we remove from the age of

Christ.[1427]1427

We have reserved to the last the consideration of the statement, that

among the Jews the Holy Spirit was presented under the symbol of a

dove. It is admitted, that there is no support for this idea either in

the Old Testament or in the writings of Philo (Lücke, Evang. Joh. i.

pp. 425, 426); that, indeed, such animal symbolism of the Divine is

foreign to the Old Testament. But all the more confident appeal is

made to Rabbinic writings. The suggestion was, apparently, first made

by Wetstein.[1428]1428 It is dwelt upon with much confidence by

Gfrörer[1429]1429 and others, as evidence of the mythical origin of

the Gospels;[1430]1430 it is repeated by Wünsche, and even reproduced

by writers who, had they known the real state of matters, would not

have lent their authority to it. Of the two passages by which this

strange hypothesis is supported, that in the Targum on Cant. ii. 12

may at once be dismissed, as dating considerably after the close of

the Talmud. There remains, therefore, only the one passage in the

Talmud,[1431]1431 which is generally thus quoted: 'The Spirit of God

moved on the face of the waters, like a dove.'[1432]1432 That this

quotation is incomplete, omitting the most important part, is only a

light charge against it. For, if fully made, it would only the more

clearly be seen to be inapplicable. The passage (Chag. 15 a) treats of

the supposed distance between 'the upper and the lower waters,' which

is stated to amount to only three fingerbreadths. This is proved by a

reference to Gen. i. 2, where the Spirit of God is said to brood over

the face of the waters, 'just as a dove broodeth over her young

without touching them.' It will be noticed, that the comparison is not

between the Spirit and the dove, but between the closeness with which

a dove broods over her young without touching them, and the supposed

proximity of the Spirit to the lower waters without touching

them.[1433]1433 But, if any doubt could still exist, it would be

removed by the fact that in a parallel passage,[1434]1434 the

expression used is not 'dove' but 'that bird.' Thus much for this

oft-misquoted passage. But we go farther, and assert, that the dove

was not the symbol of the Holy Spirit, but that of Israel. As such it

is so universally adopted as to have become almost

historical.[1435]1435 If, therefore, Rabbinic illustration of the

descent of the Holy Spirit with the visible appearance of a dove must

be sought for, it would lie in the acknowledgment of Jesus as the

ideal typical Israelite, the Representative of His People.

The lengthened details, which have been necessary for the exposure of

the mythical theory, will not have been without use, if they carry to

the mind the conviction that this history had no basis in existing

Jewish belief. Its origin cannot, therefore, be rationally accounted

for, except by the answer which Jesus, when He came to Jordan, gave to

that grand fundamental question: 'The Baptism of John, whence was it?

From Heaven, or of men?'[1436]1436

Book III.

____

THE ASCENT:

FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF

TRANSFIGURATION.

______________

{hebrew}

'In every passage of Scripture where thou findest the Majesty of God,

thou also findest close by His Condescension (Humility). So it is

written down in the Law [Deut. x. 17, followed by verse 18], repeated

in the Prophets [Is. lvii. 15], and reiterated in the Hagiographa [Ps.

lxviii. 4, followed by verse 5].' - Megill 31 a.

CHAPTER I.

THE TEMPTATION OF JESUS

(St. Matt. iv. 1-11; St. Mark i. 12, 13; St. Luke iv. 1-13.)

The proclamation and inauguration of the 'Kingdom of Heaven' at such a

time, and under such circumstances, was one of the great antitheses of

history. With reverence be it said, it is only God Who would thus

begin His Kingdom. A similar, even greater antithesis, was the

commencement of the Ministry of Christ. From the Jordan to the

wilderness with its wild Beasts; from the devout acknowledgment of the

Baptist, the consecration and filial prayer of Jesus, the descent of

the Holy Spirit, and the heard testimony of Heaven, to the utter

foresakeness, the felt want and weakness of Jesus, and the assaults of

the Devil - no contrast more startling could be conceived. And yet, as

we think of it, what followed upon the Baptism, and that it so

followed, was necessary, as regarded the Person of Jesus, His Work,

and that which was to result from it.

Psychologically, and as regarded the Work of Jesus, even reverent

negative Critics[1437]1437 have perceived its higher need. That at His

consecration to the Kingship of the Kingdom, Jesus should have become

clearly conscious of all that it implied in a world of sin; that the

Divine method by which that Kingdom should be established, should have

been clearly brought out, and its reality tested; and that the King,

as Representative and Founder of the Kingdom, should have encountered

and defeated the representative, founder, and holder of the opposite

power, 'the prince of this world' - these are thoughts which must

arise in everyone who believes in any Mission of the Christ. Yet this

only as, after the events, we have learned to know the character of

that Mission, not as we might have preconceived it. We can understand,

how a Life and Work such as that of Jesus, would commence with 'the

Temptation,' but none other than His. Judaism never conceived such an

idea; because it never conceived a Messiah like Jesus. It is quite

true that long previous Biblical teaching, and even the psychological

necessity of the case, must have pointed to temptation and victory as

the condition of spiritual greatness. It could not have been otherwise

in a world hostile to God, nor yet in man, whose conscious choice

determines his position. No crown of victory without previous contest,

and that proportionately to its brightness; no moral ideal without

personal attainment and probation. The patriarchs had been tried and

proved; so had Moses, and all the heroes of faith in Israel. And

Rabbinic legend, enlarging upon the Biblical narratives, has much to

tell of the original envy of the Angels; of the assaults of Satan upon

Abraham, when about to offer up Isaac; of attempted resistance by the

Angels to Israel's reception of the Law; and of the final vain

endeavour of Satan to take away the soul of Moses.[1438]1438 Foolish,

repulsive, and even blasphemous as some of these legends are, thus

much at least clearly stood out, that spiritual trials must precede

spiritual elevation. In their own language: 'The Holy One, blessed be

His Name, does not elevate a man to dignity till He has first tried

and searched him; and if he stands in temptation, then He raises him

to dignity.'[1439]1439

Thus far as regards man. But in reference to the Messiah there is not

a hint of any temptation or assault by Satan. It is of such importance

to mark this clearly at the outset of this wonderful history, that

proof must be offered even at this stage. In whatever manner negative

critics may seek to account for the introduction of Christ's

Temptation at the commencement of His Ministry, it cannot have been

derived from Jewish legend. The 'mythical' interpretation of the

Gospel-narratives breaks down in this almost more manifestly than in

any other instance.[1440]1440 So far from any idea obtaining that

Satan was to assault the Messiah, in a well-known passage, which has

been previously quoted,[1441]1441 the Arch-enemy is represented as

overwhelmed and falling on his face at sight of Him, and owning his

complete defeat.[1442]1442 On another point in this history we find

the same inversion of thought current in Jewish legend. In the

Commentary just referred to,[1443]1443 the placing of Messiah on the

pinnacle of the Temple, so far from being of Satanic temptation, is

said to mark the hour of deliverance, of Messianic proclamation, and

of Gentile voluntary submission. 'Our Rabbis give this tradition: In

the hour when King Messiah cometh, He standeth upon the roof of the

Sanctuary, and proclaims to Israel, saying, Ye poor (suffering), the

time of your redemption draweth nigh. And if ye believe, rejoice in My

Light, which is risen upon you . . . . . Is. lx. 1. . . . . upon you

only . . . . Is. lx. 2. . . . . In that hour will the Holy One,

blessed be His Name, make the Light of the Messiah and of Israel to

shine forth; and all shall come to the Light of the King Messiah and

of Israel, as it is written ..... Is. lx. 3. . . . . And they shall

come and lick the dust from under the feet of the King Messiah, as it

is written, Is. xlix. 23. . . . . . And all shall come and fall on

their faces before Messiah and before Israel, and say, We will be

servants to Him and to Israel. And every one in Israel shall have

2,800 servants,[1444]1444 as it is written, Zech. viii. 23.' One more

quotation from the same Commentary:[1445]1445 'In that hour, the Holy

One, blessed be His Name, exalts the Messiah to the heaven of heavens,

and spreads over Him of the splendour of His glory because of the

nations of the world, because of the wicked Persians. They say to Him,

Ephraim, Messiah, our Righteousness, execute judgment upon them, and

do to them what Thy soul desireth.'

In another respect these quotations are important. They show that such

ideas were, indeed, present to the Jewish mind, but in a sense

opposite to the Gospel-narratives. In other words, they were regarded

as the rightful manifestation of Messiah's dignity; whereas in the

Evangelic record they are presented as the suggestions of Satan, and

the Temptation of Christ. Thus the Messiah of Judaism is the

Anti-Christ of the Gospels. But if the narrative cannot be traced to

Rabbinic legend, may it not be an adaptation of an Old Testament

narrative, such as the account of the forty days' fast of Moses on the

mount, or of Elijah in the wilderness? Viewing the Old Testament in

its unity, and the Messiah as the apex in the column of its history,

we admit - or rather, we must expect - throughout points of

correspondence between Moses, Elijah, and the Messiah. In fact, these

may be described as marking the three stages in the history of the

Covenant. Moses was its giver, Elijah its restorer, the Messiah its

renewer and perfecter. And as such they all had, in a sense, a similar

outward consecration for their work. But that neither Moses nor Elijah

was assailed by the Devil, constitutes not the only, though a vital,

difference between the fast of Moses and Elijah, and that of Jesus.

Moses fasted in the middle, Elijah at the Presence of God;[1446]1446

Elijah alone; Jesus assaulted by the Devil. Moses had been called up

by God; Elijah had gone forth in the bitterness of his own spirit;

Jesus was driven by the Spirit. Moses failed after his forty days'

fast, when in indignation he cast the Tables of the Law from him;

Elijah failed before his forty days' fast; Jesus was assailed for

forty days and endured the trial. Moses was angry against Israel;

Elijah despaired of Israel; Jesus overcame for Israel.

Nor must we forget that to each the trial came not only in his human,

but in his representative capacity - as giver, restorer, or perfecter

of the Covenant. When Moses and Elijah failed, it was not only as

individuals, but as giving or restoring the Covenant. And when Jesus

conquered, it was not only as the Unfallen and Perfect Man, but as the

Messiah. His Temptation and Victory have therefore a twofold aspect:

the general human and the Messianic, and these two are closely

connected. Hence we draw also this happy inference: in whatever Jesus

overcame, we can overcome. Each victory which He has gained secures

its fruits for us who are His disciples (and this alike objectively

and subjectively). We walk in His foot-prints; we can ascend by the

rock-hewn steps which His Agony has cut. He is the perfect man; and as

each temptation marks a human assault (assault on humanity), so it

also marks a human victory (of humanity). But He is also the Messiah;

and alike the assault and the victory were of the Messiah. Thus, each

victory of humanity becomes a victory for humanity; and so is

fulfilled, in this respect also, that ancient hymn of royal victory,

'Thou hast ascended on high; Thou hast led captivity captive; Thou

hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that

Jehovah God, might dwell among them.'[1447]1447 [1448]1448

But even so, there are other considerations necessarily preliminary to

the study of one of the most important parts in the life of Christ.

They concern these two questions, so closely connected that they can

scarcely be kept quite apart: Is the Evangelic narrative to be

regarded as the account of a real and outward event? And if so, how

was it possible - or, in what sense can it be asserted - that Jesus

Christ, set before us as the Son of God, was 'tempted of the Devil?'

All subsidiary questions run up into these two.

As regards the reality and outwardness of the temptation of Jesus,

several suggestions may be set aside as unnatural, and ex post facto

attempts to remove a felt difficulty. Renan's frivolous conceit

scarcely deserves serious notice, that Jesus went into the wilderness

in order to imitate the Baptist and others, since such solitude was at

the time regarded as a necessary preparation for great things. We

equally dismiss as more reverent, but not better grounded, such

suggestions as that an interview there with the deputies of the

Sanhedrin, or with a Priest, or with a Pharisee, formed the historical

basis of the Satanic Temptation; or that it was a vision, a dream, the

reflection of the ideas of the time; or that it was a parabolic form

in which Jesus afterwards presented to His disciples His conception of

the Kingdom, and how they were to preach it.[1449]1449 Of all such

explanations it may be said, that the narrative does not warrant them,

and that they would probably never have been suggested, if their

authors had been able simply to accept the Evangelic history. But if

so it would have been both better and wiser wholly to reject (as some

have done) the authenticity of this, as of the whole early history of

the Life of Christ, rather than transform what, if true, is so

unspeakably grand into a series of modern platitudes. And yet (as Keim

has felt) it seems impossible to deny, that such a transaction at the

beginning of Christ's Messianic Ministry is not only credible, but

almost a necessity; and that such a transaction must have assumed the

form of a contest with Satan. Besides, throughout the Gospels there is

not only allusion to this first great conflict (so that it does not

belong only to the early history of Christ's Life), but constant

reference to the power of Satan in the world, as a kingdom opposed to

that of God, and of which the Devil is the King.[1450]1450 And the

reality of such a kingdom of evil no earnest mind would call in

question, nor would it pronounce à priori against the personality of

its king. Reasoning à priori, its credibility rests on the same kind

of, only, perhaps, on more generally patent, evidence as that of the

beneficent Author of all Good, so that - with reverence be it said -

we have, apart from Holy Scripture, and, as regards one branch of the

argument, as much evidence for believing in a personal Satan, as in a

Personal God. Holding, therefore, by the reality of this transaction,

and finding it equally impossible to trace it to Jewish legend, or to

explain it by the coarse hypothesis of misunderstanding, exaggeration,

and the like, this one question arises: Might it not have been a

purely inward transaction, - or does the narrative present an account

of what was objectively real?

At the outset, it is only truthful to state, that the distinction does

not seem of quite so vital importance as it has appeared to some, who

have used in regard to it the strongest language.[1451]1451 On the

other hand it must be admitted that the narrative, if naturally

interpreted, suggests an outward and real event, not an inward

transaction;[1452]1452 that there is no other instance of ecstatic

state or of vision recorded in the life of Jesus, and that (as Bishop

Ellicott has shown),[1453]1453 the special expressions used are all in

accordance with the natural view. To this we add, that some of the

objections raised - notably that of the impossiblity of showing from

one spot all the kingdoms of the world - cannot bear close

investigation. For no rational interpretation would insist on the

absolute literality of this statement, any more than on that of the

survey of the whole extent of the land of Israel by Moses from

Pisgah.[1454]1454 [1455]1455 All the requirements of the narrative

would be met by supposing Jesus to have been placed on a very high

mountain, whence south, the land of Judæa and far-off Edom; east, the

swelling plains towards Euphrates; north, snow-capped Lebanon; and

west, the cities of Herod, the coast of the Gentiles, and beyond, the

wide sea dotted with sails, gave far-off prospect of the kingdoms of

this world. To His piercing gaze all their grandeur would seem to

unroll, and pass before Him like a moving scene, in which the sparkle

of beauty and wealth dazzled the eye, the sheen of arms glittered in

the far distance, the tramp of armed men, the hum of busy cities, and

the sound of many voices fell on the ear like the far-off rush of the

sea, while the restful harmony of thought, or the music of art, held

and bewitched the senses - and all seemed to pour forth its fullness

in tribute of homage at His feet in Whom all is perfect, and to Whom

all belongs.

But in saying this we have already indicated that, in such

circumstances, the boundary-line between the outward and the inward

must have been both narrow and faint. Indeed, with Christ it can

scarcely be conceived to have existed at such a moment. The past, the

present, and the future must have been open before Him like a map

unrolling. Shall we venture to say that such a vision was only inward,

and not outwardly and objectively real? In truth we are using terms

which have no application to Christ. If we may venture once more to

speak in this wise of the Divine Being: With Him what we view as the

opposite poles of subjective and objective are absolutely one. To go a

step further: many even of our temptations are only (contrastedly)

inward, for these two reasons, that they have their basis or else

their point of contact within us, and that from the limitations of our

bodily condition we do uot see the enemy, nor can take active part in

the scene around. But in both respects it was not so with the Christ.

If this be so, the whole question seems almost irrelevant, and the

distinction of outward and inward inapplicable to the present case. Or

rather, we must keep by these two landmarks: First, it was not inward

in the sense of being merely subjective; but it was all real - a real

assualt by a real Satan, really under these three forms, and it

constituted a real Temptation to Christ. Secondly, it was not merely

outward in the sense of being only a present assault by Satan; but it

must have reached beyond the outward into the inward, and have had for

its further object that of influencing the future Work of Christ, as

it stood out before His Mind.

A still more difficult and solemn question is this: In what respect

could Jesus Christ, the Perfect Sinless Man, the Son of God, have been

tempted of the Devil? That He was so tempted is of the very essence of

this narrative, confirmed throughout His after-life, and laid down as

a fundamental principle in the teaching and faith of the

Church.[1456]1456 On the other hand, temptation without the inward

correspondence of existent sin is not only unthinkable, so far as man

is concerned,[1457]1457 but temptation without the possibility of sin

seems unreal - a kind of Docetism.[1458]1458 Yet the very passage of

Holy Scripture in which Christ's equality with us as regards all

temptation is expressed, also emphatically excepts from it this one

particular sin,[1459]1459 not only in the sense that Christ actually

did not sin, nor merely in this, that 'our concupiscence'[1460]1460

had no part in His temptations, but emphatically in this also, that

the notion of sin has to be wholly excluded from our thoughts of

Christ's temptations.[1461]1461

To obtain, if we can, a clearer understanding of this subject, two

points must be kept in view. Christ's was real, though unfallen Human

Nature; and Christ's Human was in inseparable union with His Divine

Nature. We are not attempting to explain these mysteries, nor at

present to vindicate them; we are only arguing from the standpoint of

the Gospels and of Apostolic teaching, which proceeds on these

premisses - and proceeding on them, we are trying to understand the

Temptation of Christ. Now it is clear, that human nature, that of Adam

before his fall, was created both sinless and peccable. If Christ's

Human Nature was not like ours, but, morally, like that of Adam before

his fall, then must it likewise have been both sinless and in itself

peccable. We say, in itself, for there is a great difference between

the statement that human nature, as Adam and Christ had it, was

capable of sinning, and this other, that Christ was peccable. From the

latter the Christian mind instinctively recoils, even as it is

metaphysically impossible to imagine the Son of God peccable. Jesus

voluntarily took upon Himself human nature with all its infirmities

and weaknesses - but without the moral taint of the Fall: without sin.

It was human nature, in itself capable of sinning, but not having

sinned. If He was absolutely sinless, He must have been unfallen. The

position of the first Adam was that of being capable of not sinning,

not that of being incapable of sinning. The Second Adam also had a

nature capable of not sinning, but not incapable of sinning. This

explains the possibility of 'temptation' or assault upon Him, just as

Adam could be tempted before there was in him any inward consensus to

it.[1462]1462 The first Adam would have been 'perfected' - or passed

from the capability of not sinning to the incapability of sinning - by

obedience. That 'obedience' - or absolute submission to the Will of

God - was the grand outstanding characteristic of Christ's work; but

it was so, because He was not only the Unsinning, Unfallen Man, but

also the Son of God. Because God was His Father, therefore He must be

about His Business, which was to do the Will of His Father. With a

peccable Human Nature He was impeccable; not because He obeyed, but

being impeccable He so obeyed, because His Human was inseparably

connected with His Divine Nature. To keep this Union of the two

Natures out of view would be Nestorianism.[1463]1463 To sum up: The

Second Adam, morally unfallen, though voluntarily subject to all the

conditions of our Nature, was, with a peccable Human Nature,

absolutely impeccable as being also the Son of God - a peccable

Nature, yet an impeccable Person: the God-Man, 'tempted in regard to

all (things) in like manner (as we), without (excepting) sin.'

All this sounds, after all, like the stammering of Divine words by a

babe, and yet it may in some measure help us to understand the

character of Christ's first great Temptation.

Before proceeding, a few sentences are required in explanation of

seeming differences in the Evangelic narration of the event. The

historical part of St. John's Gospel begins after the Temptation -

that is, with the actual Ministry of Christ; since it was not within

the purport of that work to detail the earlier history. That had been

sufficiently done in the Synoptic Gospels. Impartial and serious

critics will admit that these are in accord. For, if St. Mark only

summarises, in his own brief manner, he supplies the two-fold notice

that Jesus was 'driven' into the wilderness, 'and was with the wild

beasts,' which is in fullest internal agreement with the detailed

narratives of St. Matthew and St. Luke. The only noteworthy difference

between these two is, that St. Matthew places the Temple-temptation

before that of the world-kingdom, while St. Luke inverts this order,

probably because his narrative was primarily intended for Gentile

readers, to whose mind this might present itself as to them the true

gradation of temptation. To St. Matthew we owe the notice, that after

Temptation 'Angels came and ministered' unto Jesus; to St. Luke, that

the Tempter only 'departed from Him for a season.'

To restate in order our former conclusions, Jesus had deliberately, of

His own accord and of set firm purpose, gone to be baptized. That one

grand outstanding fact of His early life, that He must be about His

Father's Business, had found its explanation when He knew that the

Baptist's cry, 'the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand,' was from God. His

Father's Business, then, was 'the Kingdom of Heaven,' and to it He

consecrated Himself, so fulfilling all righteousness. But His 'being

about it' was quite other than that of any Israelite, however devout,

who came to Jordan. It was His consecration, not only to the Kingdom,

but to the Kingship, in the anointing and permanent possession of the

Holy Ghost, and in His proclamation from heaven. That Kingdom was His

Father's Business; its Kingship, the manner in which He was to be

'about it.' The next step was not, like the first, voluntary, and of

preconceived purpose. Jesus went to Jordan; He was driven of the

Spirit into the wilderness. Not, indeed, in the sense of His being

unwilling to go,[1464]1464 or having had other purpose, such as that

of immediate return into Galilee, but in that of not being willing, of

having no will or purpose in the matter, but being 'led up,'

unconscious of its purpose, with irresistible force, by the Spirit. In

that wilderness He had to test what He had learned, and to learn what

He had tested. So would He have full proof for His Work of the What -

His Call and Kingship; so would He see its How - the manner of it; so,

also, would, from the outset, the final issue of His Work appear.

Again - banishing from our minds all thought of sin in connection with

Christ's Temptation,[1465]1465 He is presented to us as the Second

Adam, both as regarded Himself, and His relation to man. In these two

respects, which, indeed, are one, He is now to be tried. Like the

first, the Second Adam, sinless, is to be tempted, but under the

existing conditions of the Fall: in the wilderness, not in Eden; not

in the enjoyment of all good, but in the pressing want of all that is

necessary for the sustenance of life, and in the felt weakness

consequent upon it. For (unlike the first) the Second Adam was, in His

Temptation, to be placed on an absolute equality with us, except as

regarded sin. Yet even so, there must have been some point of inward

connection to make the outward assault a temptation. It is here that

opponents (such as Strauss and Keim) have strangely missed the mark,

when objecting, either that the forty days' fast was intrinsically

unnecessary, or that the assaults of Satan were clumsy suggestions,

incapable of being temptations to Jesus. He is 'driven' into the

wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted.[1466]1466 The history of

humanity is taken up anew at the point where first the kingdom of

Satan was founded, only under new conditions. It is not now a choice,

but a contest, for Satan is the prince of this world. During the whole

forty days of Christ's stay in the wilderness His Temptation

continued, though it only attained its high point at the last, when,

after the long fast, He felt the weariness and weakness of hunger. As

fasting occupies but a very subordinate, we might almost say a

tolerated, place in the teaching of Jesus; and as, so far as we know,

He exercised on no other occasion such ascetic practices, we are left

to infer internal, as well as external, necessity for it in the

present instance. The former is easily understood in His

pre-occupation; the latter must have had for its object to reduce Him

to utmost outward weakness, by the depression of all the vital powers.

We regard it as a psychological fact that, under such circumstances,

of all mental faculties the memory alone is active, indeed, almost

preternaturally active. During the preceding thirty-nine days the

plan, or rather the future, of the Work to which He had been

consecrated, must have been always before Him. In this respect, then,

He must have been tempted. It is wholly impossible that He hesitated

for a moment as to the means by which He was to establish the Kingdom

of God. He could not have felt tempted to adopt carnal means, opposed

to the nature of that Kingdom, and to the Will of God. The

unchangeable convictions which He had already attained must have stood

out before Him: that His Father's business was the Kingdom of God;

that He was furnished to it, not by outward weapons, but by the

abiding Presence of the Spirit; above all, that absolute submission to

the Will of God was the way to it, nay, itself the Kingdom of God. It

will be observed, that it was on these very points that the final

attack of the Enemy was directed in the utmost weakness of Jesus. But,

on the other hand, the Tempter could not have failed to assault Him

with considerations which He must have felt to be true. How could He

hope, alone, and with such principles, to stand against Israel? He

knew their views and feelings; and as, day by day, the sense of utter

loneliness and forsakenness increasingly gathered around Him, in His

increasing faintness and weakness, the seeming hopelessness of such a

task as He had undertaken must have grown upon Him with almost

overwhelming power.[1467]1467 Alternately, the temptation to despair,

presumption, or the cutting short of the contest in some decisive

manner, must have presented itself to His mind, or rather have been

presented to it by the Tempter.

And this was, indeed, the essence of His last three great temptations;

which, as the whole contest, resolved themselves into the one question

of absolute submission to the Will of God,[1468]1468 which is the sum

and substance of all obedience. If He submitted to it, it must be

suffering, and only suffering - helpless, hopeless suffering to the

bitter end; to the extinction of life, in the agonies of the Cross, as

a male-factor; denounced, betrayed, rejected by His people; alone, in

very God-forsakenness. And when thus beaten about by temptation, His

powers reduced to the lowest ebb of faintness, all the more vividly

would memory hold out the facts so well known, so keenly realised at

that moment, in the almost utter cessation of every other mental

faculty:[1469]1469 the scene lately enacted by the banks of Jordan,

and the two great expectations of His own people, that the Messiah was

to head Israel from the Sanctuary of the Temple, and that all kingdoms

of the world were to become subject to Him. Here, then, is the inward

basis of the Temptation of Christ, in which the fast was not

unnecessary, nor yet the special assaults of the Enemy either 'clumsy

suggestions,' or unworthy of Jesus.

He is weary with the contest, faint with hunger, alone in that

wilderness. His voice falls on no sympathising ear; no voice reaches

Him but that of the Tempter. There is nothing bracing, strengthening

in this featureless, barren, stony wilderness - only the picture of

desolateness, hopelessness, despair. He must, He will absolutely

submit to the Will of God. But can this be the Will of God? One word

of power, and the scene would be changed. Let Him despair of all men,

of everything - He can do it. By His Will the Son of God, as the

Tempter suggests - not, however, calling thereby in question His

Sonship, but rather proceeding on its admitted reality[1470]1470 - can

change the stones into bread. He can do miracles - put an end to

present want and question, and, as visibly the possessor of absolute

miraculous power, the goal is reached! But this would really have been

to change the idea of Old Testament miracle into the heathen

conception of magic, which was absolute power inherent in an

individual, without moral purpose. The moral purpose - the grand moral

purpose in all that was of God - was absolute submission to the Will

of God. His Spirit had driven Him into that wilderness. His

circumstances were God-appointed; and where He so appoints them, He

will support us in them, even as, in the failure of bread, He

supported Israel by the manna.[1471]1471 [1472]1472 And Jesus

absolutely submitted to that Will of God by continuing in His present

circumstances. To have set himself free from what they implied, would

have been despair of God, and rebellion. He does more than not succmb:

He conquers. The Scriptural reference to a better life upon the Word

of God marks more than the end of the contest; it marks the conquest

of Satan. He emerges on the other side triumphant, with this

expression of His assured conviction of the sufficiency of God.

It cannot be despair - and He cannot take up His Kingdom alone, in the

exercise of mere power! Absolutely submitting to the Will of God, He

must, and He can, absolutely trust Him. But if so, then let Him really

trust Himself upon God, and make experiment, nay more, public

demonstration - of it. If it be not despair of God, let it be

presumption! He will not do the work alone! Then God-upborne,

according to His promise, let the Son of God suddenly, from that

height, descend and head His people, and that not in any profane

manner, but in the midst of the Sanctuary, where God was specially

near, in sight of incensing priests and worshipping people. So also

will the goal at once be reached.

The Spirit of God had driven Jesus into the wilderness; the spirit of

the Devil now carried Him to Jerusalem. Jesus stands on the lofty

pinnacle of the Tower, or of the Temple-porch,[1473]1473 presumably

that on which every day a Priest was stationed to watch, as the pale

morning light passed over the hills of Judæa far off to Hebron, to

announce it as the signal for offering the morning

sacrifice.[1474]1474 If we might indulge our imagination, the moment

chosen would be just as the Priest had quitted that station. The first

desert-temptation had been in the grey of breaking light, when to the

faint and weary looker the stones of the wilderness seemed to take

fantastic shapes, like the bread for which the faint body hungered. In

the next temptation Jesus stands on the watch-post which the

white-robed priest had just quitted. Fast the rosy morning-light,

deepening into crimson, and edged with gold, is spreading over the

land. In the Priests' Court below Him the morning-sacrifice has been

offered. The massive Temple-gates are slowly opening, and the blasts

of the priests' silver trumpets is summoning Israel to begin a new day

by appearing before their Lord. Now then let Him descend,

Heaven-borne, into the midst of priests and people. What shouts of

acclamation would greet His appearance! What homage of worship would

be His! The goal can at once be reached, and that at the head of

believing Israel. Jesus is surveying the scene. By His side is the

Tempter, watching the features that mark the working of the spirit

within. And now he has whispered it. Jesus had overcome in the first

temptation by simple, absolute trust. This was the time, and this the

place to act upon this trust, even as the very Scriptures to which

Jesus had appealed warranted. But so to have done would have been not

trust - far less the heroism of faith - but presumption. The goal

might indeed have been reached; but not the Divine goal, nor in God's

way - and, as so often, Scripture itself explained and guarded the

Divine promise by a preceding Divine command.[1475]1475 And thus once

more Jesus not only is not overcome, but He overcomes by absolute

submission to the Will of God.

To submit to the Will of God! But is not this to acknowledge His

authority, and the order and disposition which He has made of all

things? Once more the scene changes. They have turned their back upon

Jerusalem and the Temple. Behind are also all popular prejudices,

narrow nationalism, and limitations. They no longer breathe the

stifled air, thick with the perfume of incense. They have taken their

flight into God's wide world. There they stand on the top of some very

high mountain. It is in the full blaze of sunlight that He now gazes

upon a wondrous scene. Before Him rise, from out the cloud-land at the

edge of the horizon, forms, figures, scenes -- come words, sounds,

harmonies. The world in all its glory, beauty, strength, majesty, is

unveiled. Its work, its might, its greatness, its art, its thought,

emerge into clear view. And still the horizon seems to widen as He

gazes; and more and more, and beyond it still more and still brighter

appears. It is a world quite other than that which the retiring Son of

the retired Nazareth-home had ever seen, could ever have imagined,

that opens its enlarging wonders. To us in the circumstances the

temptation, which at first sight seems, so to speak, the clumsiest,

would have been well nigh irresistible. In measure as our intellect

was enlarged, our heart attuned to this world-melody, we would have

gazed with bewitched wonderment on that sight, surrendered ourselves

to the harmony of those sounds, and quenched the thirst of our soul

with maddening draught. But passively sublime as it must have appeared

to the Perfect Man, the God-Man - and to Him far more than to us from

His infinitely deeper appreciation of, and wider sympathy with the

good, and true, and the beautiful - He had already overcome. It was,

indeed, not 'worship,' but homage which the Evil One claimed from

Jesus, and that on the truly stated and apparently rational ground,

that, in its present state, all this world 'was delivered' unto him,

and he exercised the power of giving it to whom he would. But in this

very fact lay the answer to the suggestion. High above this moving

scene of glory and beauty arched the deep blue of God's heaven, and

brighter than the sun, which poured its light over the sheen and

dazzle beneath, stood out the fact: 'I must be about My Father's

business;' above the din of far-off sounds rose the voice: 'Thy

Kingdom come!' Was not all this the Devil's to have and to give,

because it was not the Father's Kingdom, to which Jesus had

consecrated Himself? What Satan sought was, 'My kingdom come' - a

Satanic Messianic time, a Satanic Messiah; the final realisation of an

empire of which his present possession was only temporary, caused by

the alienation of man from God. To destroy all this: to destroy the

works of the Devil, to abolish his kingdom, to set man free from his

dominion, was the very object of Christ's Mission. On the ruins of the

past shall the new arise, in proportions of grandeur and beauty

hitherto unseen, only gazed at afar by prophets' rapt sight. It is to

become the Kingdom of God; and Christ's consecration to it is to be

the corner-stone of its new Temple. Those scenes are to be transformed

into one of higher worship; those sounds to mingle and melt into a

melody of praise. An endless train, unnumbered multitudes from afar,

are to bring their gifts, to pour their wealth, to consecrate their

wisdom, to dedicate their beauty, to lay it all in lowly worship as

humble offering at His feet: a world God-restored, God-dedicated, in

which dwells God's peace, over which rests God's glory. It is to be

the bringing of worship, not the crowning of rebellion, which is the

Kingdom. And so Satan's greatest becomes to Christ his coarsest

temptation,[1476]1476 which He casts from Him; and the words: 'Thou

shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve,' which

now receive their highest fulfilment, mark not only Satan's defeat and

Christ's triumph, but the principle of His Kingdom - of all victory

and all triumph.

Foiled, defeated, the Enemy has spread his dark pinions towards that

far-off world of his, and covered it with their shadow. The sun no

longer glows with melting heat; the mists have gathered or the edge of

the horizon, and enwrapped the scene which has faded from view. And in

the cool and shade that followed have the Angels[1477]1477 come and

ministered to His wants, both bodily and mental. He has refused to

assert power; He has not yielded to despair; He would not fight and

conquer alone in His own strength; and He has received power and

refreshment, and Heaven's company unnumbered in their ministry of

worship. He would not yield to Jewish dream; He did not pass from

despair to presumption; and lo, after the contest, with no reward as

its object, all is His. He would not have Satan's vassals as His

legions, and all Heaven's hosts are at His command. It had been

victory; it is now shout of triumphant praise. He Whom God had

anointed by His Spirit had conquered by the Spirit; He Whom Heaven's

Voice had proclaimed God's beloved Son, in Whom He was well pleased,

had proved such, and done His good pleasure.

They had been all overcome, these three temptations against submission

to the Will of God, present, personal, and specifically Messianic. Yet

all His life long there were echoes of them: of the first, in the

suggestion of His brethren to show Himself;[1478]1478 of the second,

in the popular attempt to make Him a king, and perhaps also in what

constituted the final idea of Judas Iscariot; of the third, as being

most plainly Santanic, in the question of Pilate: 'Art Thou then a

King?'

The enemy 'departed from Him' - yet only 'for a season.' But this

first contest and victory of Jesus decided all others to the last.

These were, perhaps not as to the shaping of His Messianic plan, nor

through memory of Jewish expectancy, yet still in substance the same

contest about absolute obedience, absolute submission to the Will of

God, which constitutes the Kingdom of God. And so also from first to

last was this the victory: 'Not My will, but Thine, be done.' But as,

in the first three petitions which He has taught us, Christ has

enfolded us in the mantle of His royalty, so has He Who shared our

nature and our temptations gone up with us, want-pressed, sin-laden,

and temptation-stricken as we are, to the Mount of Temptation in the

four human petitions which follow the first. And over us is spread, as

the sheltering folds of His mantle, this as the outcome of His royal

contest and glorious victory, 'For Thine is the Kingdom, and the

power, and the glory, for ever and ever!'[1479]1479

CHAPTER II.

THE DEPUTATION FROM JERUSALEM - THE THREE SECTS OF THE PHARISEES,

SADDUCEES,

AND ESSENES - EXAMINATION OF THEIR DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES.[1480]1480

(St. John i. 19-24.)

APART from the repulsively carnal form which it had taken, there is

something absolutely sublime in the continuance and intensity of the

Jewish expectation of the Messiah. It outlived not only the delay of

long centuries, but the persecutions and scattering of the people; it

continued under the disappointment of the Maccabees, the rule of a

Herod, the administration of a corrupt and contemptible Priesthood,

and, finally, the government of Rome as represented by a Pilate; nay,

it grew in intensity almost in proportion as it seemed unlikely of

realisation. These are facts which show that the doctrine of the

Kingdom, as the sum and substance of Old Testament teaching, was the

very heart of Jewish religious life; while, at the same time, they

evidence a moral elevation which placed abstract religious conviction

far beyond the reach of passing events, and clung to it with a

tenacity which nothing could loosen.

Tidings of what these many months had occurred by the banks of the

Jordan must have early reached Jerusalem, and ultimately stirred to

the depths its religious society, whatever its preoccupation with

ritual questions or political matters. For it was not an ordinary

movement, nor in connection with any of the existing parties,

religious or political. An extraordinary preacher, of extraordinary

appearance and habits, not aiming, like others, after renewed zeal in

legal observances, or increased Levitical purity, but preaching

repentance and moral renovation in preparation for the coming Kingdom,

and sealing this novel doctrine with an equally novel rite, had drawn

from town and country multitudes of all classes - inquirers, penitents

and novices. The great and burning question seemed, what the real

character and meaning of it was? or rather, whence did it issue, and

whither did it tend? The religious leaders of the people proposed to

answer this by instituting an inquiry through a trust-worthy

deputation. In the account of this by St. John certain points seem

clearly implied;[1481]1481 on others only suggestions can be ventured.

That the interview referred to occurred after the Baptism of Jesus,

appears from the whole context.[1482]1482 Similarly, the statement

that the deputation which came to John was 'sent from Jerusalem' by

'the Jews,' implies that it proceeded from authority, even if it did

not bear more than a semi-official character. For, although the

expression 'Jews' in the fourth Gospel generally conveys the idea of

contrast to the disciples of Christ (for ex. St. John vii. 15), yet it

refers to the people in their corporate capacity, that is, as

represented by their constituted religious authorities.[1483]1483 On

the other hand, although the term 'scribes and elders' does not occur

in the Gospel of St. John,[1484]1484 it by no means follows that 'the

Priests and Levites' sent from the capital either represented the two

great divisions of the Sanhedrin, or, indeed, that the deputation

issued from the Great Sanhedrin itself. The former suggestion is

entirely ungrounded; the latter at least problematic. It seems a

legitimate inference that, considering their own tendencies, and the

political dangers connected with such a step, the Sanhedrin of

Jerusalem would not have come to the formal resolution of sending a

regular deputation on such an inquiry. Moreover, a measure like this

would have been entirely outside their recognised mode of procedure.

The Sanhedrin did not, and could not, originate charges. It only

investigated those brought before it. It is quite true that judgment

upon false prophets and religious seducers lay with it;[1485]1485 but

the Baptist had not as yet said or done anything to lay him open to

such an accusation. He had in no way infringed the Law by word or

deed, nor had he even claimed to be a prophet.[1486]1486 If,

nevertheless, it seems most probable that 'the Priests and Levites'

came from the Sanhedrin, we are led to the conclusion that theirs was

an informal mission, rather privately arranged than publicly

determined upon.

And with this the character of the deputies agrees. 'Priests and

Levites' - the colleagues of John the Priest - would be selected for

such an errand, rather than leading Rabbinic authorities. The presence

of the latter would, indeed, have given to the movement an importance,

if not a sanction, which the Sanhedrin could not have wished. The only

other authority in Jerusalem from which such a deputation could have

issued was the so-called 'Council of the Temple,' 'Judicature of the

Priests,' or 'Elders of the Priesthood,'[1487]1487 which consisted of

the fourteen chief officers of the Temple. But although they may

afterwards have taken their full part in the condemnation of Jesus,

ordinarily their duty was only connected with the services of the

Sanctuary, and not with criminal questions or doctrinal

investigations.[1488]1488 It would be too much to suppose, that they

would take the initiative in such a matter on the ground that the

Baptist was a member of the Priesthood. Finally, it seems quite

natural that such an informal inquiry, set on foot most probably by

the Sanhedrists, should have been entrusted exclusively to the

Pharisaic party. It would in no way have interested the Sadducees; and

what members of that party had seen of John[1489]1489 must have

convinced them that his views and aims lay entirely beyond their

horizon.

The origin of the two great parties of Pharisees and Sadducees has

already been traced.[1490]1490 They mark, not sects, but mental

directions, such as in their principles are natural and universal,

and, indeed, appear in connection with all metaphysical[1491]1491

questions. They are the different modes in which the human mind views

supersensuous problems, and which afterwards, when one-sidedly

followed out, harden into diverging schools of thought. If Pharisees

and Sadducess were not 'sects' in the sense of separation from the

unity of the Jewish ecclesiastical community, neither were theirs

'heresies' in the conventional, but only in the original sense of

tendency, direction, or, at most, views, differing from those commonly

entertained.[1492]1492 Our sources of information here are: the New

Testament, Josephus, and Rabbinic writings. The New Testament only

marks, in broad outlines and popularly, the peculiarities of each

party; but from the absence of bias it may safely be

regarded[1493]1493 as the most trustworthy authority on the matter.

The inferences which we derive from the statements of

Josephus,[1494]1494 though always to be qualified by our general

estimate of his animus,[1495]1495 accord with those from the New

Testament. In regard to Rabbinic writings, we have to bear in mind the

admittedly unhistorical character of most of their notices, the strong

party-bias which coloured almost all their statements regarding

opponents, and their constant tendency to trace later views and

practices to earlier times.

Without entering on the principles and supposed practices of 'the

fraternity' or 'association' (Chebher, Chabhurah, Chabhurta) of

Pharisees, which was comparatively small, numbering only about 6,000

members,[1496]1496 the following particulars may be of interest. The

object of the association was twofold: to observe in the strictest

manner, and according to traditional law, all the ordinances

concerning Levitical purity, and to be extremely punctilious in all

connected with religious dues (tithes and all other dues). A person

might undertake only the second, without the first of these

obligations. In that case he was simply a Neeman, an 'accredited one'

with whom one might enter freely into commerce, as he was supposed to

have paid all dues. But a person could not undertake the vow of

Levitical purity without also taking the obligation of all religious

dues. If he undertook both vows he was a Chabher, or associate. Here

there were four degrees, marking an ascending scale of Levitical

purity, or separation from all that was profane.[1497]1497 In

opposition to these was the Am ha-arets, or 'country people' (the

people which knew not, or cared not for the Law, and were regarded as

'cursed'). But it must not be thought that every Chabher was either a

learned Scribe, or that every Scribe was a Chabher. On the contrary,

as a man might be a Chabher without being either a Scribe or an

elder,[1498]1498 so there must have been sages, and even teachers, who

did not belong to the association, since special rules are laid down

for the reception of such.[1499]1499 Candidates had to be formally

admitted into the 'fraternity' in the presence of three members. But

every accredited public 'teacher' was, unless anything was known to

the contrary, supposed to have taken upon him the obligations referred

to.[1500]1500 The family of a Chabher belonged, as a matter of course,

to the community;[1501]1501 but this ordinance was afterwards

altered.[1502]1502 The Neeman undertook these four obligations: to

tithe what he ate, what he sold, and what he bought, and not to be a

guest with an Am ha-arets.[1503]1503 The full Chabher undertook not to

sell to an 'Am ha-arets' any fluid or dry substance (nutriment or

fruit), not to buy from him any such fluid, not to be a guest with

him, not to entertain him as a guest in his own clothes (on account of

their possible impurity) - to which one authority adds other

particulars, which, however, were not recognised by the Rabbis

generally as of primary importance.[1504]1504

These two great obligations of the 'official' Pharisee, or 'Associate'

are pointedly referred to by Christ - both that in regard to tithing

(the vow of the Neeman);[1505]1505 and that in regard to Levitical

purity (the special vow of the Chabher).[1506]1506 In both cases they

are associated with a want of corresponding inward reality, and with

hypocrisy. These charges cannot have come upon the people by surprise,

and they may account for the circumstance that so many of the learned

kept aloof from the 'Association' as such. Indeed, the sayings of some

of the Rabbis in regard to Pharisaism and the professional Pharisee

are more withering than any in the New Testament. It is not necessary

here to repeat the well-known description, both in the Jerusalem and

the Babylon Talmud, of the seven kinds of 'Pharisees,' of whom six

(the 'Shechemite,' the 'stumbling,' the 'bleeding,' the 'mortar,' the

'I want to know what is incumbent on me,' and 'the Pharisee from

fear') mark various kinds of unreality, and only one is 'the Pharisee

from love.'[1507]1507 Such an expression as 'the plague of Pharisaism'

is not uncommon; and a silly pietist, a clever sinner, and a female

Pharisee, are ranked among 'the troubles of life.'[1508]1508 'Shall we

then explain a verse according to the opinions of the Pharisees?' asks

a Rabbi, in supreme contempt for the arrogance of the

fraternity.[1509]1509 'It is as a tradition among the

pharisees[1510]1510 to torment themselves in this world, and yet they

will gain nothing by it in the next.' The Sadducees had some reason

for the taunt, that 'the Pharisees would by-and-by subject the globe

of the sun itself to their purifications,'[1511]1511 the more so that

their assertions of purity were sometimes conjoined with Epicurean

maxims, betokening a very different state of mind, such as, 'Make

haste to eat and drink, for the world which we quit resembles a

wedding feast;' or this: 'My son, if thou possess anything, enjoy

thyself, for there is no pleasure in Hades,[1512]1512 and death grants

no respite. But if thou sayest, What then would I leave to my sons and

daughters? Who will thank thee for this appointment in Hades?' Maxims

these to which, alas! too many of their recorded stories and deeds

form a painful commentary.[1513]1513

But it would be grossly unjust to identify Pharisaism, as a religious

direction, with such embodiments of it or even with the official

'fraternity.' While it may be granted that the tendency and logical

sequence of their views and practices were such, their system, as

opposed to Sadduceeism, had very serious bearings: dogmatic, ritual,

and legal. It is, however, erroneous to suppose, either that their

system represented traditionalism itself, or that Scribes and

Pharisees are convertible terms,[1514]1514 while the Sadducees

represented the civil and political element. The Pharisees represented

only the prevailing system of, not traditionalism itself; while the

Sadducees also numbered among them many learned men. They were able to

enter into controversy, often protracted and fierce, with their

opponents, and they acted as members of the Sanhedrin, although they

had diverging traditions of their own, and even, as it would appear,

at one time a complete code of canon-law.[1515]1515 [1516]1516

Moreover, the admitted fact, that when in office the Sadducees

conformed to the principles and practices of the Pharisees, proves at

least that they must have been acquainted with the ordinances of

traditionalism.[1517]1517 Lastly, there were certain traditional

ordinances on which both parties were at one.[1518]1518 Thus it seems

Sadduceeism was in a sense rather a speculative than a practical

system, starting from simple and well-defined principles, but

wide-reaching in its possible consequences. Perhaps it may best be

described as a general reaction against the extremes of Pharisaism,

springing from moderate and rationalistic tendencies; intended to

secure a footing within the recognised bounds of Judaism; and seeking

to defend its principles by a strict literalism of interpretation and

application. If so, these interpretations would be intended rather for

defensive than offensive purposes, and the great aim of the party

would be after rational freedom - or, it might be, free rationality.

Practically, the party would, of course, tend in broad, and often

grossly unorthodox, directions.

The fundamental dogmatic differences between the Pharisees and

Sadducees concerned: the rule of faith and practice; the 'after

death;' the existence of angels and spirits; and free will and

pre-destination. In regard to the first of these points, it has

already been stated that the Sadducees did not lay down the principle

of absolute rejection of all traditions as such, but that they were

opposed to traditionalism as represented and carried out by the

Pharisees. When put down by sheer weight of authority, they would

probably carry the controversy further, and retort on their opponents

by an appeal to Scripture as against their traditions, perhaps

ultimately even by an attack on traditionalism; but always as

represented by the Pharisees.[1519]1519 A careful examination of the

statements of Josephus on this subject will show that they convey no

more than this.[1520]1520 The Pharisaic view of this aspect of the

controversy appears, perhaps, most satisfactorily because indirectly,

in certain sayings of the Mishnah, which attribute all national

calamities to those persons, whom they adjudge to eternal perdition,

who interpret Scripture 'not as does the Halakhah,' or established

Pharisaic rule.[1521]1521 In this respect, then, the commonly received

idea concerning the Pharisees and Sadducees will require to be

seriously modified. As regards the practice of the Pharisees, as

distinguished from that of the Sadducees, we may safely treat the

statements of Josephus as the exaggerated representations of a

partisan, who wishes to place his party in the best light. It is,

indeed, true that the Pharisees, 'interpreting the legal ordinances

with rigour,'[1522]1522 [1523]1523 imposed on themselves the necessity

of much self-denial, especially in regard to food,[1524]1524 but that

their practice was under the guidance of reason, as Josephus asserts,

is one of those bold mis-statements with which he has too often to be

credited. His vindication of their special reverence for age and

authority[1525]1525 must refer to the honours paid by the party to

'the Elders,' not to the old. And that there was sufficient ground for

Sadducean opposition to Pharisaic traditionalism, alike in principle

and in practice, will appear from the following quotation, to which we

add, by way of explanation, that the wearing of phylacteries was

deemed by that party of Scriptural obligation, and that the phylactery

for the head was to consist (according to tradition) of four

compartments. 'Against the words of the Scribes is more punishable

than against the words of Scripture. He who says, No phylacteries, so

as to transgress the words of Scripture, is not guilty (free); five

compartments - to add to the words of the Scribes - he is

guilty.'[1526]1526 [1527]1527

The second doctrinal difference between Pharisees and Sadducees

concerned the 'after death.' According to the New Testament,[1528]1528

the Sadducees denied the resurrection of the dead, while Josephus,

going further, imputes to them denial of reward or punishment after

death,[1529]1529 and even the doctrine that the soul perishes with the

body.[1530]1530 The latter statement may be dismissed as among those

inferences which theological controversialists are too fond of

imputing to their opponents. This is fully borne out by the account of

a later work,[1531]1531 to the effect, that by successive

misunderstandings of the saying of Antigonus of Socho, that men were

to serve God without regard to reward, his later pupils had arrived at

the inference that there was no other world - which, however, might

only refer to the Pharisaic ideal of 'the world to come,' not to the

denial of the immortality of the soul - and no resurrection of the

dead. We may therefore credit Josephus with merely reporting the

common inference of his party. But it is otherwise in regard to their

denial of the resurrection of the dead. Not only Josephus, but the New

Testament and Rabbinic writings attest this. The Mishnah expressly

states[1532]1532 that the formula 'from age to age,' or rather 'from

world to world,' had been introduced as a protest against the opposite

theory; while the Talmud, which records disputations between Gamaliel

and the Sadducees[1533]1533 on the subject of the resurrection,

expressly imputes the denial of this doctrine to the 'Scribes of the

Sadducees.' In fairness it is perhaps only right to add that, in the

discussion, the Sadducees seem only to have actually denied that there

was proof for this doctrine in the Pentateuch, and that they

ultimately professed themselves convinced by the reasoning of

Gamaliel.[1534]1534 Still the concurrent testimony of the New

Testament and of Josephus leaves no doubt, that in this instance their

views had not been misrepresented. Whether or not their opposition to

the doctrine of the Resurrection arose in the first instance from, or

was prompted by, Rationalistic views, which they endeavoured to

support by an appeal to the letter of the Pentateuch, as the source of

traditionalism, it deserves notice that in His controversy with the

Sadducees Christ appealed to the Pentateuch in proof of His

teaching.[1535]1535

Connected with this was the equally Rationalistic

opposition to belief in Angels and Spirits. It is only mentioned in

the New Testament,[1536]1536 but seems almost to follow as a

corollary. Remembering what the Jewish Angelology was, one can

scarcely wonder that in controversy the Sadducees should have been led

to the opposite extreme.

The last dogmatic difference between the two 'sects' concerned that

problem which has at all times engaged religious thinkers: man's free

will and God's pre-ordination, or rather their compatibility. Josephus

- or the reviser whom he employed - indeed, uses the purely heathen

expression 'fate' (e_marm_nj)[1537]1537 to designate the Jewish idea

of the pre-ordination of God. But, properly understood, the real

difference between the Pharisees and Sadducees seems to have amounted

to this: that the former accentuated God's preordination, the latter

man's free will; and that, while the Pharisees admitted only a partial

influence of the human element on what happened, or the co-operation

of the human with the Divine, the Sadducees denied all absolute

pre-ordination, and made man's choice of evil or good, with its

consequences of misery or happiness, to depend entirely on the

exercise of free will and self-determination. And in this, like many

opponents of 'Predestinarianism,' they seem to have started from the

principle, that it was impossible for God 'either to commit or to

foresee [in the sense of fore-ordaining] anything evil.' The mutual

misunderstanding here was that common in all such controversies.

Although[1538]1538 Josephus writes as if, according to the Pharisees,

the chief part in every good action depended upon fate

[pre-ordination] rather than on man's doing, yet in another

place[1539]1539 he disclaims for them the notion that the will of man

was destitute of spontaneous activity, and speaks somewhat confusedly

- for he is by no means a good reasoner - of 'a mixture' of the Divine

and human elements, in which the human will, with its sequence of

virtue or wickedness, is subject to the will of fate. A yet further

modification of this statement occurs in another place,[1540]1540

where we are told that, according to the Pharisees, some things

depended upon fate, and more on man himself. Manifestly, there is not

a very wide difference between this and the fundamental principle of

the Sadducees in what we may suppose its primitive form.

But something more will have to be said as illustrative of Pharisaic

teaching on this subject. No one who has entered into the spirit of

the Old Testament can doubt that its outcome was faith, in its twofold

aspect of acknowledgment of the absolute Rule, and simple submission

to the Will, of God. What distinguished this so widely from fatalism

was what may be termed Jehovahism - that is, the moral element in its

thoughts of God, and that He was ever presented as in paternal

relationship to men. But the Pharisees carried their accentuation of

the Divine to the verge of fatalism. Even the idea that God had

created man with two impulses, the one to good, the other to evil; and

that the latter was absolutely necessary for the continuance of this

world, would in some measure trace the causation of moral evil to the

Divine Being. The absolute and unalterable pre-ordination of every

event, to its minutest details, is frequently insisted upon. Adam had

been shown all the generations that were to spring from him. Every

incident in the history of Israel had been foreordained, and the

actors in it - for good or for evil - were only instruments for

carrying out the Divine Will. What were ever Moses and Aaron? God

would have delivered Israel out of Egypt, and given them the Law, had

there been no such persons. Similarly was it in regard to Solomon, to

Esther, to Nebuchadnezzar, and others. Nay, it was because man was

predestined to die that the serpent came to seduce our first parents.

And as regarded the history of each individual: all that concerned his

mental and physical capacity, or that would betide him, was

prearranged. His name, place, position, circumstances, the very name

of her whom he was to wed, were proclaimed in heaven, just as the hour

of his death was foreordered. There might be seven years of pestilence

in the land, and yet no one died before his time.[1541]1541 Even if a

man inflicted a cut on his finger, he might be sure that this also had

been preordered.[1542]1542 Nay, 'wheresoever a man was destined to

die, thither would his feet carry him.'[1543]1543 We can well

understand how the Sadducees would oppose notions like these, and all

such coarse expressions of fatalism. And it is significant of the

exaggeration of Josephus,[1544]1544 that neither the New Testament,

nor Rabbinic writings, bring the charge of the denial of God's

prevision against the Sadducees.

But there is another aspect of this question also. While the Pharisees

thus held the doctrine of absolute preordination, side by side with it

they were anxious to insist on man's freedom of choice, his personal

responsibility, and moral obligation.[1545]1545 Although every event

depended upon God, whether a man served God or not was entirely in his

own choice. As a logical sequence of this, fate had no influence as

regarded Israel, since all depended on prayer, repentance, and good

works. Indeed, otherwise that repentance, on which Rabbinism so

largely insists, would have had no meaning. Moreover, it seems as if

it had been intended to convey that, while our evil actions were

entirely our own choice, if a man sought to amend his ways, he would

be helped of God.[1546]1546 It was, indeed, true that God had created

the evil impulse in us; but He had also given the remedy in the

Law.[1547]1547 This is parabolically represented under the figure of a

man seated at the parting of two ways, who warned all passers that if

they chose one road it would lead them among the thorns, while on the

other brief difficulties would end in a plain path (joy).[1548]1548

Or, to put it in the language of the great Akiba:[1549]1549

'Everything is foreseen; free determination is accorded to man; and

the world is judged in goodness.' With this simple juxtaphysition of

two propositions equally true, but incapable of metaphysical

combination, as are most things in which the empirically cognisable

and uncognisable are joined together, we are content to leave the

matter.

The other differences between the Pharisees and Sadducees can be

easily and briefly summed up. They concern ceremonial, ritual, and

juridical questions. In regard to the first, the opposition of the

Sadducees to the excessive scruples of the Pharisees on the subject of

Levitical defilements led to frequent controversy. Four points in

dispute are mentioned, of which, however, three read more like

ironical comments than serious divergences. Thus, the Sadducees

taunted their opponents with their many lustrations, including that of

the Golden Candlestick in the Temple.[1550]1550 Two other similar

instances are mentioned.[1551]1551 By way of guarding against the

possibility of profanation, the Pharisees enacted, that the touch of

any thing sacred 'defiled' the hands. The Sadducees, on the other

hand, ridiculed the idea that the Holy Scriptures 'defiled' the hands,

but not such a book as Homer.[1552]1552 In the same spirit, the

Sadducees would ask the Pharisees how it came, that water pouring from

a clean into an unclean vessel did not lose its purity and purifying

power.[1553]1553 If these represent no serious controversies, on

another ceremonial question there was real difference, though its

existence shows how far party-spirit could lead the Pharisees. No

ceremony was surrounded with greater care to prevent defilement than

that of preparing the ashes of the Red Heifer.[1554]1554 What seem the

original ordinances,[1555]1555 directed that, for seven days previous

to the burning of the Red Heifer, the priest was to be kept in

separation in the Temple, sprinkled with the ashes of all

sin-offerings, and kept from the touch of his brother-priests, with

even greater rigour than the High-Priest in his preparation for the

Day of Atonement. The Sadducees insisted that, as 'till sundown' was

the rule in all purification, the priest must be in cleanliness till

then, before burning the Red Heifer. But, apparently for the sake of

opposition, and in contravention to their own principles, the

Pharisees would actually 'defile' the priest on his way to the place

of burning, and then immediately make him take a bath of purification

which had been prepared, so as to show that the Sadducees were in

error.[1556]1556 [1557]1557 In the same spirit, the Sadducees seem to

have prohibited the use of anything made from animals which were

either interdicted as food, or by reason of their not having been

properly slaughtered; while the Pharisees allowed it, and, in the case

of Levitically clean animals which had died or been torn, even made

their skin into parchment, which might be used for sacred

purposes.[1558]1558

These may seem trifling distinctions, but they sufficed to kindle the

passions. Even greater importance attached to differences on ritual

questions, although the controversy here was purely theoretical. For,

the Sadducees, when in office, always conformed to the prevailing

Pharisaic practices. Thus the Sadducees would have interpreted Lev.

xxiii. 11, 15, 16, as meaning that the wave-sheaf (or, rather, the

Omer) was to be offered on 'the morrow after the weekly Sabbath' -

that is, on the Sunday in Easter week - which would have brought the

Feast of Pentacost always on a Sunday;[1559]1559 while the Pharisees

understood the term 'Sabbath' of the festive Paschal day.[1560]1560

[1561]1561 Connected with this were disputes about the examination of

the witnesses who testified to the appearance of the new moon, and

whom the Pharisees accused of having been suborned by their

opponents.[1562]1562

The Sadducean objection to pouring the water of libation upon the

altar on the Feast of Tabernacles, led to riot and bloody reprisals on

the only occasion on which it seems to have been carried into

practice.[1563]1563 [1564]1564 Similarly, the Sadducees objected to

the beating off the willow-branches after the procession round the

altar on the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, if it were a

Sabbath.[1565]1565 Again, the Sadducees would have had the

High-Priest, on the Day of Atonement, kindle the incense before

entering the Most Holy Place; the Pharisees after he had entered the

Sanctuary.[1566]1566 Lastly, the Pharisees contended that the cost of

the daily Sacrifices should be discharged from the general Temple

treasury, while the Sadducees would have paid it from free-will

offerings. Other differences, which seem not so well established, need

not here be discussed.

Among the divergences on juridical questions, reference has already

been made to that in regard to marriage with the 'betrothed,' or else

actually espoused widow of a deceased, childless brother. Josephus,

indeed, charges the Sadducees with extreme severity in criminal

matters;[1567]1567 but this must refer to the fact that the ingenuity

or punctiliousness of the Pharisees would afford to most offenders a

loophole of escape. On the other hand, such of the diverging juridical

principles of the Sadducees, as are attested on trustworthy

authority,[1568]1568 seem more in accordance with justice than those

of the Pharisees. They concerned (besides the Levirate marriage)

chiefly three points. According to the Sadducees, the

punishment[1569]1569 againstfalse witnesses was only to be executed if

the innocent person, condemned on their testimony, had actually

suffered punishment, while the Pharisees held that this was to be done

if the sentence had been actually pronounced, although not carried

out.[1570]1570 Again, according to Jewish law, only a son, but not a

daughter, inherited the father's property. From this the Pharisees

argued, that if, at the time of his father's decease, that son were

dead, leaving only a daughter, this granddaughter would (as

representative of the son) be the heir, while the daughter would be

excluded. On the other hand, the Sadducees held that, in such a case,

daughter and granddaughter should share alike.[1571]1571 Lastly, the

Sadducees argued that if, according to Exodus xxi. 28,29, a man was

responsible for damage done by his cattle, he was equally, if not

more, responsible for damage done by his slave, while the Pharisees

refused to recognise any responsibility on the latter score.[1572]1572

[1573]1573

For the sake of completeness it has been necessary to enter into

details, which may not posses a general interest. This, however, will

be marked, that, with the exception of dogmatic differences, the

controversy turned on questions of 'canon-law.' Josephus tells us that

the Pharisees commanded the masses,[1574]1574 and especially the

female world,[1575]1575 while the Sadducees attached to their ranks

only a minority, and that belonging to the highest class. The leading

priests in Jerusalem formed, of course, part of that highest class of

society; and from the New Testament and Josephus we learn that the

High-Priestly families belonged to the Sadducean party.[1576]1576 But

to conclude from this,[1577]1577 either that the Sadducees represented

the civil and political aspect of society, and the Pharisees the

religious; or, that the Sadducees were the priest-party,[1578]1578 in

opposition to the popular and democratic Pharisees, are inferences not

only unsupported, but opposed to historical facts. For, not a few of

the Pharisaic leaders were actually priests,[1579]1579 while the

Pharisaic ordinances make more than ample recognition of the

privileges and rights of the Priesthood. This would certainly not have

been the case if, as some have maintained, Sadducean and priest-party

had been convertible terms. Even as regards the deputation to the

Baptist of 'Priests and Levites' from Jerusalem, we are expressely

told that they 'were of the Pharisees.'[1580]1580

This bold hypothesis seems, indeed, to have been invented chiefly for

the sake of another, still more unhistorical. The derivation of the

name 'Sadducee' has always been in dispite. According to a Jewish

legend of about the seventh century of our era,[1581]1581 the name was

derived from one Tsadoq (Zadok),[1582]1582 a disciple of Antigonus of

Socho, whose principle of not serving God for reward had been

gradually misinterpreted into Sadduceeism. But, apart from the

objection that in such case the party should rather have taken the

name of Antigonites, the story itself receives no support either from

Josephus or from early Jewish writings. Accordingly modern critics

have adopted another hypothesis, which seems at least equally

untenable. On the supposition that the Sadducees were the

'priest-party,' the name of the sect is derived from Zadok (Tsadoq),

the High-Priest in the time of Solomon.[1583]1583 But the objections

to this are insuperable. Not to speak of the linguistic difficulty of

deriving Tsadduqim (Zaddukim, Sadducees) from Tsadoq

(Zadok),[1584]1584 neither Josephus nor the Rabbis know anything of

such a connection between Tsadoq and the Sadducees, of which, indeed,

the rationale would be difficult to perceive. Besides, is it likely

that a party would have gone back so many centuries for a name, which

had no connection with their distinctive principles? The name of a

party is, if self-chosen (which is rarely the case), derived from its

founder or place of origin, or else from what it claims as distinctive

principles or practices. Opponents might either pervert such a name,

or else give a designation, generally opprobrious, which would express

their own relation to the party, or to some of its supposed

peculiarities. But on none of these principles can the origin of the

name of Sadducees from Tsadoq be accounted for. Lastly, on the

supposition mentioned, the Sadducees must have given the name to their

party, since it cannot be imagined that the Pharisees would have

connected their opponents with the honoured name of the High-Priest

Tsadoq.

If it is highly improbable that the Sadducees, who, of course,

professed to be the right interpreters of Scripture, would choose any

party-name, thereby stamping themselves as sectaries, this derivation

of their name is also contrary to historical analogy. For even the

name Pharisees, 'Perushim,' 'separated ones,' was not taken by the

party itself, but given to it by their opponents.[1585]1585 [1586]1586

From 1 Macc. ii. 42; vii. 13; 2 Macc. xiv. 6, it appears that

originally they had taken the sacred name of Chasidim, or 'the

pious.'[1587]1587 This, no doubt, on the ground that they were truly

those who, according to the directions of Ezra,[1588]1588 had

separated themselves (become nibhdalim) 'from the filthiness of the

heathen' (all heathen defilement) by carrying out the traditional

ordinances.[1589]1589 In fact, Ezra marked the beginning of the

'later,' in contradistinction to the 'earlier,' or

Scripture-Chasidim.[1590]1590 If we are correct in supposing that

their opponents had called them Perushim, instead of the Scriptural

designation of Nibhdalim, the inference is at hand, that, while the

'Pharisees' would arrogate to themselves the Scriptural name of

Chasidim, or 'the pious,' their opponents would retort that they were

satisfied to be Tsaddiqim,[1591]1591 or 'righteous.' Thus the name of

Tsaddiqim would become that of the party opposing the Pharisees, that

is, of the Sadducees. There is, indeed, an admitted linguistic

difficulty in the change of the sound i into u (Tsaddiqim into

Tsadduqim), but may it not have been that this was accomplished, not

grammatically, but by popular witticism? Such mode of giving a

'by-name' to a party or government is, at least, not irrational, nor

is it uncommon.[1592]1592 Some wit might have suggested: Read not

Tsaddiqim, the 'righteous,' but Tsadduqim (from Tsadu, {hebrew}),

'desolation,' 'destruction.' Whether or not this suggestion approve

itself to critics, the derivation of Sadducees from Tsaddiqim is

certainly that which offers most probability.[1593]1593

This uncertainty as to the origin of the name of a party leads almost

naturally to the mention of another, which, indeed, could not be

omitted in any description of those times. But while the Pharisees and

Sadducees were parties within the Synagogue, the Essenes (Essjno_ or

HEssa_oi - the latter always in Philo) were, although strict Jews, yet

separatists, and, alike in doctrine, worship, and practice, outside

the Jewish body ecclesiastic. Their numbers amounted to only about

4,000.[1594]1594 They are not mentioned in the New Testament, and only

very indirectly referred to in Rabbinic writings, perhaps without

clear knowledge on the part of the Rabbis. If the conclusion

concerning them, which we shall by-and-by indicate, be correct, we can

scarcely wonder at this. Indeed, their entire separation from all who

did not belong to their sect, the terrible oaths by which they bound

themselves to secrecy about their doctrines, and which would prevent

any free religious discussion, as well as the character of what is

know of their views, would account for the scanty notices about them.

Josephus and Philo,[1595]1595 who speak of them in the most

sympathetic manner, had, no doubt, taken special pains to ascertain

all that could be learned. For this Josephus seems to have enjoyed

special opportunities.[1596]1596 Still, the secrecy of their doctrines

renders us dependent on writers, of whom at least one (Josephus) lies

open to the suspicion of colouring and exaggeration. But of one thing

we may feel certain: neither John the Baptist, and his Baptism, nor

the teaching of Christianity, had any connection with Essenism. It

were utterly unhistorical to infer such from a few points of contact -

and these only of similarity, not identity - when the differences

between them are so fundamental. That an Essene would have preached

repentance and the Kingdom of God to multitudes, baptized the

uninitiated, and given supreme testimony to One like Jesus, are

assertions only less extravagant than this, that One Who mingled with

society as Jesus did, and Whose teaching, alike in that respect, and

in all its tendencies, was so utterly Non-, and even Anti-Essenic, had

derived any part of His doctrine from Essenism. Besides, when we

remember the views of the Essenes on purification, and on Sabbath

observance, and their denial of the Resurrection, we feel that,

whatever points of resemblance critical ingenuity may emphasise, the

teaching of Christianity was in a direction opposite from that of

Essenism.[1597]1597

We posses no data for the history of the origin and development (if

such there was) of Essenism. We may admit a certain connection between

Pharisaism and Essenism, though it has been greatly exaggerated by

modern Jewish writers. Both directions originated from a desire after

'purity,' though there seems a fundamental difference between them,

alike in the idea of what constituted purity, and in the means for

attaining it. To the Pharisee it was Levitical and legal purity,

secured by the 'hedge' of ordinances which they drew around

themselves. To the Essene it was absolute purity in separation from

the 'material,' which in itself was defiling. The Pharisee attained in

this manner the distinctive merit of a saint; the Essene obtained a

higher fellowship with the Divine, 'inward' purity, and not only

freedom from the detracting, degrading influence of matter, but

command over matter and nature. As the result of this higher

fellowship with the Divine, the adept possessed the power of

prediction; as the result of his freedom from, and command over

matter, the power of miraculous cures. That their purifications,

strictest Sabbath observance, and other practices, would form points

of contact with Pharisaism, follows as a matter of course; and a

little reflection will show, that such observances would naturally be

adopted by the Essenes, since they were within the lines of Judaism,

although separatists from its body ecclesiastic. On the other hand,

their fundamental tendency was quite other than that of Pharisaism,

and strongly tinged with Eastern (Parsee) elements. After this the

inquiry as to the precise date of its origin, and whether Essenism was

an offshoot from the original (ancient) Assideans or Chasidim, seems

needless. Certain it is that we find its first mention about 150

b.c.,[1598]1598 and that we meet the first Essence in the reign of

Aristobulus I.[1599]1599

Before stating our conclusions as to its relation to Judaism and the

meaning of the name, we shall put together what information may be

derived of the sect from the writings of Josephus, Philo, and

Pliny.[1600]1600 Even its outward organisation and the mode of life

must have made as deep, and, considering the habits and circumstances

of the time, even deeper impression than does the strictest asceticism

on the part of any modern monastic order, without the unnatural and

repulsive characteristics of the latter. There were no vows of

absolute silence, broken only by weird chaunt of prayer or 'memento

mori;' no penances, nor self-chastisement. But the person who had

entered the 'order' was as effectually separated from all outside as

if he had lived in another world. Avoiding the large cities as the

centres of immorality,[1601]1601 they chose for their settlements

chiefly villages, one of their largest colonies being by the shore of

the Dead Sea.[1602]1602 At the same time they had also 'houses'

inmost, if not all the cities of Palestine,[1603]1603 notably in

Jerusalem,[1604]1604 where, indeed, one of the gates was named after

them.[1605]1605 In these 'houses' they lived in common,[1606]1606

under officials of their own. The affairs of 'the order' were

administered by a tribunal of at least a hundred members,[1607]1607

wore a common dress, engaged in common labor, united in common

prayers, partook of common meals, and devoted themselves to works of

charity, for which each had liberty to draw from the common treasury

at his own discretion, except in the case of relatives.[1608]1608 It

scarcely needs mention that they extended fullest hospitality to

strangers belonging to the order; in fact, a special official was

appointed for this purpose in every city.[1609]1609 Everything was of

the simplest character, and intended to purify the soul by the

greatest possible avoidance, not only of what was sinful, but of what

was material. Rising at dawn, no profane word was spoken till they had

offered their prayers. These were addressed towards, if not to, the

rising sun - probably, as they would have explained it, as the emblem

of the Divine Light, but implying invocation, if not adoration, of the

sun.[1610]1610 After that they were dismissed by their officers to

common work. The morning meal was preceded by a lustration, or bath.

Then they put on their 'festive' linen garments, and entered,

purified, the common hall as their Sanctuary. For each meal was

sacrificial, in fact, the only sacrifices which they acknowledged. The

'baker,' who was really their priest - and naturally so, since he

prepared the sacrifice - set before each bread, and the cook a mess of

vegetables. The meal began with prayer by the presiding priest, for

those who presided at these 'sacrifices' were also 'priests,' although

in neither case probably of Aaronic descent, but consecrated by

themselves.[1611]1611 The sacraficial meal was again concluded by

prayer, when they put off their sacred dress, and returned to their

labour. The evening meal was of exactly the same description, and

partaken of with the same rites as that of the morning.

Although the Essenes, who, with the exception of a small party among

them, repudiated marriage, adopted children to train them in the

principles of their sect,[1612]1612 yet admission to the order was

only granted to adults, and after a novitiate which lasted three

years. On entering, the novice received the three symbols of purity:

an axe, or rather a spade, with which to dig a pit, a foot deep, to

cover up the excrements; an apron, to bind round the loins in bathing;

and a white dress, which was always worn, the festive garment at meals

being of linen. At the end of the first year the novice was admitted

to the lustrations. He had now entered on the second grade, in which

he remained for another year. After its lapse, he was advanced to the

third grade, but still continued a novice, until, at the close of the

third year of his probation, he was admitted to the fourth grade -

that of full member, when, for the first time, he was admitted to the

sacrifice of the common meals. The mere touch of one of a lower grade

in the order defiled the Essene, and necessitated the lustration of a

bath. Before admission to full membership, a terrible oath was taken.

As, among other things, it bound to the most absolute secrecy, we can

scarcely suppose that its form, as given by Josephus,[1613]1613

contains much beyond what was generally allowed to transpire. Thus the

long list given by the Jewish historian of moral obligations which the

Essenes undertook, is probably only a rhetorical enlargement of some

simple formula. More credit attaches to the alleged undertaking of

avoidance of all vanity, falsehood, dishonesty, and unlawful gains.

The last parts of the oath alone indicate the peculiar vows of the

sect, that is, so far as they could be learned by the outside world,

probably chiefly through the practice of the Essenes. They bound each

member not to conceal anything from his own sect, nor, even on peril

of death, to disclose their doctrines to others; to hand down their

doctrines exactly as they had received them; to abstain from

robbery;[1614]1614 and to guard the books belonging to their sect, and

the names of the Angels.

It is evident that, while all else was intended as safeguards of a

rigorous sect of purists, and with the view of strictly keeping it a

secret order, the last-mentioned particulars furnish significant

indications of their peculiar doctrines. Some of these may be regarded

as only exaggerations of Judaism, though not of the Pharisaic

kind.[1615]1615 Among them we reckon the extravagant reverence for the

name of their legislator (presumably Moses), whom to blaspheme was a

capital offence; their rigid abstinence from all prohibited food; and

their exaggerated Sabbath-observance, when, not only no food was

prepared, but not a vessel moved, nay, not even nature

eased.[1616]1616 But this latter was connected with their fundamental

idea of inherent impurity in the body, and, indeed, in all that is

material. Hence, also, their asceticism, their repudiation of

marriage, and their frequent lustrations in clean water, not only

before their sacrificial meals, but upon contact even with an Essene

of a lower grade, and after attending to the calls of nature. Their

undoubted denial of the resurrection of the body seems only the

logical sequence from it. If the soul was a substance of the subtlest

ether, drawn by certain natural enticement into the body, which was

its prison, a state of perfectness could not have consisted in the

restoration of that which, being material, was in itself impure. And,

indeed, what we have called the exaggerated Judaism of the sect- its

rigid abstinence from all forbidden food, and peculiar

Sabbath-observance - may all have had the same object, that of tending

towards an external purism, which the Divine legislator would have

introduced, but the 'carnally-minded' could not receive. Hence, also,

the strict separation of the order, its grades, its rigorous

discipline, as well as its abstinence from wine, meat, and all

ointments - from every luxury, even from trades which would encourage

this, or any vice. This aim after external purity explains many of

their outward arrangements, such as that their labour was of the

simplest kind, and the commonality of all property in the order;

perhaps, also, what may seem more ethical ordinances, such as the

repudiation of slavery, their refusal to take an oath, and even their

scrupulous care of truth. The white garments, which they always wore,

seem to have been but a symbol of that purity which they sought. For

this purpose they submitted, not only to strict asceticism, but to a

discipline which gave the officials authority to expel all offenders,

even though in so doing they virtually condemned them to death by

starvation, since the most terrible oaths had bound all entrants into

the order not to partake of any food other than that prepared by their

'priests.'

In such a system there would, of course, be no place for either an

Aaronic priesthood, or bloody sacrifices. In fact, they repudiated

both. Without formally rejecting the Temple and its services, there

was no room in their system for such ordinances. They sent, indeed,

thank offerings to the Temple, but what part had they in bloody

sacrifices and an Aaronic ministry, which constituted the main

business of the Temple? Their 'priests' were their bakers and

presidents; their sacrifices those of fellowship, their sacred meals

of purity. It is quite in accordance with this tendency when we learn

from Philo that, in their diligent study of the Scriptures, they

chiefly adopted the allegorical mode of interpretation.[1617]1617

We can scarcely wonder that such Jews as Josephus and Philo, and such

heathens as Pliny, were attracted by such an unworldly and lofty sect.

Here were about 4,000 men, who deliberately separated themselves, not

only from all that made life pleasant, but from all around; who, after

passing a long and strict novitiate, were content to live under the

most rigid rule, obedient to their superiors; who gave up all their

possessions, as well as the earnings of their daily toil in the

fields, or of their simple trades; who held all things for the common

benefit, entertained strangers, nursed their sick, and tended their

aged as if their own parents, and were charitable to all men; who

renounced all animal passions, eschewed anger, ate and drank in

strictest moderation, accumulated neither wealth nor possessions, wore

the simplest white dress till it was no longer fit for use; repudiated

slavery, oaths, marriage; abstained from meat and wine, even from the

common Eastern anointing with oil; used mystic lustrations, had mystic

rites and mystic prayers, an esoteric literature and doctrines; whose

every meal was a sacrifice, and every act one of self-denial; who,

besides, were strictly truthful, honest, upright, virtuous, chaste,

and charitable, in short, whose life meant, positively and negatively,

a continual purification of the soul by mortification of the body. To

the astonished onlookers this mode of life was rendered even more

sacred by doctrines, a literature, and magic power known only to the

initiated. Their mysterious conditions made them cognisant of the

names of Angels, by which we are, no doubt, to understand a theosophic

knowledge, fellowship with the Angelic world, and the power of

employing its ministry. Their constant purifications, and the study of

their prophetic writings, gave them the power of prediction;[1618]1618

the same mystic writings revealed the secret remedies of plants and

stones for the healing of the body,[1619]1619 as well as what was

needed for the cure of souls.

It deserves special notice that this intercourse with Angels, this

secret traditional literature, and its teaching concerning mysterious

remedies in plants and stones, are not unfrequently referred to in

that Apocalyptic literature known as the 'Pseudepigraphic Writings.'

Confining ourselves to undoubtedly Jewish and pre-Christian

documents,[1620]1620 we know what development the doctrine of Angels

received both in the Book of Enoch (alike in its earlier and in its

later portion[1621]1621) and in the Book of Jubilees,[1622]1622 and

how the 'seers' received Angelic instruction and revelations. The

distinctively Rabbinic teaching on these subjects is fully set forth

in another part of this work.[1623]1623 Here we would only specially

notice that in the Book of Jubilees[1624]1624 Angels are represented

as teaching Noah all 'herbal remedies' for diseases,[1625]1625 while

in the later Pirqé de R. Eliezer[1626]1626 this instruction is said to

have been given to Moses. These two points (relaion to the Angels, and

knowledge of the remedial power of plants - not to speak of visions

and prophecies) seem to connect the secret writings of the Essenes

with that 'outside' literature which in Rabbinic writings is known as

Sepharim haChitsonim, 'outside writings.'[1627]1627 The point is of

greatest importance, as will presently appear.

It needs no demonstration, that a system which proceeded from a

contempt of the body and of all that is material; in some manner

identified the Divine manifestation with the Sun; denied the

Resurrection, the Temple-priesthood, and sacrifices; preached

abstinence from meats and from marriage; decreed such entire

separation from all around that their very contact defiled, and that

its adherents would have perished of hunger rather than join in the

meals of the outside world; which, moreover, contained not a trace of

Messianic elements - indeed, had no room for them - could have had no

internal connection with the origin of Christianity. Equally certain

is it that, in respect of doctrine, life, and worship, it really stood

outside Judaism, as represented by either Pharisees or Sadducees. The

question whence the foreign elements were derived, which were its

distinctive characteristics, has of late been so learnedly discussed,

that only the conclusions arrived at require to be stated. Of the two

theories, of which the one traces Essenism to

Neo-Pythagorean,[1628]1628 the other to Persian sources,[1629]1629 the

latter seems fully established - without, however, wholly denying at

least the possibility of Neo-Pythagorean influences. To the grounds

which have been so conclusively urged in support of the Eastern origin

of Essenism,[1630]1630 in its distinctive features, may be added this,

that Jewish Angelology, which played so great a part in the system,

was derived from Chaldee and Persian sources, and perhaps also the

curious notion, that the knowledge of medicaments, originally derived

by Noah from the angels, came to the Egyptians chiefly through the

magic books of the Chaldees.[1631]1631 [1632]1632

It is only at the conclusion of these investigations that we are

prepared to enter on the question of the origin and meaning of the

name Essenes, important as this inquiry is, not only in itself, but in

regard to the relation of the sect to orthodox Judaism. The eighteen

or nineteen proposed explanations of a term, which must undoubtedly be

of Hebrew etymology, all proceed on the idea of its derivation from

something which implied praise of the sect, the two least

objectionable explaining the name as equivalent either to 'the pious,'

or else to 'the silent ones.' But against all such derivations there

is the obvious objection, that the Pharisees, who had the moulding of

the theological language, and who were in the habit of giving the

hardest names to those who differed from them, would certainly not

have bestowed a title implying encomium on a sect which, in principle

and practices, stood so entirely outside, not only of their own views,

but even of the Synagogue itself. Again, if they had given a name of

encomium to the sect, it is only reasonable to suppose that they would

not have kept, in regard to their doctrines and practices, a silence

which is only broken by dim and indirect allusions. Yet, as we examine

it, the origin and meaning of the name seem implied in their very

position towards the Synagogue. They were the only real sect, strictly

outsiders, and their name Essenes (HEssjno_, HEssa_oi) seems the Greek

equivalent for Chitsonim ({hebrew}), 'the outsiders.' Even the

circumstance that the axe, or rather spade (_xin_rion), which every

novice received, has for its Rabbinic equivalent the word Chatsina, is

here not without significance. Linguistically, the words Essenoi and

Chitsonim are equivalents, as admittedly are the similar designations

Chasidim ({hebrew}) and Asidaioi (HAsida_oi). For, in rendering Hebrew

into Greek, the ch ({hebrew}) is 'often entirely omitted, or

represented by a spiritus lenis in the beginning,' while 'in regard to

the vowels no distinct rule is to be laid down.'[1633]1633 Instances

of a change of the Hebrew i into the Greek e are frequent, and of the

Hebrew o into the Greek _ not rare. As one instance will suffice, we

select a case in which exactly the same transmutation of the two

vowel-sounds occurs - that of the Rabbinic Abhginos ({hebrew}) for the

Greek (e_gen_v) Eugen_s ('well-born').[1634]1634

This derivation of the name Essenes, which strictly expresses the

character and standing of the sect relatively to orthodox Judaism,

and, indeed, is the Greek form of the Hebrew term for 'outsiders,' is

also otherwise confirmed. It has already been said, that no direct

statement concerning the Essenes occurs in Rabbinic writings. Nor need

this surprise us, when we remember the general reluctance of the

Rabbis to refer to their opponents, except in actual controversy; and,

that, when traditionalism was reduced to writing, Essenism, as a

Jewish sect, had ceased to exist. Some of its elements had passed into

the Synagogue, influencing its general teaching (as in regard to

Angelology, magic, &c.), and greatly contributing to that mystic

direction which afterwards found expression in what is now known as

the Kabbalah. But the general movement had passed beyond the bounds of

Judaism, and appeared in some forms of the Gnostic heresy. But still

there are Rabbinic references to the 'Chitsonim,' which seem to

identify them with the sect of the Essenes. Thus, in one

passage[1635]1635 certain practices of the Sadducees and of the

Chitsonim are mentioned together, and it is difficult to see who could

be meant by the latter if not the Essenes. Besides, the practices

there referred to seem to contain covert allusions to those of the

Essenes. Thus, the Mishnah begins by prohibiting the public reading of

the Law by those who would not appear in a coloured, but only in a

white dress. Again, the curious statement is made that the manner of

the Chitsonim was to cover the phylacteries with gold - a statement

unexplained in the Gemara, and inexplicable, unless we see in it an

allusion to the Essene practice of facing the rising Sun in their

morning prayers.[1636]1636 Again, we know with what bitterness

Rabbinism denounced the use of the externe writings (the Sepharim

haChitsonim) to the extent of excluding from eternal life those who

studied them.[1637]1637 But one of the best ascertained facts

concerning the Essenes is that they possessed secret, 'outside,' holy

writings of their own, which they guarded with special care. And,

although it is not maintained that the Sepharim haChitsonim were

exclusively Essene writings,[1638]1638 the latter must have been

included among them. We have already seen reason for believing, that

even the so-called Pseudepigraphic literature, notably such works as

the Book of Jubilees, was strongly tainted with Essene views; if,

indeed, in perhaps another than its present form, part of it was not

actually Essene. Lastly, we find what seems to us yet another covert

allusion[1639]1639 to Essene practices, similar to that which has

already been noticed.[1640]1640 For, immediatley after consigning to

destruction all who denied that there was proof in the Pentateuch for

the Resurrection (evidently the Sadducees), those who denied that the

Law was from heaven (the Minim, or heretics - probably the Jewish

Christians), and all 'Epicureans'[1641]1641 (materialists), the same

punishment is assigned to those 'who read externe writings' (Sepharim

haChitsonim) and 'who whispered' (a magical formula) 'over a

wound.'[1642]1642 Both the Babylonian and the Jerusalem

Talmud[1643]1643 offer a strange explanation of this practice;

perhaps, because they either did not, or else would not, understand

the allusion. But to us it seems at least significant that as, in the

first quoted instance, the mention of the Chitsonim is conjoined with

a condemnation of the exclusive use of white garments in worship,

which we know to have been an Essene peculiarity, so the condemnation

of the use of Chitsonim writings with that of magical cures.[1644]1644

At the same time, we are less bound to insist on these allusions as

essential to our argument, since those, who have given another

derivation than ours to the name Essenes, express themselves unable to

find in ancient Jewish writings any trustworthy reference to the sect.

On one point, at least, our inquiry into the three 'parties' can leave

no doubt. The Essenes could never have been drawn either to the

person, or the preaching of John the Baptist. Similarly, the Sadducees

would, after they knew its real character and goal, turn

contemptuously from a movement which would awaken no sympathy in them,

and could only become of interest when it threatened to endanger their

class by awakening popular enthusiasm, and so rousing the suspicions

of the Romans. To the Pharisees there were questions of dogmatic,

ritual, and even national importance involved, which made the barest

possibility of what John announced a question of supreme moment. And,

although we judge that the report which the earliest Pharisaic hearers

of John[1645]1645 brought to Jerusalem - no doubt, detailed and

accurate - and which led to the despatch of the deputation, would

entirely predispose them against the Baptist, yet it behooved them, as

leaders of public opinion, to take such cognisance of it, as would not

only finally determine their own relation to the movement, but enable

them effectually to direct that of others also.

CHAPTER III.

THE TWOFOLD TESTIMONY OF JOHN - THE FIRST SABBATH OF JESUS'S

MINISTRY - THE

FIRST SUNDAY - THE FIRST DISCIPLES.

(St. John i. 15-51.)

THE forty days, which had passed since Jesus had first come to him,

must have been to the Baptist a time of soul-quickening, of unfolding

understanding, and of ripened decision. We see it in his more

emphasised testimony to the Christ; in his fuller comprehension of

those prophecies which had formed the warrant and substance of his

Mission; but specially in the yet more entire self-abnegation, which

led him to take up a still lowlier position, and acquiescingly to

realise that his task of heralding was ending, and that what remained

was to point those nearest to him, and who had most deeply drunk of

his spirit, to Him Who had come. And how could it be otherwise? On

first meeting Jesus by the banks of Jordan, he had felt the seeming

incongruity of baptizing One of Whom he had rather need to be

baptized. Yet this, perhaps, because he had beheld himself by the

Brightness of Christ, rather than looked at the Christ Himself. What

he needed was not to be baptized, but to learn that it became the

Christ to fulfil all righteousness. This was the first lesson. The

next, and completing one, came when, after the Baptism, the heavens

opened, the Spirit descended, and the Divine Voice of Testimony

pointed to, and explained the promised sign.[1646]1646 It told him,

that the work, which he had begun in the obedience of faith, had

reached the reality of fulfilment. The first was a lesson about the

Kingdom; the second about the King. And then Jesus was parted from

him, and led of the Spirit into the wilderness.

Forty days since then - with these events, this vision, those words

ever present to his mind! It had been the mightiest impulse; nay, it

must have been a direct call from above, which first brought John from

his life-preparation of lonely communing with God to the task of

preparing Israel for that which he knew was preparing for them. He had

entered upon it, not only without illusions, but with such entire

self-forgetfulness, as only deepest conviction of the reality of what

he announced could have wrought. He knew those to whom he was to speak

- the preoccupation, the spiritual dulness, the sins of the great

mass; the hypocrisy, the unreality, the inward impenitence of their

spiritual leaders; the perverseness of their direction; the hollowness

and delusiveness of their confidence as being descended from Abraham.

He saw only too clearly their real character, and knew the near end of

it all: how the axe was laid to the barren tree, and how terribly the

fan would sift the chaff from the wheat. And yet he preached and

baptized; for, deepest in his heart was the conviction, that there was

a Kingdom at hand, and a King coming. As we gather the elements of

that conviction, we find them chiefly in the Book of Isaiah. His

speech and its imagery, and, especially, the burden of his message,

were taken from those prophecies.[1647]1647 Indeed, his mind seems

saturated with them; they must have formed his own religious training;

and they were the preparation for his work. This gathering up of the

Old Testament rays of light and glory into the burning-glass of

Evangelic prophecy had set his soul on fire. No wonder that, recoiling

equally from the externalism of the Pharisees, and the merely material

purism of the Essenes, he preached quite another doctrine, of inward

repentance and renewal of life.

One picture was most brightly reflected on those pages of Isaiah. It

was that of the Anointed, Messiah, Christ, the Representative

Israelite, the Priest, King, and Prophet,[1648]1648 in Whom the

institution and sacramental meaning of the Priesthood, and of

Sacrifices, found their fulfilment.[1649]1649 In his announcement of

the Kingdom, in his call to inward repentance, even in his symbolic

Baptism, that Great Personality always stood out before the mind of

John, as the One all-overtopping and overshadowing Figure in the

background. It was the Isaiah-picture of 'the King in His beauty,' the

vision of 'the land of far distances'[1650]1650 [1651]1651 - to him a

reality, of which Sadducee and Essene had no conception, and the

Pharisee only the grossest misconception. This also explains how the

greatest of those born of women was also the most humble, the most

retiring, and self-forgetful. In a picture such as that which filled

his whole vision, there was no room for self. By the side of such a

Figure all else appeared in its real littleness, and, indeed, seemed

at best but as shadows cast by its light. All the more would the bare

suggestion on the part of the Jerusalem deputation, that he might be

the Christ, seem like a blasphemy, from which, in utter

self-abasement, he would seek shelter in the scarce-ventured claim to

the meanest office which a slave could discharge. He was not Elijah.

Even the fact that Jesus afterwards, in significant language, pointed

to the possibility of his becoming such to Israel (St. Matt. xi. 14),

proves that he claimed it not;[1652]1652 not 'that prophet;' not even

a prophet. He professed not visions, revelations, special messages.

All else was absorbed in the great fact: he was only the voice of one

that cried, 'Prepare ye the way!' Viewed especially in the light of

those self-glorious times, this reads not like a fictitious account of

a fictitious mission; nor was such the profession of an impostor, an

associate in a plot, or an enthusiast. There was deep reality of

all-engrossing conviction which underlay such self-denial of mission.

And all this must have ripened during the forty days of probably

comparative solitude,[1653]1653 only relieved by the presence of such

'disciples' as, learning the same hope, would gather around him. What

he had seen and what he had heard threw him back upon what he had

expected and believed. It not only fulfilled, it transfigured it. Not

that, probably, he always maintained the same height which he then

attained. It was not in the nature of things that it should be so. We

often attain, at the outset of our climbing, a glimpse, afterwards hid

from us in our laborious upward toil till the supreme height is

reached. Mentally and spiritually we may attain almost at a bound

results, too often lost to us till again secured by long reflection,

or in the course of painful development. This in some measure explains

the fulness of John's testimony to the Christ as 'the Lamb of God,

Which taketh away the sin of the world,' when at the beginning we find

ourselves almost at the goal of New Testament teaching. It also

explains that last strife of doubt and fear, when the weary wrestler

laid himself down to find refreshment and strength in the shadow of

those prophecies, which had first called him to the contest. But

during those forty days, and in the first meetings with Jesus which

followed, all lay bathed in the morning-light of that heavenly vision,

and that Divine truth wakened in him the echoes of all those

prophecies, which these thirty years had been the music of his soul.

And now, on the last of those forty days, simultaneously with the

final great Temptation of Jesus[1654]1654 which must have summed up

all that had preceded it in the previous days, came the hour of John's

temptation by the deputation from Jerusalem.[1655]1655 Very gently it

came to him, like the tempered wind that fans the fire into flame, not

like that keen, desolating storm-blast which swept over the Master. To

John, as now to us, it was only the fellowship of His sufferings,

which he bore in the shelter of that great Rock over which its

intenseness had spent itself. Yet a very real temptation it was, this

provoking to the assumption of successively lower grades of

self-assertion, where only entire self-abnegation was the rightful

feeling. Each suggestion of lower office (like the temptations of

Christ) marked an increased measure of temptation, as the human in his

mission was more and more closely neared. And greatest temptation it

was when, after the first victory, came the not unnatural challenge of

his authority for what he said and did. This was, of all others, the

question which must at all times, from the beginning of his mission to

the hour of his death, have pressed most closely upon him, since it

touched not only his conscience, but the very ground of his mission,

nay, of his life. That it was such temptation is evidenced by the fact

that, in the hour of his greatest loneliness and depression it formed

his final contest, in which he temporarily paused, like Jacob in his

Israel-struggle, though, like him, he failed not in it. For what was

the meaning of that question which the disciples of John brought to

Jesus: 'Art Thou He that should come, or do we look for another?'

other than doubt of his own warrant and authority for what he had said

and done? But in that first time of his trial at Bethabara he

overcame, the first temptation by the humility of his intense

sincerity, the second by the absolute simplicity of his own

experimental conviction; the first by what he had seen, the second by

what he had heard concerning the Christ at the banks of Jordan. And

so, also, although perhaps 'afar off,' it must ever be to us in like

temptation.

Yet, as we view it, and without needlessly imputing malice prepense to

the Pharisaic deputation, their questions seemed but natural. After

his previous emphatic disclaimer at the beginning of his preaching

(St. Luke iii. 15), of which they in Jerusalem could scarcely have

been ignorant, the suggestion of his Messiahship - not indeed

expressly made, but sufficiently implied to elicit what the language

of St. John[1656]1656 shows to have been the most energetic denial -

could scarcely have been more than tentative. It was otherwise with

their question whether he was 'Elijah?' Yet, bearing in mind what we

know of the Jewish expectations of Elijah, and how his appearance was

always readily recognised,[1657]1657 this also could scarcely have

been meant in its full literality - but rather as ground for the

further question after the goal and warrant of his mission. Hence also

John's disavowing of such claims is not satisfactorily accounted for

by the common explanation, that he denied being Elijah in the sense of

not being what the Jews expected of the Forerunner of the Messiah: the

real, identical Elijah of the days of Ahab; or else, that he denied

being such in the sense of the peculiar Jewish hopes attaching to his

reappearance in the 'last days.' There is much deeper truth in the

disclaimer of the Baptist. It was, indeed, true that, as foretold in

the Angelic announcement,[1658]1658 he was sent 'in the spirit and

power of Elias,' that is, with the same object and the same

qualifications. Similarly, it is true what, in His mournful retrospect

of the result of John's mission, and in the prospect of His own end,

the Saviour said of him, 'Elias is indeed come,' but 'they knew him

not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed.'[1659]1659 But on

this very recognition and reception of him by the Jews depended his

being to them Elijah - who should 'turn the hearts of the fathers to

the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just,' and so

'restore all things.' Between the Elijah of Ahab's reign, and him of

Messianic times, lay the wide cleft of quite another dispensation. The

'spirit and power of Elijah' could 'restore all things,' because it

was the dispensation of the Old Testament, in which the result was

outward, and by outward means. But 'the spirit and power' of the

Elijah of the New Testament, which was to accomplish the inward

restoration through penitent reception of the Kingdom of God in its

reality, could only accomplish that object if 'they received it' - if

'they knew him.' And as in his own view, and looking around and

forward, so also in very fact the Baptist, though Divinely such, was

not really Elijah to Israel - and this is the meaning of the words of

Jesus: 'And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to

come.'[1660]1660

More natural still - indeed, almost quite truthful, seems the third

question of the Pharisees, whether the Baptist was 'that prophet.' The

reference here is undoubtedly to Deut. xviii. 15, 18. Not that the

reappearance of Moses as lawgiver was expected. But as the prediction

of the eighteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, especially when taken in

connection with the promise[1661]1661 of a 'new covenant' with a 'new

law' written in the hearts of the people, implied a change in this

respect, it was but natural that it should have been expected in

Messianic days by the instrumentality of 'that prophet.'[1662]1662

Even the various opinions broached in the Mishnah,[1663]1663 as to

what were to be the reformatory and legislative functions of Elijah,

prove that such expectations were connected with the Forerunner of the

Messiah.

But whatever views the Jewish embassy might have entertained

concerning the abrogation, renewal, or renovation of the Law[1664]1664

in Messianic times, the Baptist repelled the suggestion of his being

'that prophet' with the same energy as those of his being either the

Christ or Elijah. And just as we notice, as the result of those forty

days' communing, yet deeper humility and self-abnegation on the part

of the Baptist, so we also mark increased intensity and directness in

the testimony which he now bears to the Christ before the Jerusalem

deputies.[1665]1665 'His eye is fixed on the Coming One.''He is as a

voice not to be inquired about, but heard;' and its clear and

unmistakable, but deeply reverent utterance is: 'The Coming One has

come.'[1666]1666

The reward of his overcoming temptation - yet with it also the fitting

for still fiercer conflict (which two, indeed, are always conjoined),

was at hand. After His victorious contest with the Devil, Angels had

come to minister to Jesus in body and soul. But better than Angels'

vision came to refresh and strengthen His faithful witness John. On

the very day of the Baptist's temptation Jesus had left the

wilderness. On the morrow after it, 'John seeth Jesus coming unto him,

and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God, Which taketh away the sin of the

world!' We cannot doubt, that the thought here present to the mind of

John was the description of 'The Servant of Jehovah,'[1667]1667 as set

forth in Is. liii. If all along the Baptist had been filled with

Isaiah-thoughts of the Kingdom, surely in the forty days after he had

seen the King, a new 'morning' must have risen upon them,[1668]1668

and the halo of His glory shone around the well-remembered prophecy.

It must always have been Messianically understood;[1669]1669 it formed

the groundwork of Messianic thought to the New Testament

writers[1670]1670 - nor did the Synagogue read it otherwise, till the

necessities of controversy diverted its application, not indeed from

the times, but from the Person of the Messiah.[1671]1671 But we can

understand how, during those forty days, this greatest height of

Isaiah's conception of the Messiah was the one outstanding fact before

his view. And what he believed, that he spake, when again, and

unexpectedly, he saw Jesus.

Yet, while regarding his words as an appeal to the prophecy of Isaiah,

two other references must not be excluded from them: those to the

Paschal Lamb, and to the Daily Sacrifice. These are, if not directly

pointed to, yet implied. For the Paschal Lamb was, in a sense, the

basis of all the sacrifices of the Old Testament, not only from its

saving import to Israel, but as that which really made them 'the

Church,'[1672]1672 and people of God. Hence the institution of the

Paschal Lamb was, so to speak, only enlarged and applied in the daily

sacrifice of a Lamb, in which this twofold idea of redemption and

fellowship was exhibited. Lastly, the prophecy of Isaiah liii. was but

the complete realisation of these two ideas in the Messiah. Neither

could the Paschal Lamb, with its completion in the Daily Sacrifice, be

properly viewed without this prophecy of Isaiah, nor yet that prophecy

properly understood without its reference to its two great types. And

here one Jewish comment in regard to the Daily Sacrifice (not

previously pointed out) is the more significant, that it dates from

the very time of Jesus. The passage reads almost like a Christian

interpretation of sacrifice. It explains how the morning and evening

sacrifices were intended to atone, the one for the sins of the night,

the other for those of the day, so as ever to leave Israel guiltless

before God; and it expressly ascribes to them the efficacy of a

Paraclete - that being the word used.[1673]1673 Without further

following this remarkable Rabbinic commentation,[1674]1674 which

stretches back its view of sacrifices to the Paschal Lamb, and, beyond

it, to that offering of Isaac by Abraham which, in the Rabbinic view,

was the substratum of all sacrifices, we turn again to its teaching

about the Lamb of the Daily Sacrifice. Here we have the express

statement, that both the school of Shammai and that of Hillel - the

latter more fully - insisted on the symbolic import of this sacrifice

in regard to the forgiveness of sin. 'Kebhasim' (the Hebrew word for

'lambs'), explained the school of Shammai, 'because, according to

Micah vii. 19, they suppress [in the A.V. 'subdue'] our iniquities

(the Hebrew word Kabhash meaning he who suppresseth).'[1675]1675 Still

more strong is the statement of the school of Hillel, to the effect

that the sacrifical lambs were termed Kebhasim (from kabhas, 'to

wash'), 'because they wash away the sins of Israel.'[1676]1676 The

quotation just made gains additional interest from the circumstance,

that it occurs in a 'meditation' (if such it may be called) for the

new moon of the Passover-month (Nisan). In view of such clear

testimony from the time of Christ, less positiveness of assertion

might, not unreasonably, be expected from those who declare that the

sacrifices bore no reference to the forgiveness of sins, just as, in

the face of the application made by the Baptist and other New

Testament writers, more exegetical modesty seems called for on the

part of those who deny the Messianic references in Isaiah.

If further proof were required that, when John pointed the bystanders

to the Figure of Jesus walking towards them, with these words:

'Behold, the Lamb of God,' he meant more than His gentleness,

meekness, and humility, it would be supplied by the qualifying

explanation, 'Which taketh away the sin of the world.' We prefer

rendering the expression 'taketh away' instead of 'beareth,' because

it is in that sense that the LXX. uniformly use the Greek term. Of

course, as we view it, the taking away presupposes the taking upon

Himself of the sin of the world. But it is not necessary to suppose

that the Baptist clearly understood that manner of His Saviourship,

which only long afterwards, and reluctantly, came to the followers of

the Lamb.[1677]1677 That he understood the application of His ministry

to the whole world, is only what might have been expected of one

taught by Isaiah; and what, indeed, in one or another form, the

Synagogue has always believed of the Messiah. What was distinctive in

the words of the Baptist, seems his view of sin as a totality, rather

than sins: implying the removal of that great barrier between God and

man, and the triump in that great contest indicated in Gen. iii. 15,

which Israel after the flesh failed to perceive. Nor should we omit

here to notice an undesigned evidence of the Hebraic origin of the

fourth Gospel; for an Ephesian Gospel, dating from the close of the

second century, would not have placed in its forefront, as the first

public testimony of the Baptist (if, indeed, it would have introduced

him at all), a quotation from Isaiah - still less a sacrificial

reference.

The motives which brought Jesus back to Bethabara must remain in the

indefiniteness in which Scripture has left them. So far as we know,

there was no personal interview between Jesus and the Baptist. Jesus

had then and there nothing further to say to the Baptist; and yet on

the day following that on which John had, in such manner, pointed Him

out to the bystanders, He was still there, only returning to Galilee

the next day. Here, at least, a definite object becomes apparent. This

was not merely the calling of His first disciples, but the necessary

Sabbath rest; for, in this instance, the narrative supplies the means

of ascertaining the days of the week on which each event took place.

We have only to assume, that the marriage in Cana of Galilee was that

of a maiden, not a widow. The great festivities which accompanied it

were unlikely, according to Jewish ideas, in the case of a widow; in

fact, the whole mise en scène of the marriage renders this most

improbable. Besides, if it had been the marriage of a widow, this (as

will immediately appear) would imply that Jesus had returned from the

wilderness on a Saturday, which, as being the Jewish Sabbath, could

not have been the case. For uniform custom fixed the marriage of a

maiden on Wednesdays, that of a widow on Thursday.[1678]1678 Counting

backwards from the day of the marriage in Cana, we arrive at the

following results. The interview between John and the

Sanhedrin-deputation took place on a Thursday. 'The next day,' Friday,

Jesus returned from the wilderness of the Temptation, and John bore

his first testimony to 'the Lamb of God.' The following day, when

Jesus appeared a second time in view, and when the first two disciples

joined Him, was the Saturday, or Jewish Sabbath. It was, therefore,

only the following day, or Sunday,[1679]1679 that Jesus returned to

Galilee,[1680]1680 calling others by the way. 'And the third day'

after it[1681]1681 - that is, on the Wednesday - was the marriage in

Cana.[1682]1682

If we group around these days the recorded events of each, they almost

seem to intensify in significance. The Friday of John's first pointing

to Jesus as the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world,

recalls that other Friday, when the full import of that testimony

appeared. The Sabbath of John's last personal view and testimony to

Christ is symbolic in its retrospect upon the old economy. It seems to

close the ministry of John, and to open that of Jesus; it is the

leave-taking of the nearest disciples of John from the old, their

search after the new. And then on the first Sunday - the beginning of

Christ's active ministry, the call of the first disciples, the first

preaching of Jesus.

As we picture it to ourselves: in the early morning of that Sabbath

John stood, with the two of his disciples who most shared his thoughts

and feelings. One of them we know to have been Andrew (v. 40); the

other, unnamed one, could have been no other than John himself, the

beloved disciple.[1683]1683 They had heard what their teacher had, on

the previous day, said of Jesus. But then He seemed to them but as a

passing Figure. To hear more of Him, as well as in deepest sympathy,

these two had gathered to their Teacher on that Sabbath morning, while

the other disciples of John were probably engaged with that, and with

those, which formed the surroundings of an ordinary Jewish

Sabbath.[1684]1684 And now that Figure once more appeared in view.

None with the Baptist but these two. He is not teaching now, but

learning, as the intensity and penetration of his gaze[1685]1685 calls

from him the now worshipful repetition of what, on the previous day,

he had explained and enforced. There was no leave-taking on the part

of these two - perhaps they meant not to leave John. Only an

irresistible impulse, a heavenly instinct, bade them follow His steps.

It needed no direction of John, no call from Jesus. But as they went

in modest silence, in the dawn of their rising faith, scarce conscious

of the what and the why, He turned Him. It was not because He

discerned it not, but just because He knew the real goal of their yet

unconscious search, and would bring them to know what they sought,

that He put to them the question, 'What seek ye?' which elicited a

reply so simple, so real, as to carry its own evidence. He is still to

them the Rabbi - the most honoured title they can find - yet marking

still the strictly Jewish view, as well as their own standpoint of

'What seek ye?' They wish, yet scarcely dare, to say what was their

object, and only put it in a form most modest, suggestive rather than

expressive. There is strict correspondence to their view in the words

of Jesus. Their very Hebraism of 'Rabbi' is met by the equally Hebraic

'Come and see;'[1686]1686 their unspoken, but half-conscious longing

by what the invitation implied (according to the most probable

reading, 'Come and ye shall see'[1687]1687

It was but early morning - ten o'clock.[1688]1688 What passed on that

long Sabbath-day we know not save from what happened in its course.

From it issued the two, not learners now but teachers, bearing what

they had found to those nearest and dearest. The form of the narrative

and its very words convey, that the two had gone, each to search for

his brother - Andrew for Simon Peter, and John for James, though here

already, at the outset of this history, the haste of energy

characteristic of the sons of Jona outdistanced the more quiet

intenseness of John:[1689]1689 'He (Andrew) first findeth his own

brother.'[1690]1690 But Andrew and John equally brought the same

announcement, still markedly Hebraic in its form, yet filled with the

new wine, not only of conviction, but of joyous apprehension: 'We have

found the Messias.'[1691]1691 This, then, was the outcome of them of

that day - He was the Messiah; and this the goal which their longing

had reached, 'We have found Him.' Quite beyond what they had heard

from the Baptist; nay, what only personal contact with Jesus can carry

to any heart.

And still this day of first marvellous discovery had not closed. It

almost seems, as if this 'Come and see' call of Jesus were emblematic,

not merely of all that followed in His own ministry, but of the manner

in which to all time the 'What seek ye?' of the soul is answered. It

could scarcely have been but that Andrew had told Jesus of his

brother, and even asked leave to bring him. The searching, penetrating

glance[1692]1692 of the Saviour now read in Peter's inmost character

his future call and work: 'Thou art Simon, the son of John[1693]1693 -

thou shalt be called[1694]1694 Cephas, which is interpreted

(Grecianised) Peter.'[1695]1695

It must not, of course, be supposed that this represents all that had

passed between Jesus and Peter, any more than that the recorded

expression was all that Andrew and John had said of Jesus to their

brothers. Of the interview between John and James his brother, the

writer, with his usual self-reticence, forbears to speak. But we know

its result; and, knowing it, can form some conception of what passed

on that holy evening between the new-found Messiah and His first four

disciples: of teaching manifestation on His part, and of satisfied

heart-peace on theirs. As yet they were only followers, learners, not

yet called to be Apostles, with all of entire renunciation of home,

family, and other calling which this implied. This, in the course of

proper development, remained for quite another period. Alike their

knowledge and their faith for the present needed, and could only bear,

the call to personal attachment.[1696]1696

It was Sunday morning, the first of Christ's Mission-work, the first

of His Preaching. He was purposing to return to Galilee. It was

fitting He should do so: for the sake of His new disciples; for what

He was to do in Galilee; for His own sake. The first Jerusalem-visit

must be prepared for by them all; and He would not go there till the

right time - for the Paschal Feast. It was probably a distance of

about twenty miles from Bethabara to Cana. By the way, two other

disciples were to be gained - this time not brought, but called,

where, and in what precise circumstances, we know not. But the notice

that Philip was a fellow-townsman of Andrew and Peter, seems to imply

some instrumentality on their part. Similarly, we gather that,

afterwards, Philip was somewhat in advance of the rest, when he found

his acquaintance Nathanael, and engaged in conversation with him just

as Jesus and the others came up. But here also we mark, as another

characteristic trait of John, that he, and his brother with him, seem

to have clung close to the Person of Christ, just as did Mary

afterwards in the house of her brother. It was this intense

exclusiveness of fellowship with Jesus which traced on his mind that

fullest picture of the God-Man, which his narrative reflects.

The call to Philip from the lips of the Saviour met, we know not under

what circumstances, immediate responsive obedience. Yet, though no

special obstacles had to be overcome, and hence no special narrative

was called for, it must have implied much of learning, to judge from

what he did, and from what he said to Nathanael. There is something

special about Nathanael's conquest by Christ - rather implied,

perhaps, than expressed - and of which the Lord's words gives

significant hints. They seem to point to what had passed in his mind

just before Philip found him. Alike the expression 'an Israelite in

truth, in whom is no guile'[1697]1697 - looking back on what changed

the name of Jacob into Israel - and the evident reference to the full

realisation of Jacob's vision in Bethel,[1698]1698 may be an

indication that this very vision had engaged his thoughts. As the

Synagogue understood the narrative, its application to the then state

of Israel and the Messianic hope would most readily suggest itself.

Putting aside all extravagances, the Synagogue thought, in connection

with it, of the rising power of the Gentiles, but concluded with the

precious comfort of the assurance, in Jer. xxx. 11, of Israel's final

restoration.[1699]1699 Nathanael (Theodore, 'the gift of God,') had,

as we often read of Rabbis,[1700]1700 rested for prayer, meditation,

or study, in the shadow of that wide-spreading tree so common in

Palestine, the fig-tree.[1701]1701 The approaching Passover-season,

perhaps mingling with thoughts of John's announcement by the banks of

Jordan, would naturally suggest the great deliverance of Israel in

'the age to come;'[1702]1702 all the more, perhaps, from the painful

contrast in the present. Such a verse as that with which, in a

well-known Rabbinic work,[1703]1703 the meditation for the New Moon of

Nisan, the Passover month, closes: 'Happy is he that hath the God of

Jacob for his help,'[1704]1704 would recur, and so lead back the mind

to the suggestive symbol of Jacob's vision, and its realisation in

'the age to come.'[1705]1705

These are, of course, only suppositions; but it might well be that

Philip had found him while still busy with such thoughts. Possibly

their outcome, and that quite in accordance with Jewish belief at the

time, may have been, that all that was needed to bring that happy 'age

to come' was, that Jacob should become Israel in truth. In such case

he would himself have been ripening for 'the Kingdom' that was at

hand. It must have seemed a startling answer to his thoughts, this

announcement, made wth the freshness of new and joyous conviction: 'We

have found Him of Whom Moses in the Law, and the Prophets, did write.'

But this addition about the Man of Nazareth, the Son of

Joseph,[1706]1706 would appear a terrible anti-climax. It was so

different from anything that he had associated either with the great

hope of Israel, or with the Nazareth of his own neighbourhood, that

his exclamation, without implying any special imputation on the little

town which he knew so well, seems not only natural, but,

psychologically, deeply true. There was but one answer to this - that

which Philip made, which Jesus had made to Andrew and John, and which

has ever since been the best answer to all Christian inquiry: 'Come

and see.' And, despite the disappointment, there must have been such

moving power in the answer which Philip's sudden announcement had

given to his unspoken thoughts, that he went with him. And now, as

ever, when in such spirit we come, evidences irrefragable multiplied

at every step. As he neared Jesus, he heard Him speak to the disciples

words concerning him, which recalled, truly and actually, what had

passed in his soul. But could it really be so, that Jesus knew it all?

The question, intended to elicit it, brought such proof that he could

not but burst into the immediate and full acknowledgment: 'Thou art

the Son of God,' Who hast read my inmost being; 'Thou art the King of

Israel,' Who dost meet its longing and hope. And is it not ever so,

that the faith of the heart springs to the lips, as did the water from

the riven rock at the touch of the God-gifted rod? It needs not long

course of argumentation, nor intricate chain of evidences, welded link

to link, when the secret thoughts of the heart are laid bare, and its

inmost longings met. Then, as in a moment, it is day, and joyous voice

of song greets its birth.

And yet that painful path of slower learning to enduring conviction

must still be trodden, whether in the sufferings of the heart, or the

struggle of the mind. This it is which seems implied in the half-sad

question of the Master,[1707]1707 yet with full view of the final

triumph ('thou shalt see greater things than these'), and of the true

realisation in it of that glorious symbol of Jacob's vision.[1708]1708

And so Nathanael, 'the God-given' - or, as we know him in

after-history, Bartholomew, 'the son of Telamyon'[1709]1709 - was

added to the disciples. Such was on that first Sunday the small

beginning of the great Church Catholic; these the tiny springs that

swelled into the mighty river which, in its course, has enriched and

fertilised the barrenness of the far-off lands of the Gentiles.

CHAPTER IV.

THE MARRIAGE FEAST IN CANA OF GALILEE - THE MIRACLE THAT IS 'A SIGN.'

(St. John ii. 1-12.)

At the close of His Discourse to Nathanael - His first sermon - Jesus

had made use of an expression which received its symbolic fulfilment

in His first deed. His first testimony about Himself had been to call

Himself the 'Son of Man.'[1710]1710 [1711]1711 We cannot but feel that

this bore reference to the confession of Nathanael: 'Thou art the Son

of God; Thou art the King of Israel.' It is, as if He would have

turned the disciples from thoughts of His being the Son of God and

King of Israel to the voluntary humiliation of His Humanity, as being

the necessary basis of His work, without knowledge of which that of

His Divinity would have been a barren, speculative abstraction, and

that of His Kingship a Jewish fleshly dream. But it was not only

knowledge of His humiliation in His Humanity. For, as in the history

of the Christ humiliation and glory are always connected, the one

enwrapped in the other as the flower in the bud, so here also His

humiliation as the Son of Man is the exaltation of humanity, the

realisation of its ideal destiny as created in the likeness of God. It

should never be forgotton, that such teaching of His exaltation and

Kingship through humiliation and representation of humanity was

needful. It was the teaching which was the outcome of the Temptation

and of its victory, the very teaching of the whole Evangelic history.

Any other real learning of Christ would, as we see it, have been

impossible to the disciples - alike mentally, as regards foundation

and progression, and spiritually. A Christ: God, King, and not

primarily 'the Son of Man,' would not have been the Christ of

Prophecy, nor the Christ of Humanity, nor the Christ of salvation, nor

yet the Christ of sympathy, help, and example. A Christ, God and King,

Who had suddenly risen like the fierce Eastern sun in midday

brightness, would have blinded by his dazzling rays (as it did Saul on

the way to Damascus), not risen 'with kindly light' to chase away

darkness and mists, and with genial growing warmth to woo life and

beauty into our barren world. And so, as 'it became Him,' for the

carrying out of the work, 'to make the Captain of Salvation perfect

through sufferings,'[1712]1712 so it was needful for them that He

should veil, even from their view who followed Him, the glory of His

Divinity and the power of His Kingship, till they had learned all that

the designation 'Son of Man' implied, as placed below 'Son of God' and

'King of Israel.'

This idea of the 'Son of Man,' although in its full and prophetic

meaning, seems to furnish the explanation of the miracle at the

marriage of Cana. We are now entering on the Ministry of 'The Son of

Man,' first and chiefly in its contrast to the preparatory call of the

Baptist, with the asceticism symbolic of it. We behold Him now as

freely mingling with humanity, sharing its joys and engagements,

entering into its family life, sanctioning and hallowing all by His

Presents and blessing; then as transforming the 'water of legal

purification' into the wine of the new dispensation, and, more than

this, the water of our felt want into the wine of His giving; and,

lastly, as having absolute power as the 'Son of Man,' being also 'the

Son of God' and 'the King of Israel.' Not that it is intended to

convey, that it was the primary purpose of the miracle of Cana to

exhibit the contrast between His own Ministry and the asceticism of

the Baptist, although greater could scarcely be imagined than between

the wilderness and the supply of wine at the marriage-feast. Rather,

since this essential difference really existed, it naturally appeared

at the very commencement of Christ's Ministry.[1713]1713 And so in

regard to the other meaning, also, which this history carries to our

minds.

At the same time it must be borne in mind, that marriage conveyed to

the Jews much higher thoughts than merely those of festivity and

merriment. The pious fasted before it, confessing their sins. It was

regarded almost as a Sacrament. Entrance into the married state was

thought to carry the forgiveness of sins.[1714]1714 [1715]1715 It

almost seems as if the relationship of Husband and Bride between

Jehovah and His people, so frequently insisted upon, not only in the

Bible, but in Rabbinic writings, had always been standing out in the

background. Thus the bridal pair on the marriage-day symbolised the

union of God with Israel.[1716]1716 Hence, though it may in part have

been national pride, which considered the birth of every Israelite as

almost outweighing the rest of the world, it scarcely wholly accounts

for the ardent insistance on marriage, from the first prayer at the

circumcision of a child, onwards through the many and varied

admonitions to the same effect. Similarly, it may have been the deep

feeling of brotherhood in Israel, leading to sympathy with all that

most touched the heart, which invested with such sacredness

participation in the gladness of marriage,[1717]1717 or the sadness of

burial. To use the bold allegory of the times, God Himself had spoken

the words of blessing over the cup at the union of our first parents,

when Michael and Gabriel acted as groomsmen,[1718]1718 and the Angelic

choir sang the wedding hymn.[1719]1719 So also He had shown the

example of visiting the sick (in the case of Abraham), comforting the

mourners (in that of Isaac), and burying the dead (in that of

Moses).[1720]1720 Every man who met it, was bound to rise and join the

marriage procession, or the funeral march. It was specially related of

King Agrippa that he had done this, and a curious Haggadah sets forth

that, when Jezebel was eaten of dogs, her hands and feet were

spared,[1721]1721 because, amidst all her wickedness, she had been

wont to greet every marriage-procession by clapping of hands, and to

accompany the mourners a certain distance on their way to the

burying.[1722]1722 And so we also read it, that, in the burying of the

widow's son of Nain, 'much people of the city was with her.'[1723]1723

In such circumstances, we would naturally expect that all connected

with marriage was planned with care, so as to bear the impress of

sanctity, and also to wear the aspect of gladness.[1724]1724 A special

formality, that of 'betrothal' (Erusin Qiddushin), preceded the actual

marriage by a period varying in length, but not exceeding a

twelvemonth in the case of a maiden.[1725]1725 At the betrothal, the

bridegroom, personally or by deputy, handed to the bride a piece of

money or a letter, it being expressly stated in each case that the man

thereby espoused the woman. From the moment of betrothal both parties

were regarded, and treated in law (as to inheritance, adultery, need

of formal divorce), as if they had been actually married, except as

regarded their living together. A legal document (the Shitré Erusin)

fixed the dowry which each brought, the mutual obligations, and all

other legal points.[1726]1726 Generally a festive meal closed the

ceremony of betrothal - but not in Galilee, where, habits being more

simple and pure, that which sometimes ended in sin was avoided.

On the evening of the actual marriage (Nissuin, Chathnuth), the bride

was led from her paternal home to that of her husband. First came the

merry sounds of music; then they who distributed among the people wine

and oil, and nuts among the children; next the bride, covered with the

bridal veil, her long hair flowing, surrounded by her companions, and

led by 'the friends of the bridegroom,' and 'the children of the

bride-chamber.' All around were in festive array; some carried

torches, or lamps on poles; those nearest had myrtle-branches and

chaplets of flowers. Every one rose to salute the procession, or join

it; and it was deemed almost a religious duty to break into praise of

the beauty, the modesty, or the virtues of the bride. Arrived at her

new home, she was led to her husband. Some such formula as 'Take her

according to the Law of Moses and of Israel,'[1727]1727 would be

spoken, and the bride and bridegroom crowned with garlands.[1728]1728

Then a formal legal instrument, called the Kethubah, was

signed,[1729]1729 which set forth that the bridegroom undertook to

work for her, to honour, keep, and care for her,[1730]1730 as is the

manner of the men of Israel; that he promised to give his maiden-wife

at least two hundred Zuz[1731]1731 (or more it might be),[1732]1732

and to increase her own dowry (which, in the case of a poor orphan,

the authorities supplied) by at least one half, and that he also

undertook to lay it out for her to the best advantage, all his own

possessions being guarantee for it.[1733]1733 Then, after the

prescribed washing of hands and benediction, the marriage-supper

began, the cup being filled, and the solemn prayer of bridal

benediction spoken over it. And so the feast lasted, it might be more

than one day, while each sought to contribute, sometimes

coarsely,[1734]1734 sometimes wisely, to the general

enjoyment,[1735]1735 till at last 'the friends of the bridegroom' led

the bridal pair to the Cheder and the Chuppah, or the bridal chamber

and bed. Here it ought to be specially noticed, as a striking evidence

that the writer of the fourth Gospel was not only a Hebrew, but

intimately acquainted with the varying customs prevailing in Galilee

and in Judæa, that at the marriage of Cana no 'friend of the

bridegroom,' or 'groomsman' (Shoshebheyna), is mentioned, while he is

referred to in St. John iii. 29, where the words are spoken outside

the boundaries of Galilee. For among the simpler and purer Galileans

the practice of having 'friends of the bridegroom,' which must so

often have led to gross impropriety,[1736]1736 did not

obtain,[1737]1737 though all the invited guests bore the general name

of 'children of the bridechamber' (bené Chuppah).[1738]1738

It was the marriage in Cana of Galilee. All connected with

the account of it is strictly Jewish - the feast, the guests, the

invitation of the stranger Rabbi, and its acceptance by Jesus. Any

Jewish Rabbi would have gone, but how differently from Him would he

have spoken and acted! Let us first think of the scenic details of the

narrative. Strangely, we are not able to fix with certainty the site

of the little town of Cana.[1739]1739 But if we adopt the most

probable indentification of it with the modern pleasant village of

Kefr Kenna,[1740]1740 a few miles north-east of Nazareth, on the road

to the Lake of Galilee, we picture it to ourselves as on the slope of

a hill, its houses rising terrace upon terrace, looking north and west

over a large plain (that of Battauf), and south upon a valley, beyond

which the hills rise that separate it from Mount Tabor and the plain

of Jezreel. As we approach the little town through that smiling

valley, we come upon a fountain of excellent water, around which the

village gardens and orchards clustered, that produced in great

abundance the best pomegranates in Palestine. Here was the home of

Nathanael-Bartholomew, and it seems not unlikely, that with him Jesus

had passed the time intervening between His arrival and 'the

marriage,' to which His Mother had come - the omission of all mention

of Joseph leading to the supposition, that he had died before that

time. The inquiry, what had brought Jesus to Cana, seems almost worse

than idle, remembering what had passed between Him and Nathanael, and

what was to happen in the first 'sign,' which was to manifest His

glory. It is needless to speculate, whether He had known beforehand of

'the marriage.' But we can understand the longing of the 'Israelite

indeed' to have Him under his roof, though we can only imagine what

the Heavenly Guest, would now teach him, and those others who

accompanied Him. Nor is there any difficulty in understanding, that on

His arrival He would hear of this 'marriage,' of the presence of His

Mother in what seems to have been the house of a friend if not a

relative; that Jesus and His disciples would be bidden to the feast;

and that He resolved not only to comply with the request, but to use

it as a leave-taking from home and friends - similar, though also far

other, than that of Elisha, when he entered on his mission. Yet it

seems deeply significant, that the 'true Israelite' should have been

honoured to be the first host of 'Israel's King.'

And truly a leave-taking it was for Christ from former friends and

home - a leave-taking also from His past life. If one part of the

narrative - that of His dealing with His Mother - has any special

meaning, it is that of leave-taking, or rather of leaving home and

family, just as with this first 'sign' He took leave of all the past.

When he had returned from His first Temple-visit, it had been in the

self-exinanition of voluntary humility: to 'be subject to His

Parents.' That period was now ended, and a new one had begun - that of

active consecration of the whole life to His 'Father's business.' And

what passed at the marriage-feast marks the beginning of this period.

We stand on the threshold, over which we pass from the old to the new

- to use a New Testament figure: to the marriage-supper of the Lamb.

Viewed in this light, what passed at the marriage in Cana seems like

taking up the thread, where it had been dropped at the first

manifestation of His Messianic consciousness. In the Temple at

Jerusalem He had said in answer to the misapprehensive question of His

Mother: 'Wist ye not that I must be about My Father's business?' and

now when about to take in hand that 'business,' He tells her so again,

and decisively, in reply to her misapprehensive suggestion. It is a

truth which we must ever learn, and yet are ever slow to learn in our

questionings and suggestings, alike as concerns His dealings with

ourselves and His rule of His Church, that the highest and only true

point of view is 'the Father's business,' not our personal

relationship to Christ. This thread, then, is taken up again at Cana

in the circle of friends, as immediately afterwards in His public

manifestation, in the purifying of the Temple. What He had first

uttered as a Child, on His first visit to the Temple, that He

manifested forth when a Man, entering on His active work - negatively,

in His reply to His Mother; positively, in the 'sign' He wrought. It

all meant: 'Wist ye not that I must be about My Father's business?'

And, positively and negatively, His first appearance in

Jerusalem[1741]1741 meant just the same. For, there is ever deepest

unity and harmony in that truest Life, the Life of Life.

As we pass through the court of that house in Cana, and reach the

covered gallery which opens on the various rooms - in this instance,

particularly, on the great reception room - all is festively adorned.

In the gallery the servants move about, and there the 'water-pots' are

ranged, 'after the manner of the Jews,' for purification - for the

washing not only of hands before and after eating, but also of the

vessels used.[1742]1742 How detailed Rabbinic ordinances were in these

respects, will be shown in another connection. 'Purification' was one

of the main points in Rabbinic sanctity. By far the largest and most

elaborate[1743]1743 of the six books into which the Mishnah is

divided, is exclusively devoted to this subject (the 'Seder Tohoroth,'

purifications). Not to speak of references in other parts of the

Talmud, we have two special tractates to instruct us about the

purification of 'Hands' (Yadayim) and of 'Vessels' (Kelim). The latter

is the most elaborate in all the Mishnah, and consists of not less

than thirty chapters. Their perusal proves, alike the strict accuracy

of the Evangelic narratives, and the justice of Christ's denunciations

of the unreality and gross hypocrisy of this elaborateness of

ordinances.[1744]1744 This the more so, when we recall that it was

actually vaunted as a special qualification for a seat in the

Sanhedrin, to be so acute and learned as to know how to prove clean

creeping things (which were declared unclean by the Law).[1745]1745

And the mass of the people would have regarded neglect of the

ordinances of purification as betokening either gross ignorance, or

daring impiety.

At any rate, such would not be exhibited on an occasion like the

present; and outside the reception-room, as St. John with graphic

minuteness of details relates, six of those stone pots, which we know

from Rabbinic writings,[1746]1746 were ranged. Here it may be well to

add, as against objectors, that it is impossible to state with

certainty the exact measure represented by the 'two or three firkins

apiece.' For, although we know that the term metretes (A.V. 'firkin')

was intended as an equivalent for the Hebrew 'bath,'[1747]1747 yet

three different kinds of 'bath' were at the time used in Palestine:

the common Palestinian or 'wilderness' bath, that of Jerusalem, and

that of Sepphoris.[1748]1748 The common Palestinian 'bath' was equal

to the Roman amphora, containing about 5 ¼ gallons, while the

Sepphoris 'bath' corresponded to the Attic metretes, and would contain

about 8 ½ gallons. In the former case, therefore, each of these pots

might have held from 10 ½ to 15 ¾ gallons; in the latter, from 17 to

25 ½. Reasoning on the general ground that the so-called Sepphoris

measurement was common in Galilee, the larger quantity seems the more

likely, though by no means certain. It is almost like trifling on the

threshold of such a history, and yet so many cavils have been raised,

that we must here remind ourselves, that neither the size, nor the

number of these vessels has anything extraordinary about it. For such

an occasion the family would produce or borrow the largest and

handsomest stone-vessels that could be procured; nor is it necessary

to suppose that they were filled to the brim; nor should we forget

that, from a Talmudic notice,[1749]1749 it seems to have been the

practiceto set apart some of these vessels exclusively for the use of

the bride and of the more distinguished guests, while the rest were

used by the general company.

Entering the spacious, lofty dining-room,[1750]1750 which would be

brilliantly lighted with lamps and candlesticks, the guests are

disposed round tables on couches, soft with cushions or covered with

tapestry, or seated on chairs. The bridal blessing has been spoken,

and the bridal cup emptied. The feast is proceeding - not the common

meal, which was generally taken about even, according to the Rabbinic

saying,[1751]1751 that he who postponed it beyond that hour was as if

he swallowed a stone - but a festive evening meal. If there had been

disposition to those exhibitions of, or incitement to, indecorous and

light merriment,[1752]1752 such as even the more earnest Rabbis

deprecated, surely the presence of Jesus would have restrained it. And

now there must have been a painful pause, or something like it, when

the Mother of Jesus whispered to Him that 'the wine failed.'[1753]1753

There could, perhaps, be the less cause for reticence on this point

towards her Son, not merely because this failure may have arisen from

the accession of guests in the persons of Jesus and his disciples, for

whom no provision had been originally made, but because the gift of

wine or oil on such occasions was regarded a meritorious work of

charity.[1754]1754

But all this still leaves the main incidents in the narrative

untouched. How are we to understand the implied request of the Mother

of Jesus? how His reply? and what was the meaning of the miracle? It

seems scarcely possible to imagine that, remembering the miraculous

circumstances connected with His Birth, and informed of what had

passed at Jordan, she now anticipated, and by her suggestion wished to

prompt, this as His Royal Messianic manifestation.[1755]1755 With

reverence be it said, such a beginning of Royalty and triumph would

have been paltry: rather that of the Jewish miracle-monger than that

of the Christ of the Gospels. Not so, if it was only 'a sign,'

pointing to something beyond itself. Again, such anticipations on the

part of Mary seem psychologically untrue - that is, untrue to her

history. She could not, indeed, have ever forgotten the circumstances

which had surrounded His Birth; but the deeper she 'kept all these

things in her heart,' the more mysterious would they seem, as time

passed in the dull round of the most simple and uneventful

country-life, and in the discharge of every-day duties, without even

the faintest appearance of anything beyond it. Only twelve years had

passed since His Birth, and yet they had not understood His saying in

the Temple! How much more difficult would it be after thirty years,

when the Child had grown into Youth and Manhood, with still the same

silence of Divine Voices around? It is difficult to believe in fierce

sunshine on the afternoon of a long, grey day. Although we have no

absolute certainty of it, we have the strongest internal reasons for

believing, that Jesus had done no miracles these thirty years in the

home at Nazareth,[1756]1756 but lived the life of quiet submission and

obedient waiting. That was the then part of His Work. It may, indeed,

have been that Mary knew of what had passed at Jordan; and that, when

she saw Him returning with His first disciples, who, assuredly, would

make no secret of their convictions - whatever these may have conveyed

to outsiders - she felt that a new period in His Life had opened. But

what was there in all this to suggest such a miracle? and if it had

been suggested, why not ask for it in express terms, if it was to be

the commencement, certainly in strangely incongruous circumstances, of

a Royal manifestation?

On the other hand, there was one thing which she had learned, and one

thing which she was to unlearn, after those thirty years of the

Nazareth-Life. What she had learned - what she must have learned - was

absolute confidence in Jesus. What she had to unlearn, was the

natural, yet entirely mistaken, impression which His meekness,

stillness, and long home-submission had wrought on her as to His

relationship to the family. It was, as we find from her after-history,

a very hard, very slow, and very painful thing to learn it;[1757]1757

yet very needful, not only for her own sake, but because it was a

lesson of absolute truth. And so when she told Him of the want that

had arisen, it was simply in absolute confidence in her Son, probably

without any conscious expectancy of a miracle on His part.[1758]1758

Yet not without a touch of maternal self-consciousness, almost pride,

that He, Whom she could trust to do anything that was needed, was her

Son, Whom she could solicit in the friendly family whose guests they

were - and if not for her sake, yet at her request. It was a true

earth-view to take of their relationship; only, an earth-view which

must now for ever cease: the outcome of His misunderstood meekness and

weakness, and which yet, strangely enough, the Romish Church puts in

the forefront as the most powerful plea for Jesus' acting. But the

fundamental mistake in what she attempted is just this, that she spake

as His Mother, and placed that maternal relationship in connection

with His Work. And therefore it was that as, on the first

misunderstanding in the Temple, He had said: 'Wist ye not that I must

be about my Father's business?' so now: 'Woman, what have I to do with

thee?' With that 'business' earthly relationship, however tender, had

no connection. With everything else it had, down to the utter

self-forgetfulness of that tenderest commendation of her to John, in

the bitterest agonies of the Cross; but not with this. No, not now,

nor ever henceforth, with this. As in His first manifestation in the

Temple, so in this the first manifestation of His glory, the finger

that pointed to 'His hour' was not, and could not be, that of an

earthly parent, but of His Father in Heaven.[1759]1759 There was, in

truth, a twofold relationship in that Life, of which none other but

the Christ could have preserved the harmony.

This is one main point - we had almost called it the negative one; the

other, and positive one, was the miracle itself. All else is but

accidental and circumstantial. No one who either knows the use of the

language,[1760]1760 or remembers that, when commending her to John on

the Cross, He used the same mode of expression,[1761]1761 will

imagine, that there was anything derogatory to her, or harsh on His

part, in addressing her as 'woman' rather than 'mother.' But the

language is to us significant of the teaching intended to be conveyed,

and as the beginning of this further teaching: 'Who is My mother? and

My brethren? And He stretched forth His hand toward His disciples, and

said, Behold My mother and My brethren!'[1762]1762

And Mary did not, and yet she did, understand Him, when she turned to

the servants with the direction, implicitly to follow His behests.

What happened is well known: how, in the excess of their zeal, they

filled the water-pots to the brim - an accidental circumstance, yet

useful, as much that seems accidental, to show that there could be

neither delusion nor collusion; how, probably in the drawing of it,

the water became best wine - 'the conscious water saw its God, and

blushed;' then the coarse proverbial joke of what was probably the

master of ceremonies and purveyor of the feast,[1763]1763 intended, of

course, not literally to apply to the present company, and yet in its

accidentalness an evidence of the reality of the miracle; after which

the narrative abruptly closes with a retrospective remark on the part

of him who relates it. What the bridegroom said; whether what had been

done became known to the guests, and, if so, what impression it

wrought; how long Jesus remained; what His Mother felt - of this and

much more that might be asked, Scripture, with that reverent reticence

which we so often mark, in contrast to our shallow talkativeness,

takes no further notice. And best that it should be so. St. John meant

to tell us, what the Synoptists, who begin their account with the

later Galilean ministry, have not recorded,[1764]1764 of the first of

His miracles as a 'sign,'[1765]1765 pointing to the deeper and higher

that was to be revealed, and of the first forth-manifesting of 'His

glory.'[1766]1766 That is all; and that object was attained. Witness

the calm, grateful retrospect upon that first day of miracles, summed

up in these simple but intensely conscious words: 'And His disciples

believed on Him.'

A sign it was, from whatever point we view its meaning, as previously

indicated. For, like the diamond that shines with many colours, it has

many meanings; none of them designed, in the coarse sense of the term,

but all real, because the outcome of a real Divine Life and history.

And a real miracle also, not only historically, but as viewed in its

many meanings; the beginning of all others, which in a sense are but

the unfolding of this first. A miracle it is, which cannot be

explained, but is only enhanced by the almost incredible platitudes to

which negative criticism has sunk in its commentation,[1767]1767 for

which there assuredly exists no legendary basis, either in Old

Testament history, or in contemporary Jewish expectation;[1768]1768

which cannot be sublimated into nineteenth-century idealism;[1769]1769

least of all can be conceived as an after-thought of His disciples,

invented by an Ephesian writer of the second century.[1770]1770 But

even the allegorical illustration of St. Augustine, who reminds us

that in the grape the water of rain is ever changed into wine, is

scarcely true, save as a bare illustration, and only lowers our view

of the miracle. For miracle it is,[1771]1771 and will ever remain;

not, indeed, magic,[1772]1772 nor arbitrary power, but power with a

moral purpose, and that the highest.[1773]1773 And we believe it,

because this 'sign' is the first of all those miracles in which the

Miracle of Miracles gave 'a sign,' and manifested forth His glory -

the glory of His Person, the glory of His Purpose, and the glory of

His Work.

CHAPTER V.

THE CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE - 'THE SIGN,' WHICH IS NOT A SIGN.

(St. John ii. 13-25.)

It has been said that Mary understood, and yet did not understand

Jesus. And of this there seems fresh evidence in the circumstance

that, immediately after the marriage of Cana, she and the 'brethren of

Jesus' went with Him, or followed Him, to Capernaum, which henceforth

became 'His own city,'[1774]1774 during His stay by the Lake of

Galilee. The question, whether He had first returned to Nazareth,

seems almost trifling. It may have been so, and it may be that His

brothers had joined Him there, while His 'sisters,' being married,

remained at Nazareth.[1775]1775 For the departure of the family from

Nazareth many reasons will, in the peculiar circumstances, suggest

themselves. And yet one feels, that their following Jesus and His

disciples to their new home had something to do with their

understanding, and yet not understanding, of Him, which had been

characteristic of Mary's silent withdrawal after the reply she had

received at the feast of Cana, and her significant direction to the

servants, implicitly to do what He bade them. Equally in character is

the willingness of Jesus to allow His family to join Him - not ashamed

of their humbleness, as a Jewish Messiah might have been, nor

impatient of their ignorance: tenderly near to them, in all that

concerned the humanness of His feelings; sublimely far from them, in

all connected with His Work and Mission.

It is almost a relief to turn from the long discussion (to which

reference has already been made): whether those who bore that

designation were His 'brothers' and 'sisters' in the real sense, or

the children of Joseph by an earlier marriage, or else His cousins -

and to leave it in the indefiniteness which rests upon it.[1776]1776

But the observant reader will probably mark, in connection with this

controversy, that it is, to say the least, strange that 'brothers' of

Jesus should, without further explanation, have been introduced in the

fourth Gospel, if it was an Ephesian production, if not a fiction of

spiritualistic tendency; strange also, that the fourth Gospel alone

should have recorded the removal to Capernaum of the 'mother and

brothers' of Jesus, in company with Him. But this by the way, and in

reference to recent controversies about the authorship of the fourth

Gospel.

If we could only feel quite sure - and not merely deem it most

probable - that the Tell Hûm of modern exploration marks the site of

the ancient Capernaum, Kephar Nachum, or Tanchumin (the latter,

perhaps, 'village of consolation'), with what solemn interest would we

wander over its ruins.[1777]1777 We know it from New Testament

history, and from the writings of Josephus.[1778]1778 A rancorous

notice and certain vile insinuations[1779]1779 of the

Rabbis,[1780]1780 connecting it with 'heresy,' presumably that of

Christianity, seem also to point to Kephar Nachum as the home of

Jesus, where so many of His miracles were done. At the time it could

have been of only recent origin, since its Synagogue had but lately

been reared, through the friendly liberality of that true and faithful

Centurion.[1781]1781 But already its importance was such, that it had

become the station of a garrison, and of one of the principal

custom-houses. Its soft, sweet air, by the glorious Lake of Galilee,

with snow-capped Hermon full in view in the North - from a distance,

like Mount Blanc over the Lake of Geneva;[1782]1782 the fertility of

the country - notably of the plain of Gennesaret close by; and the

merry babble, and fertilising proximity of a spring which, from its

teeming with fish like that of the Nile, was popularly regarded as

springing from the river of Egypt - this and more must have made

Capernaum one of the most delightful places in these 'Gardens of

Princes,' as the Rabbis interpreted the word 'Gennesaret,' by the

'cither-shaped lake' of that name.[1783]1783 The town lay quite up on

its north-western shore, only two miles from where the Jordan falls

into the lake. As we wander over that field of ruins, about half a

mile in length by a quarter in breadth, which in all probability mark

the site of ancient Capernaum, we can scarcely realise it, that the

desolateness all around has taken the place of the life and beauty of

eighteen centuries ago. Yet the scene is the same, though the breath

of judgement has long swept the freshness from its face. Here lies in

unruffled stillness, or wildly surges, lashed by sudden storms, the

deep blue lake, 600 or 700 feet below the level of the Mediterranean.

We can look up and down its extent, about twelve miles, or across it,

about six miles. Right over on the other side from where we stand -

somewhere there, is the place where Jesus miraculously fed the five

thousand. Over here came the little ship, its timbers still trembling,

and its sides and deck wet with the spray of that awful night of

storm, when He came to the weary rowers, and brought with Him calm. Up

that beach they drew the boat. Here, close by the shore, stood the

Synagogue, built of white limestone on dark basalt foundation. North

of it, up the gentle slopes, stretched the town. East and south is the

lake, in almost continuous succession of lovely small bays, of which

more than seventeen may be counted within six miles, and in one of

which nestled Capernaum. All its houses are gone, scarce one stone

left on the other: the good Centurion's house, that of Matthew the

publican,[1784]1784 that of Simon Peter,[1785]1785 the temporary home

which first sheltered the Master and His loved ones. All are

unrecognisable - a confused mass of ruins - save only that white

Synagogue in which He taught. From its ruins we can still measure its

dimensions, and trace its fallen pillars; nay, we discover over the

lintel of its entrance the device of a pot of manna, which may have

lent its form to His teaching there[1786]1786 - a device different

from that of the seven-branched candlestick, or that other most

significant one of the Paschal Lamb, which seem to have been so

frequent over the Synagogues in Galilee.[1787]1787

And this then, is Capernaum - the first and the chief home of Jesus,

when He had entered on His active work. But, on this occasion, He

'continued there not many days.' For, already, 'the Jews' Passover was

at hand,' and He must needs keep that feast in Jerusalem. If our

former computations are right - and, in the nature of things, it is

impossible to be absolutely certain about exact dates - and John began

his preaching in the autumn of the year 779 from the building of Rome,

or in 26 of our present reckoning, while Jesus was baptized in the

early winter following,[1788]1788 [1789]1789 then this Passover must

have taken place in the spring (about April) of the same

year.[1790]1790 The preparations for it had, indeed, commenced a month

before. Not to speak of the needful domestic arrangements for the

journey of pilgrims to Jerusalem, the whole land seemed in a state of

preparation. A month before the feast (on the 15th Adar) bridges and

roads were put in repair, and sepulchres whitened, to prevent

accidental pollution to the pilgrims. Then, some would select this out

of the three great annual feasts for the tithing of their flocks and

herds, which, in such case, had to be done two weeks before the

Passover; while others would fix on it as the time for going up to

Jerusalem before the feast 'to purify themselves'[1791]1791 - that

is, to undergo the prescribed purification in any case of Levitical

defilement. But what must have appealed to every one in the land was

the appearance of the 'money-changers' (Shulchanim), who opened their

stalls in every country-town on the 15th of Adar (just a month before

the feast). They were, no doubt, regularly accredited and duly

authorised. For, all Jews and proselytes - women, slaves, and minors

excepted - had to pay the annual Temple-tribute of half a shekel,

according to the 'sacred' standard, equal to a common Galilean shekel

(two denars), or about 1s. 2d. of our money. From this tax many of the

priests - to the chagrin of the Rabbis - claimed exemption, on the

ingenious plea that in Lev. vi. 23 (A.V.) every offering of a priest

was ordered to be burnt, and not eaten; while from the Temple-tribute

such offerings were paid for as the two wave loaves and the shewbread,

which were afterwards eaten by priests. Hence, it was argued, their

payment of Temple-tribute would have been incompatible with Lev. vi.

23!

But to return. This Temple-tribute had to be paid in exact

half-shekels of the Sanctuary, or ordinary Galilean shekels. When it

is remembered that, besides strictly Palestinian silver and especially

copper coin,[1792]1792 Persian, Tyrian, Syrian, Egyptian, Grecian, and

Roman money circulated in the country, it will be understood what work

these 'money-changers' must have had. From the 15th to the 25th Adar

they had stalls in every country-town. On the latter date, which must

therefore be considered as marking the first arrivals of festive

pilgrims in the city, the stalls in the country were closed, and the

money-changers henceforth sat within the precincts of the Temple. All

who refused to pay the Temple-tribute (except priests) were liable to

distraint of their goods. The 'money-changers' made a statutory fixed

charge of a Maah, or from 1½d. to 2d.[1793]1793 (or, according to

others, of half a maah) on every half-shekel. This was called qolbon.

But if a person tendered a Sela (a four-denar piece, in value two

half-shekels of the Sanctuary, or two Galilean shekels), he had to pay

double qolbon; one for his half-shekel of tribute-money, the other for

his change. Although not only priests, but all other non-obligatory

officers, and those who paid for their poorer brethren, were exempted

from the charge of qolbon, it must have brought in an immense revenue,

since not only many native Palestinians might come without the

statutory coin, but a vast number of foreign Jews presented themselves

on such occasions in the Temple. Indeed, if we compute the annual

Temple-tribute at about 75,000l., the bankers' profits may have

amounted to from 8,000l. to 9,000l., an immense sum in the

circumstances of the country.[1794]1794

But even this does not represent all the facts of the case. We have

already seen, that the 'money-changers' in the Temple gave change,

when larger amounts than were equivalent to the Temple-tribute were

proffered. It is a reasonable, nay, an almost necessary inference,

that many of the foreign Jews arriving in Jerusalem would take the

opportunity of changing at these tables their foreign money, and for

this, of course, fresh charges would be made. For, there was a great

deal to be bought within the Temple-area, needful for the feast (in

the way of sacrifices and their adjuncts), or for purification, and it

would be better to get the right money from the authorised changers,

than have disputes with the dealers. We can picture to ourselves the

scene around the table of an Eastern money-changer - the weighing of

the coins, deductions for loss of weight, arguing, disputing,

bargaining - and we can realise the terrible truthfulness of our

Lord's charge that they had made the Father's House a mart and place

of traffic. But even so, the business of the Temple money-changers

would not be exhausted. Through their hands would pass the immense

votive offerings of foreign Jews, or of proselytes, to the Temple;

indeed, they probably transacted all business matters connected with

the Sanctuary. It is difficult to realise the vast accumulation of

wealth in the Temple-treasury. But some idea of it may be formed from

the circumstance that, despite many previous spoliations, the value of

the gold and silver which Crassus[1795]1795 carried from the

Temple-treasury amounted to the enormous sum of about two and a half

millions sterling. Whether or not these Temple money-changers may have

transacted other banking business, given drafts, or cashed those from

correspondents, received and lent money at interest - all which was

common at the time - must remain undetermined.

Readers of the New Testament know, that the noisy and incongruous

business of an Eastern money-lender was not the only one carried on

within the sacred Temple-enclosure. It was a great accommodation, that

a person bringing a sacrifice might not only learn, but actually

obtain, in the Temple from its officials what was required for the

meat, and drink-offering. The prices were fixed by tariff every month,

and on payment of the stated amount the offerer received one of four

counterfoils, which respectively indicated, and, on handing it to the

proper official, procured the prescribed complement of his

sacrifice.[1796]1796 The Priests and Levites in charge of this made up

their accounts every evening, and these (though necessary)

transactions must have left a considerable margin of profit to the

treasury. This would soon lead to another kind of traffic. Offerers

might, of course, bring their sacrificial animals with them, and we

know that on the Mount of Olives there were four shops, specially for

the sale of pigeons and other things requisite for sacrificial

purposes.[1797]1797 [1798]1798 But then, when an animal was brought,

it had to be examined as to its Levitical fitness by persons regularly

qualified and appointed. Disputes might here arise, due to the

ignorance of the purchaser, or the greed of the examiner. A regularly

qualified examiner was called mumcheh (one approved), and how much

labour was given to the acquisition of the requisite knowledge appears

from the circumstance, that a certain teacher is said to have spent

eighteen months with a farmer, to learn what faults in an animal were

temporary, and which permanent.[1799]1799 Now, as we are informed that

a certain mumcheh of firstlings had been authorised to charge for his

inspection from four to six Isar (1¼d. to about 2d.), according to the

animal inspected,[1800]1800 it is but reasonable to suppose that a

similar fee may have been exacted for examining the ordinary

sacrificial animals. But all trouble and difficulty would be avoided

by a regular market within the Temple-enclosure, where sacrificial

animals could be purchased, having presumably been duly inspected, and

all fees paid before being offered for sale.[1801]1801 It needs no

comment to show how utterly the Temple would be profaned by such

traffic, and to what scenes it might lead. From Jewish writings we

know, that most improper transactions were carried on, to the taking

undue advantage of the poor people who came to offer their sacrifices.

Thus we read,[1802]1802 that on one occasion the price of a couple of

pigeons was run up to the enormous figure of a gold denar (a Roman

gold denar, about 15s. 3d.), when, through the intervention of Simeon,

the grandson of the great Hillel, it was brought down before night to

a quarter of a silver denar, or about 2d. each. Since Simeon is

represented as introducing his resolve to this effect with the

adjuration, 'by the Temple,' it is not unfair to infer that these

prices had ruled within the sacred enclosure. It was probably not

merely controvesial zeal for the peculiar teaching of his master

Shammai, but a motive similar to that of Simeon, which on another

occasion induced Baba ben Buta (well known as giving Herod the advice

of rebuilding the Temple), when he found the Temple-court empty of

sacrificial animals, through the greed of those who had 'thus

desolated the House of God,' to bring in no less than three thousand

sheep, so that the people might offer sacrifices.[1803]1803 [1804]1804

This leads up to another question, most important in this connection.

The whole of this traffic - money-changing, selling of doves, and

market for sheep and oxen - was in itself, and from its attendant

circumstances, a terrible desecration; it was also liable to gross

abuses. But was there about the time of Christ anything to make it

specially obnoxious and unpopular? The priesthood must always have

derived considerable profit from it - of course, not the ordinary

priests, who came up in their 'orders' to minister in the Temple, but

the permanent priestly officials, the resident leaders of the

priesthood, and especially the High-Priestly family. This opens up a

most interesting inquiry, closely connected, as we shall show, with

Christ's visit to the Temple at this Passover. But the materials here

at our command are so disjointed, that, in attempting to put them

together, we can only suggest what seems most probable, not state what

is absolutely certain. What became of the profits of the

money-changers, and who were the real owners of the Temple-market?

To the first of these questions the Jerusalem Talmud[1805]1805 gives

no less than five different answers, showing that there was no fixed

rule as to the employment of these profits, or, at least, that it was

no longer known at that time. Although four of these answers point to

their use for the public service, yet that which seems most likely

assigns the whole profits to the money-changers themselves. But in

that case it can scarcely be doubted, that they had to pay a

considerable rental or percentage to the leading Temple-officials. The

profits from the sale of meat- and drink-offerings went to the

Temple-treasury. But it can hardly be believed, that such was the case

in regard to the Temple-market. On the other hand, there can be little

doubt, that this market was what in Rabbinic writings is styled 'the

Bazaars of the sons of Annas' (Chanuyoth beney Chanan), the sons of

that High-Priest Annas, who is so infamous in New Testament history.

When we read that the Sanhedrin, forty years before the destruction of

Jerusalem, transferred its meeting-place from 'the Hall of Hewn

Stones' (on the south side of the Court of the Priest, and therefore

partly within the Sanctuary itself) to 'the Bazaars,' and then

afterwards to the City,[1806]1806 the inference is plain, that these

Bazaars were those of the sons of Annas the High-Priest, and that they

occupied part of the Temple-court; in short, that the Temple-market

and the Bazaars of the sons of Annas are identical.

If this inference, which is in accordance with received Jewish

opinion, be admitted, we gain much light as regards the purification

of the Temple by Jesus, and the words which He spake on that occasion.

For, our next position is that, from the unrighteousness of the

traffic carried on in these Bazaars, and the greed of their owners,

the 'Temple-market' was at the time most unpopular. This appears, not

only from the conduct and words of the patriarch Simeon and of Baba

ben Buta (as above quoted), but from the fact that popular

indignation, three years before the destruction of Jerusalem, swept

away the Bazaars of the family of Annas,[1807]1807 and this, as

expressly stated, on account of the sinful greed which characterised

their dealings. And if any doubt should still linger in the mind, it

would surely be removed by our Lord's open denunciation of the

Temple-market as 'a den of robbers.'[1808]1808 Of the avarice and

corruption of this High-Priestly family, alike Josephus and the Rabbis

give a most terrible picture. Josephus describes Annas (or Ananus),

the son of the Annas of the New Testament, as 'a great hoarder up of

money,' very rich, and as despoiling by open violence the common

priests of their official revenues.[1809]1809 The Talmud also records

the curse which a distinguished Rabbi of Jerusalem (Abba Shaul)

pronounced upon the High-Priestly families (including that of Annas),

who were 'themselves High-Priests, their sons treasurers (Gizbarin),

their sons-in-law assistant-treasurers (Ammarkalin), while their

servants beat the people with sticks.'[1810]1810 What a comment this

passage offers on the bearing of Jesus, as He made a scourge to drive

out the very servants who 'beat the people with sticks,' and upset

their unholy traffic! It were easy to add from Rabbinic sources

repulsive details of their luxuriousness, wastefulness, gluttony, and

general dissoluteness. No wonder that, in the figurative language of

the Talmud, the Temple is represented as crying out against them: 'Go

hence, ye sons of Eli, ye defile the Temple of Jehovah!'[1811]1811

These painful notices of the state of matters at that time help us

better to understand what Christ did, and who they were that opposed

His doing.

These Temple-Bazaars, the property, and one of the principal sources

of income, of the family of Annas, were the scene of the purification

of the Temple by Jesus; and in the private locale attached to these

very Bazaars, where the Sanhedrin held its meetings at the time, the

final condemnation of Jesus may have been planned, if not actually

pronounced. All this has its deep significance. But we can now also

understand why the Temple officials, to whom these Bazaars belonged,

only challenged the authority of Christ in thus purging the Temple.

The unpopularity of the whole traffic, if not their consciences,

prevented their proceeding to actual violence. Lastly, we can also

better perceive the significance, alike of Christ's action, and of His

reply to their challenge, spoken as it was close to the spot where He

was so soon to be condemned by them. Nor do we any longer wonder that

no resistance was offered by the people to the action of Jesus, and

that even the remonstrances of the priests were not direct, but in the

form of a perplexing question.

For it is in the direction just indicated, and in no other, that

objections have been raised to the narrative of Christ's first public

act in Jerusalem: the purgation of the Temple. Commentators have

sufficiently pointed out the differences between this and the

purgation of the Temple at the close of His Ministry.[1812]1812

[1813]1813 Indeed, on comparison, these are so obvious, that every

reader can mark them. Nor does it seem difficult to understand, rather

does it seem not only fitting, but almost logically necessary, that,

if any such event had occurred, it should have taken place both at the

beginning and at the close of His public ministry in the Temple. Nor

yet is there anything either 'abrupt' or 'tactless' in such a

commencement of his Ministry. It is not only profane, but

unhistorical, to look for calculation and policy in the Life of Jesus.

Had there been such, He would not have died on the Cross. And 'abrupt'

it certainly was not. Jesus took up the thread where he had dropped it

on His first recorded appearance in the Temple, when he had spoken His

wonder, that those who knew Him should have been ignorant, that He

must be about His Father's business. He was now about His Father's

business, and, as we may so say, in the most elementary manner. To put

an end to this desecration of His Father's House, which, by a

nefarious traffic, had been made a place of mart, nay, 'a den of

robbers,' was, what all who knew Mis Mission must have felt, a most

suitable and almost necessary beginning of His Messianic Work.

And many of those present must have known Jesus. The zeal of His early

disciples, who, on their first recognition of Him, proclaimed the

new-found Messiah, could not have given place to absolute silence. The

many Galilean pilgrims in the Temple could not but have spread the

tidings, and the report must soon have passed from one to the other in

the Temple-courts, as He first entered their sacred enclosure. They

would follow Him, and watch what He did. Nor were they disappointed.

He inaugurated His Mission by fulfilling the prediction concerning Him

Who was to be Israel's refiner and purifier (Mal. iii. 1-3). Scarce

had He entered the Temple-porch, and trod the Court of the Gentiles,

than He drove thence what profanely defiled it.[1814]1814 There was

not a hand lifted, not a word spoken to arrest Him, as He made the

scourage of small cords (even this not without significance) and with

it drove out of the Temple both the sheep and the oxen; not a word

said, nor a hand raised, as He poured into their receptacles the

changers' money, and overthrew their tables.[1815]1815 His Presence

awed them, His words awakened even their consciences; they knew, only

too well, how true His denunciations were. And behind Him was gathered

the wondering multitude, that could not but sympathise with such bold,

right royal, and Messianic vindication of Temple sanctity from the

nefarious traffic of a hated, corrupt, and avaricious Priesthood. It

was a scene worth witnessing by any true Israelite, a protest and an

act which, even among a less emotional people, would have gained Him

respect, approbation, and admiration, and which, at any rate, secured

his safety.[1816]1816

For when 'the Jews,' by which here, as in so many other places, we are

to understand the rulers of the people - in this instance, the Temple

officials - did gather courage to come forward, they ventured not to

lay hands on Him. It was not yet the time for it. In presence of that

multitude they would not then have dared it, even if policy had not

dictated quietness within the Temple-enclosure, when the Roman

garrison so close by, in Fort Antonia, kept jealous watch for the

first appearance of a tumult.[1817]1817 Still more strangely, they did

not even reprove Him for what He had done, as if it had been wrong or

improper. With infinite cunning, as appealing to the multitude, they

only asked for 'a sign' which would warrant such assumption of

authority. But this question of challenge marked two things: the

essential opposition between the Jewish authorities and Jesus, and the

manner in which they would carry on the contest, which was henceforth

to be waged between Him and the rulers of the people. That first

action of Jesus determined their mutual positions; and with and in

that first conflict its end was already involved. The action of Jesus

as against the rulers must develop into a life-opposition; their first

step against Him must lead on to the last in His condemnation to the

Cross.

And Jesus then and there knew it all, foresaw, or rather saw it all.

His answer told it. It was - as all His teaching to those who seeing

do not see, and hearing do not hear, whose understanding is darkened

and heart hardened - in parabolic language, which only the after-event

would make clear.[1818]1818 As for 'the sign,' then and ever again

sought by an 'evil and adulterous generation' - evil in their thoughts

and ways and adulterous to the God of Israel - He had then, as

afterwards,[1819]1819 only one 'sign' to give: 'Destroy this Temple,

and in three days I will raise it up.' Thus He met their challenge for

a sign by the challenge of a sign: Crucify Him, and He would rise

again; let them suppress the Christ, He would triumph.[1820]1820 A

sign this which they understood not, but misunderstood, and by making

it the ground of their false charge in His final trial, themselves

unwittingly fulfilled.

And yet to all time this is the sign, and the only sign, which the

Christ has given, which He still gives to every 'evil and adulterous

generation,' to all sin-lovers and God-forsakers. They will destroy,

so far as their power reaches, the Christ, crucify Him, give His words

the lie, suppress, sweep away Christianity - and they shall not

succeed: He shall triumph. As on that first Easter-day, so now and

ever in history, He raises up the Temple, which they break down. This

is the 'sign,' the evidence, the only 'sign,' which the Christ gives

to His enemies; a sign which, as an historical fact, has been patent

to all men, and seen by them; which might have been evidence, but

being of the nature of miracle, not explicable by natural agencies,

they have misunderstood, viewing 'the Temple' merely as a building, of

which they fully know the architecture, manner, and time of

construction,[1821]1821 but of whose spiritual character and

upbuilding they have no knowledge nor thought. And thus, as to that

generation, so to all which have followed, this is stil the 'sign,' if

they understand it - the only sign, the Great Miracle, which, as they

only calculate from the visible and to them ascertained, these

'despiser behold, and wonder, and perish,' for He worketh 'a work in

their days, a work which they shall in no wise believe.'[1822]1822

CHAPTER VI.

THE TEACHER COME FROM GOD AND THE TEACHER FROM JERUSALEM - JESUS

AND

NICODEMUS

(St. John iii. 1-21.)

But there were those who beheld, and heard His words, and did in some

measure understand them. Even before Jesus had spoken to the

Temple-officials, His disciples, as silently they watched Him, saw an

old Scripture-saying kindled into light by the halo of His glory. It

was that of the suffering, self-forgetful, God-dedicated Servant of

Jehovah, as His figure stood out against the Old Testament sky,

realising in a hostile world only this, as the deepest element of His

being and calling: entire inward and outward consecration to God, a

burnt-offering, such as Isaac would have been. Within their minds

sprang up unbidden, as when the light of the Urim and Thummim fell on

the letter graven on the precious stones of the High-Priest's

breastplate, those words of old: 'The zeal of Thine house eateth me

up.'[1823]1823 Thus, even in those days of their early learning, Jesus

purging the Temple in view of a hostile rulership was the full

realisation of that picture, which must be prophetic, since no mere

man ever bore those lineaments: that of the ideal Nazarite, whom the

zeal of God's house was consuming. And then long afterwards, after His

Passion and Death, after those dark days of loneliness and doubt,

after the misty dawn of the first recognition, this word, which He had

spoken to the rulers at the first, came to them, with all the

convincing power of prediction fulfilled by fact, as an assured

conviction, which in its strong grasp held not only the past, but the

present, because the present is ever the fulfilment of the past: 'When

therefore He was risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He

had said this unto them; and they believed the Scripture, and the word

which Jesus had said.'

Again, as we think of the meaning of His refusing 'a sign' to the

rulers of Israel - or rather think of the only 'sign' which He did

give them - we see nothing incompatible with it in the fact that, at

the same feast, He did many 'signs'[1824]1824 in sight of the people.

For it was only the rulers who had entered on that conflict, of which,

from the character and aims of the two parties engaged, the beginning

involved the terrible end as its logical sequence. In presence of such

a foe only one 'sign' could be given: that of reading their inmost

hearts, and in them their real motives and final action, and again of

setting forth His own final triumph - a predictive description, a 'no

sign' that was, and is, a sign to all time. But neither challenge nor

hostile demand for a sign had been addressed to Him by the people.

Indeed even at the last, when incited by their rulers, and blindly

following them, 'they knew not what they did.' And it was to them that

Jesus now, on the morning of His Work, spoke by 'signs.'

The Feast of the Passover commenced on the 15th Nisan, dating it, of

course, from the preceding evening. But before that - before the

slaying of the Paschal Lamb, on the afternoon of the 14th Nisan - the

visitor to the Temple would mark something peculiar.[1825]1825 On the

evening of the 13th Nisan, with which the 14th, or 'preparation-day,'

commenced, the head of each household would, with lighted candle and

in solemn silence, search out all leaven in his house, prefacing his

search with solemn thanksgiving and appeal to God, and closing it by

an equally solemn declaration that he had accomplished it, so far as

within his knowledge, and disavowing responsibility for what lay

beyond it. And as the worshippers went to the Temple, they would see

prominently exposed, on a bench in one of the porches, two desecrated

cakes of some thank offering, indicating that it was still lawful to

eat of that which was leavened. At ten, or at latest eleven o'clock,

one of those cakes was removed, and then they knew that it was no

longer lawful to eat of it. At twelve o'clock the second cake was

removed, and this was the signal for solemnly burning all the leaven

that had been gathered. Was it on the eve of the 14th, when each head

of a house sought for and put aside the leaven, or else as the people

watched these two cakes, and then the removal of the last of them,

which marked that all leaven was to be 'purged out,' that Jesus, in

real fulfilment of its national meaning, 'cleansed' the Temple of its

leaven?

We can only suggest the question. But the 'cleansing of the Temple'

undoubtedly preceded the actual festive Paschal week.[1826]1826 To

those who were in Jerusalem it was a week such as had never been

before, a week when 'they saw the signs which He did,' and when,

stirred by a strange impulse, 'they believed in His Name' as the

Messiah. 'A milk-faith,' as Luther pithily calls it, which fed on, and

required for its sustenance, 'signs.' And like a vision it passed with

the thing seen. Not a faith to which the sign was only the fingerpost,

but a faith of which the sign, not the thing signified, was the

substance; a faith which dazzled the mental sight, but reached not

down to the heart. And Jesus, Who with heart-searching glance saw what

was in man, Who needed not any to tell Him, but with immediateness

knew all, did not commit Himself to them. They were not like His first

Galilean disciples, true of heart and in heart. The Messiah Whom these

found, and He Whom those saw, met different conceptions. The faith of

the Jerusalem sign-seers would not have compassed what the Galileans

experienced; it would not have understood nor endured, had He

committed Himself to them. And yet He did, in wondrous love,

condescend and speak to them in the only language they could

understand, in that of 'signs.' Nor was it all in vain.

Unrecorded as these miracles are - because the words they spoke were

not recorded on many hearts - it was not only here and there, by this

or that miracle, that their power was felt. Their grand general effect

was, to make the more spiritually minded and thoughtful feel that

Jesus was indeed 'a teacher come from God.' In thinking of the

miracles of Jesus, and generally of the miraculous in the New

Testament, we are too apt to overlook the principal consideration in

the matter. We regard it from our present circumstances, not from

those of the Jews and people of that time; we judge it from our

standpoint, not from theirs. And yet the main gist of the matter lies

here. We would not expect to be convinced of the truth of religion,

nor converted to it, by outward miracles; we would not expect them at

all. Not but that, if a notable miracle really did occur, its

impression and effect would be overwhelming; although, unless a

miracle submitted itself to the strictest scientific tests, when in

the nature of things it would cease to be a miracle, it would scarcely

find general credence. Hence, truth to say, the miraculous in the New

Testament constitutes to modern thought not its strong, but its weak

point; not its convincing evidence, but its point of attack and

difficulty. Accordingly, treating of, or contemplating the miracles of

the New Testament, it is always their moral, not their natural (or

supranatural), aspect which has its chief influence upon us. But what

is this but to say that ours is modern, not ancient thought, and that

the evidential power of Christ's miracles has given place to the age

and dispensation of the Holy Ghost? With us the process is the reverse

of what it was with them of old. They approached the moral and

spiritual through the miraculous; we the miraculous through the moral

and spiritual. His Presence, that one grand Presence is, indeed, ever

the same. But God always adapts His teaching to our learning; else it

were not teaching at all, least of all Divine teaching. Only what

carries it now to us is not the same as what carried it to them of

old: it is no more the fingerpost of 'signs,' but the finger of the

Spirit. To them the miraculous was the expected - that miraculous

which to us also is so truly and Divinely miraculous, just because it

applies to all time, since it carries to us the moral, as to them the

physical, aspect of the miracle; in each case, Divine reality Divinely

conveyed. It may therefore safely be asserted, that to the men of that

time no teaching of the new faith would have been real without the

evidence of miracles.

In those days, when the idea of the miraculous was, so to speak, fluid

- passing from the natural into the supernatural - and men regarded

all that was above their view-point of nature as supernatural, the

idea of the miraculous would, by its constant recurrence, always and

prominently suggest itself. Other teachers also, among the Jews at

least, claimed the power of doing miracles, and were popularly

credited with them. But what an obvious contrast between theirs and

the 'signs' which Jesus did! In thinking of this, it is necessary to

remember, that the Talmud and the New Testament alike embody teaching

Jewish in its form, and addressed to Jews, and - at least so far as

regards the subject of miracles - at periods not far apart, and

brought still nearer by the singular theological conservatism of the

people. If, with this in our minds, we recall some of the absurd

Rabbinic pretensions to miracles - such as the creation of a calf by

two Rabbis every Sabbath eve for their Sabbath meal,[1827]1827 or the

repulsive, and in part blasphemous, account of a series of prodigies

in testimony of the subleties of some great Rabbi[1828]1828 - we are

almost overwhelmed by the evidential force of the contrast between

them and the 'signs' which Jesus did. We seem to be in an entirely new

world, and we can understand the conclusion at which every earnest and

thoughtful mind must have arrived in witnessing them, that He was,

indeed, 'a Teacher from God.'

Such an observer was Nicodemus (Naqdimon),[1829]1829 one of the

Pharisees and a member of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin. And, as we gather

from his mode of expression,[1830]1830 not he only, but others with

him. From the Gospel-history we know him to have been cautious by

nature and education, and timid of character; yet, as in other cases,

it was the greatest offence to his Jewish thinking, the Cross, which

at last brought him to the light of decision, and the vigour of bold

confession.[1831]1831 And this in itself would show the real character

of his inquiry, and the effect of what Jesus had first taught him. It

is, at any rate, althogether rash to speak of the manner of his first

approach to Christ as most commentators have done. We can scarcely

realise the difficulties which he had to overcome. It must have been a

mighty power of conviction, to break down prejudice so far as to lead

this old Sanhedrist to acknowledge a Galilean, untrained in the

Schools, as a Teacher come from God, and to repair to Him for

direction on, perhaps, the most delicate and important point in Jewish

theology. But, even so, we cannot wonder that he should have wished to

shroud his first visit in the utmost possible secrecy. It was a most

compromising step for a Sanhedrist to take. With that first bold

purgation of the Temple a deadly feud between Jesus and the Jewish

authorities had begun, of which the sequel could not be doubtful. It

was involved in that first encounter in the Temple, and it needed not

the experience and wisdom of an aged Sanhedrist to forecast the end.

Nevertheless, Nicodemus came. If this is evidence of his intense

earnestness, so is the bearing of Jesus of His Divine Character, and

of the truth of the narrative. As he was not depressed by the

resistance of the authorities, nor by the 'milk-faith' of the

multitude, so He was not elated by the possibility of making such a

convert as a member of the great Sanhedrin. There is no excitement, no

undue deference, nor eager politeness; no compromise, nor attempted

persuasiveness; not even accommodation. Nor, on the other hand, is

there assumed superiority, irony, or dogmatism. There is not even a

reference to the miracles, the evidential power of which had wrought

in His visitor the initial conviction, that He was a Teacher come from

God. All is calm, earnest, dignified - if we may reverently say it -

as became the God-Man in the humiliation of His personal teaching. To

say that it is all un-Jewish were a mere truism: it is Divine. No

fabricated narrative would have invented such a scene, nor so

represented the actors in it.[1832]1832

Dangerous as it may be to indulge the imagination, we can almost

picture the scene. The report of what passed reads, more than almost

any other in the Gospels, like notes taken at the time by one who was

present. We can almost put it again into the form of brief notes, by

heading what each said in this manner, Nicodemus: - or, Jesus:. They

are only the outlines of the conversation, given, in each case, the

really important gist, and leaving abrupt gaps between, as would be

the manner in such notes. Yet quite sufficient to tell us all that is

important for us to know. We can scarcely doubt that it was the

narrator, John, who was the witness that took the notes. His own

reflections upon it, or rather his afterlook upon it, in the light of

later facts, and under the teaching of the Holy Ghost, is described in

the verses with which the writer follows his account of what had

passed between Jesus and Nicodemus (St. John iii. 16-21). In the same

manner he winds up with similar reflections (ib. vv. 31-36) the

reported conversation between the Baptist and his disciples. In

neither case are the verses to which we refer, part of what either

Jesus or John said at the time, but what, in view of it, John says in

name of, and to the Church of the New Testament.[1833]1833

If from St. John xix. 27 we might infer that St. John had 'a home' in

Jerusalem itself - which, considering the simplicity of living at the

time, and the cost of houses, would not necessarily imply that he was

rich - the scene about to be described would have taken place under

the roof of him who has given us its record. In any case, the

circumstances of life at the time are so well known, that we have no

difficulty in realising the surroundings. It was night - one of the

nights in that Easter week so full of marvels. Perhaps we may be

allowed to suppose that, as so often in analogous circumstances, the

spring-wind, sweeping up the narrow streets of the City, had suggested

the comparison,[1834]1834 [1835]1835 which was so full of deepest

teaching of Nicodemus. Up in the simply furnished Aliyah - the

guest-chamber on the roof, the lamp was still burning, and the

Heavenly Guest still busy with thought and words. There was no need

for Nicodemus to pass through the house, for an outside stair led to

the upper room. It was night, when Jewish superstition would keep men

at home; a wild, gusty spring night, when loiterers would not be in

the streets; and no one would see him as at that hour he ascended the

outside steps that led up to the Aliyah. His errand was soon told: one

sentence, that which admitted the Divine Teachership of Jesus, implied

all the questions he could wish to ask. Nay, his very presence there

spoke them. Or, if otherwise, the answer of Jesus spoke them.

Throughout, Jesus never descended the standpoint of Nicodemus, but

rather sought to lift him to His own. It was all about 'the Kingdom of

God,'[1836]1836 so connected with that Teacher come from God, that

Nicodemus would inquire.

And yet, though Christ never descended to the standpoint of Nicodemus,

we must bear in mind what his views as a Jew would be, if we would

understand the interview. Jesus took him straight to whence alone that

'Kingdom' could be seen. 'Except a man be born from above,[1837]1837

he cannot see the Kingdom of God.' It has been thought by

commentators, that there is here an allusion to a Jewish mode of

expression in regard to proselytes, who were viewed as 'new-born.' But

in that case Nicodemus would have understood it, and answered

differently - or, rather, not expressed his utter inability to

understand it. It is indeed, true that a Gentile on becoming a

proselyte - though not, as has been suggested, an ordinary

penitent[1838]1838 - was likened to a child just born.[1839]1839 It is

also true, that persons in certain circumstances - the bridegroom on

his marriage, the Chief of the Academy on his promotion, the king on

his enthronement - were likened to those newly born.[1840]1840 The

expression, therefore, was not only common, but, so to speak, fluid;

only, both it and what it implied must be rightly understood. In the

first place, it was only a simile, and never meant to convey a real

regeneration ('as a child'). So far as proselytes were concerned, it

meant that, having entered into a new relation to God, they also

entered into new relationship to man, just as if they had at that

moment been newly born. All the old relations had ceased - a man's

father, brother, mother, sister were no longer his nearest of kin: he

was a new and another man. Then, secondly,[1841]1841 it implied a new

state, when all a man's past was past, and his sins forgiven him as

belonging to that past. It will now be perceived, how impossible it

was for Nicodemus to understand the teaching of Jesus, and yet how

all-important to him was that teaching. For, even if he could have

imagined that Jesus pointed to repentance, as that which would give

him the figurative standing of 'born from above,' or even 'born anew,'

it would not have helped him. For, first, this second birth was only a

simile. Secondly, according to the Jewish view, this second birth was

the consequence of having taken upon oneself 'the Kingdom;' not, as

Jesus put it, the cause and condition of it. The proselyte had taken

upon himself 'the Kingdom,' and therefore he was 'born' anew, while

Jesus put it that he must be born again in order to see the Kingdom of

God. Lastly, it was 'a birth from above' to which reference was made.

Judaism could understand a new relationship towards God and man, and

even the forgiveness of sins. But it had no conception of a moral

renovation, a spiritual birth, as the initial condition for

reformation, far less as that for seeing the Kingdom of God. And it

was because it had no idea of such 'birth from above,' of its reality

or even possibility, that Judaism could not be the Kingdom of God.

Or, to take another view of it, for Divine truth is many-sided -

perhaps some would say, to make 'Western' application of what was

first spoken to the Jew - in one respect Nicodemus and Jesus had

started from the same premiss: The Kingdom of God. But how different

were their conceptions of what constituted that Kingdom, and of what

was its door of entrance! What Nicodemus had seen of Jesus had not

only shaken the confidence which his former views on these subjects

had engendered in him, but opened dim possibilities, the very

suggestion of which filled him with uneasiness as to the past, and

vague hopes as to the future. And so it ever is with us also, when,

like Nicodemus, we first arrive at the conviction that Jesus is the

Teacher come from God. What He teaches is so entirely different from

what Nicodemus, or any of us could, from any other standpoint than

that of Jesus, have learned or known concerning the Kingdom and

entrance into it. The admission, however reached, of the Divine

Mission of this Teacher, implies, unspoken, the grand question about

the Kingdom. It is the opening of the door through which the Grand

Presence will enter in. To such a man, as to us in like unspoken

questioning, Jesus ever has but one thing to say: 'Except a man be

born from above, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.' The Kingdom is

other, the entrance to it is other, than you know or think. That which

is of the flesh is flesh. Man may rise to high possibilities - mental,

even moral: self-development, self-improvement, self-restraint,

submission to a grand idea or a higher law, refined moral egotism,

aesthetic even moral altruism. But to see the Kingdom of God: to

understand what means the absolute rule of God, the one high calling

of our humanity, by which a man becomes a child of God - to perceive

this, not as an improvement upon our present state, but as the

submission of heart, mind, and life to Him as our Divine King, an

existence which is, and which means, proclaiming unto the world the

Kingship of God: this can only be learned from Christ, and needs even

for its perception a kinship of spirit - for that which is born of the

Spirit is spirit. To see it, needs the birth from above; to enter it,

the double baptismal birth of what John's Baptism had meant, and of

what Christ's Baptism was.

Accordingly, all this sounded quite strange and unintelligible to

Nicodemus. He could understand how a man might become other, and so

ultimately be other; but how a man could first be other in order to

become other - more than that, needed to be 'born from above,' in

order to 'see the Kingdom of God' - passed alike his experience and

his Jewish learning. Only one possibility of being occurred to him:

that given him in his natural disposition, or as a Jew would have put

it, in his original innocency when he first entered the world. And

this - so to express ourselves - he thought aloud.[1842]1842 But there

was another world of being than that of which Nicodemus thought. That

world was the 'Kingdom of God' in its essential contrariety to the

Kingdom of this world, whether in the general sense of that

expression, or even in the special Judaistic sense attaching to the

'Kingdom' of the Messiah. There was only one gate by which a man could

pass into that Kingdom of God - for that which was of the flesh could

ever be only fleshly. Here a man might strive, as did the Jews, by

outward conformity to become, but he would never attain to being. But

that 'Kingdom' was spiritual, and here a man must be in order to

become. How was he to attain that new being? The Baptist had pointed

it out in its negative aspect of repentance and putting away the old

by his Baptism of water; and as regarded its positive aspect he had

pointed to Him Who was to baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire.

This was the gate of being through which a man must enter into the

Kingdom, which was of the Messiah, because it was of God and the

Messiah was of God, and in that sense 'the Teacher come from God' -

that is, being sent of God, He taught of God by bringing to God. This

but a few who had gone to the Baptist had perceived, or indeed could

perceive, because the Baptist could in his Baptism only convey the

negative, not the positive, aspect of it. And it needed that positive

aspect - the being born from above - in order to see the Kingdom of

God. But as to the mystery of this being in order to become - hark!

did he hear the sound of that wind as it swept past the Aliyah? He

heard its voice; but he neither knew whence it came, nor whither it

went. So was every one that was born of the Spirit. You heard the

voice of the Spirit Who originated the new being, but the origination

of that new being, or its further development into all that it might

and would become, lay beyond man's observation.

Nicodemus now understood in some measure what entrance into the

Kingdom meant; but its how seemed only involved in greater mystery.

That it was such a mystery, unthought and unimagined in Jewish

theology, was a terribly sad manifestation of what the teaching in

Israel was. Yet it had all been told them, as of personal knowledge,

by the Baptist and by Jesus; nay, if they could only have received it,

by the whole Old Testament. He wanted to know the how of these things

before he believed them. He believed them not, though they passed on

earth, because he knew not their how. How then could he believe that

how, of which the agency was unseen and in heaven? To that spring of

being no one could ascend but He that had come down from

heaven,[1843]1843 and Who, to bring to us that spring of being, had

appeared as 'the Son of Man,' the Ideal Man, the embodiment of the

Kingdom of Heaven, and thus the only true Teacher come from God. Or

did Nicodemus think of another Teacher - hitherto their only Teacher,

Moses - whom Jewish tradition generally believed to have ascended into

the very heavens, in order to bring the teaching unto them?[1844]1844

Let the history of Moses, then, teach them! They thought they

understood his teaching, but there was one symbol in his history

before which tradition literally stood dumb. They had heard what Moses

had taught them; they had seen 'the earthly things' of God in the

Manna which had rained from heaven, and, in view and hearing of it

all, they had not believed, but murmured and rebelled. Then came the

judgment of the fiery serpents, and, in answer to repentant prayer,

the symbol of new being, a life restored from death, as they looked on

their no longer living but dead death lifted up before them. A symbol

this, showing forth two elements: negatively, the putting away of the

past in their dead death (the serpent no longer living, but a brazen

serpent); and positively, in their look of faith and hope. Before this

symbol, as has been said, tradition has stood dumb. It could only

suggest one meaning, and draw from it one lesson. Both these were

true, and yet both insufficient. The meaning which tradition attached

to it was, that Israel lifted up their eyes, not merely to the

serpent, but rather to their Father in heaven, and had regard to His

mercy. This,[1845]1845 as St. John afterwards shows (ver. 16), was a

true interpretation; but it left wholly out of sight the Antitype, in

gazing on Whom our hearts are uplifted to the love of God, Who gave

His only-begotten Son, and we learn to know and love the Father in His

Son. And the lesson which tradition drew from it was, that this symbol

taught, the dead would live again; for, as it is argued,[1846]1846

'behold, if God made it that, through the similitude of the serpent

which brought death, the dying should be restored to life, how much

more shall He, Who is Life, restore the dead to life.' And here lies

the true interpretation of what Jesus taught. If the uplifted serpent,

as symbol, brought life to the believing look which was fixed upon the

giving, pardoning love of God, then, in the truest sense, shall the

uplifted Son of Man give true life to everyone that believeth, looking

up in Him to the giving and forgiving love of God, which His Son came

to bring, to declare, and to manifest. 'For as Moses lifted up the

serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that

whosoever believeth should in Him have eternal life.'[1847]1847

With this final and highest teaching, which contains all that

Nicodemus, or, indeed, the whole Church, could require or be able to

know, He explained to him and to us the how of the new birth - alike

the source and the flow of its spring. Ours it is now only to

'believe,' where we cannot further know, and, looking up to the Son of

Man in His perfected work, to perceive, and to receive the gift of

God's love His perfected work, to perceive, and to receive the gift of

God's love for our healing. In this teaching it is not the serpent and

the Son of Man that are held side by side, though we cannot fail to

see the symbolic reference of the one to the other, but the uplifting

of the one and the other - the one by the sin, the other through the

sin of the people: both on account of it - the forthgoing of God's

pardoning mercy, the look of faith, and the higher recognition of

God's love in it all.

And so the record of this interview abruptly closes. It tells all, but

no more than the Church requires to know. Of Nicodemus we shall hear

again in the sequel, not needlessly, nor yet to complete a biography,

were it even that of Jesus; but as is necessary for the understanding

of this History. What follows[1848]1848 are not the words of Christ,

but of St. John. In them, looking back many years afterwards in the

light of completed events, the Apostle takes his stand, as becomes the

circumstances, where Jesus had ended His teaching of Nicodemus - under

the Cross. In the Gift, unutterable in its preciousness, he now sees

the Giver and the Source of all.[1849]1849 Then, following that

teaching of Jesus backward, he sees how true it has proved concerning

the world, that 'that which is of the flesh is flesh;' how true, also

concerning the Spirit-born, and what need there is to us of 'this

birth from above.'

But to all time, through the gusty night of our world's early spring,

flashes, as the lamp in that Aliyah through the darkened streets of

silent Jerusalem, that light; sounds through its stillness, like the

Voice of the Teacher come from God, this eternal Gospel-message to us

and to all men: 'God so loved the world, that He gave His

only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish,

but have everlasting life.'

CHAPTER VII.

IN JUDÆA AND THROUGH SAMARIA - A SKETCH OF SAMARITAN HISTORY AND

THEOLOGY -

JEWS AND SAMARITANS.

(St. John iv. 1-4.)

We have no means of determining how long Jesus may have tarried in

Jerusalem after the events recorded in the previous two chapters. The

Evangelic narrative[1850]1850 only marks an indefinite period of time,

which, as we judge from internal probability, cannot have been

protracted. From the city He retired with His disciples to 'the

country,' which formed the province of Judæa. There He taught and His

disciples baptized.[1851]1851 [1852]1852 From what had been so lately

witnessed in Jerusalem, as well as from what must have been known as

to the previous testimony of the Baptist concerning Him, the number of

those who professed adhesion to the expected new Kingdom, and were

consequently baptized, was as large, in that locality, as had

submitted to the preaching and Baptism of John, perhaps even larger.

An exaggerated report was carried to the Pharisaic

authorities:[1853]1853 'Jesus maketh and baptizeth more disciples than

John.'[1854]1854 From which, at least, we infer, that the opposition

of the leaders of the party to the Baptist was now settled, and that

it extended to Jesus; and also, what careful watch they kept over the

new movement.

But what seems at first sight strange is the twofold circumstance,

that Jesus should for a time have established Himself in such

apparently close proximity to the Baptist, and that on this occasion,

and on this only, He should have allowed His disciples to administer

the rite of Baptism. That the latter must be not be confounded with

Christian Baptism, which was only introduced after the Death of

Christ,[1855]1855 or, to speak more accurately, after the outpouring

of the Holy Ghost, needs no special explanation. But our difficulties

only increase, as we remember the essential difference between them,

grounded on that between the Mission of John and the Teaching of

Jesus. In the former, the Baptism of repentant preparation for the

coming Kingdom had its deepest meaning; not so in presence of that

Kingdom itself, and in the teaching of its King. But, even were it

otherwise, the administration of the same rite by John and by the

disciples of Jesus in apparently close proximity, seems not only

unnecessary, but it might give rise to misconception on the part of

enemies, and misunderstanding or jealousy on the part of weak

disciples.

Such was actually the case when, on one occassion, a discussion arose

'on the part of John's disciples with a Jew,'[1856]1856 on the subject

of purification.[1857]1857 We know not the special point in dispute,

nor does it seem of much importance, since such 'questions' would

naturally suggest themselves to a caviller or opponent[1858]1858 who

encountered those who were administering Baptism. What really

interests us is, that somehow this Jewish objector must have connected

what he said with a reference to the Baptism of Jesus' disciples. For,

immediately afterwards, the disciples of John, in their sore zeal for

the honour of their master, brought him tidings, in the language of

doubt, if not of complaint, of what to them seemed interference with

the work of the Baptist, and almost presumption on the part of Jesus.

While fully alive to their grievous error, perhaps in proportion as we

are so, we cannot but honour and sympathise with this loving care for

their master. The toilsome mission of the great Ascetic was drawing to

its close, and that without any tangible success so far as he was

concerned. Yet, to souls susceptible of the higher, to see him would

be to be arrested; to hear him, to be convinced; to know, would be to

love and venerate him. Never before had such deep earnestness and

reality been witnessed, such devotedness, such humility and

self-abnegation, and all in that great cause which set every Jewish

heart on fire. And then, in the high-day of his power, when all men

had gathered around him and hung on his lips; when all wondered

whether he would announce himself as the Christ, or, at least, as His

Forerunner, or as one of the great Prophets; when a word from him

would have kindled that multitude into a frenzy of enthusiasm - he had

disclaimed everything for himself, and pointed to Another! But this

'Coming One,' to whom he had borne witness, had hitherto been quite

other than their Master. And, as if this had not been enough, the

multitudes, which had formerly come to John, now flocked around Jesus;

nay, He had even unsurped the one distinctive function still left to

their master, humble as it was. It was evident that, hated and watched

by the Pharisees; watched, also, by the ruthless jealousy of a Herod;

overlooked, if not supplanted, by Jesus, the mission of their master

was nearing its close. It had been a life and work of suffering and

self-denial; it was about to end in loneliness and sorrow. They said

nothing expressly to complain of Him to Whom John had borne witness,

but they told of what He did, and how all men came to Him.

The answer which the Baptist made, may be said to mark the high point

of his life and witness. Never before was he so tender, almost sad;

never before more humble and self-denying, more earnest and faithful.

The setting of his own life-sun was to be the rising of One infinitely

more bright; the end of his Mission the beginning of another far

higher. In the silence, which was now gathering around him, he heard

but one Voice, that of the Bridegroom, and he rejoiced in it, though

he must listen to it in stillness and loneliness. For it he had waited

and worked. Not his own, but this had he sought. And now that it had

come, he was content; more than content: his 'joy was now fulfilled.'

'He must increase, but I must decrease.' It was the right and good

order. With these as his last words publicly spoken,[1859]1859 this

Aaron of the New Testament unrobed himself ere he lay down to die.

Surely among those born of women there was not one greater than John.

That these were his last words, publicly spoken and recorded, may,

however, explain to us why on this exceptional occasion Jesus

sanctioned the administration by His disciples of the Baptism of John.

It was not a retrogression from the position He had taken in

Jerusalem, nor caused by the refusal of His Messianic claims in the

Temple.[1860]1860 There is no retrogression, only progression, in the

Life of Jesus. And yet it was only on this occasion that the rite was

administered under His sanction. But the circumstances were

exceptional. It was John's last testimony to Jesus, and it was

preceded by this testimony of Jesus to John. Far divergent, almost

opposite, as from the first their paths had been, this practical

sanction on the part of Jesus of John's Baptism, when the Baptist was

about to be forsaken, betrayed, and murdered, was Christ's highest

testimony to him. Jesus adopted his Baptism, ere its waters for ever

ceased to flow, and thus He blessed and consecrated them. He took up

the work of His Forerunner, and continued it. The baptismal rite of

John administered with the sanction of Jesus, was the highest witness

that could be borne to it.

There is no necessity for supposing that John and the disciples of

Jesus baptized at, or quite close to, the same place. On the contrary,

such immediate juxtaposition seems, for obvious reasons, unlikely.

Jesus was within the boundaries of the province of Judæa, while John

baptized at Ænon (the springs), near to Salim. The latter site has not

been identified. But the oldest tradition, which places it a few miles

to the south of Bethshean (Scythopolis), on the border of Samaria and

Galilee, has this in its favour, that it locates the scene of John's

last public work close to the seat of Hearod Antipas, into whose power

the Baptist was so soon to be delivered.[1861]1861 But already there

were causes at work to remove both Jesus and His Forerunner from their

present spheres of activity. As regards Christ, we have the express

statement,[1862]1862 that the machinations of the Pharisaic party in

Jerusalem led Him to withdraw into Galilee. And, as we gather from the

notice of St. John, the Baptist was now involved in this hostility, as

being so closely connected with Jesus. Indeed, we venture the

suggestion that the imprisonment of the Baptist, although occasioned

by his outspoken rebuke of Herod, was in great part due to the

intrigues of the Pharisees. Of such a connection between them and

Herod Antipas, we have direct evidence in a similar attempt to bring

about the removal of Jesus from his territory.[1863]1863 It would not

have been difficult to rouse the suspicions of a nature so mean and

jealous as that of Antipas, and this may explain the account of

Josephus,[1864]1864 who attributes the imprisonment and death of the

Baptist simply to Herod's suspicious fear of John's unbounded

influence with the people.[1865]1865

Leaving for the present the Baptist, we follow the footsteps of the

Master. They are only traced by the disciple who best understood their

direction, and who alone has left us a record of the beginning of

Christ's ministry. For St. Matthew and St. Mark expressly indicate the

imprisonment of the Baptist as their starting-point,[1866]1866 and,

though St. Luke does not say this in so many words, he

characteristically commences with Christ's public Evangelic teaching

in the Synagogues of Galilee. Yet the narrative of St.

Matthew[1867]1867 reads rather like a brief summary;[1868]1868 that of

St. Mark seems like a succession of rapid sketches; and even that of

St. Luke, though with deeper historic purpose than the others,

outlines, rather than tells, the history. St. John alone does not

profess to give a narrative at all in the ordinary sense; but he

selects incidents which are characteristic as unfolding the meaning of

that Life, and records discourses which open its inmost

teaching;[1869]1869 and he alone tells of that early Judæan ministry

and the journey through Samaria, which preceded the Galilean work.

The shorter road from Judæa to Galilee led through Samaria;[1870]1870

and this, if we may credit Josephus,[1871]1871 was generally taken by

the Galileans on their way to the capital. On the other hand, the

Judæans seem chiefly to have made a détour through Peræa, in order to

avoid hostile and impure Samaria. It lay not within the scope of our

Lord to extend His personal Ministry, especially at its commencement,

beyond the boundaries of Israel,[1872]1872 and the expression, 'He

must needs go through Samaria,'[1873]1873 can only refer to the

advisability in the circumstances of taking the most direct

road,[1874]1874 or else to the wish of avoiding Peræa as the seat of

Herod's government.[1875]1875 Such prejudices in regard to Samaria, as

those which affected the ordinary Judæan devotee, would, of course,

not influence the conduct of Jesus. But great as these undoubtedly

were, they have been unduly exaggerated by modern writers, misled by

one-sided quotations from Rabbinic works.[1876]1876

The Biblical history of that part of Palestine which bore the name of

Samaria need not here be repeated.[1877]1877 Before the final

deportation of Israel by Shalmaneser, or rather Sargon,[1878]1878 the

'Samaria' to which his operations extended must have considerably

shrunk in dimensions, not only owing to previous conquests, but from

the circumstance that the authority of the kings of Judah seems to

have extended over a considerable portion of what once constituted the

kingdom of Israel.[1879]1879 Probably the Samaria of that time

included little more than the city of that name, together with some

adjoining towns and villages. It is of considerable interest to

remember that the places, to which the inhabitants of Samaria were

transported,[1880]1880 have been identified with such clearness as to

leave no reasonable doubt, that at least some of the descendants of

the ten tribes, whether mixed or unmixed with Gentiles, must be sought

among what are now known as the Nestorian Christians.[1881]1881 On the

other hand, it is of no practical importance for our present purpose

to ascertain the exact localities, whence the new 'Samaritans' were

brought to take the place of the Israelitish exiles.[1882]1882 Suffice

it, that one of them, perhaps that which contributed the principal

settlers, Cuthah, furnished the name Cuthim, by which the Jews

afterwards persistently designated the Samaritans. It was intended as

a term of reproach,[1883]1883 to mark that they were of foreign

race,[1884]1884 [1885]1885 and to repudiate all connection between

them and the Jews. Yet it is impossible to believe that, at least in

later times, they did not contain a considerable admixture of

Israelitish elements. It is difficult to suppose, that the original

deportation was so complete as to leave behind no traces of the

original Israelitish inhabitants.[1886]1886 Their number would

probably be swelled by fugitives from Assyria, and by Jewish settlers

in the troublous times that followed. Afterwards, as we know, they

were largely increased by apostates and rebels against the order of

things established by Ezra and Nehemiah.[1887]1887 Similarly, during

the period of internal political and religious troubles, which marked

the period to the accession of the Maccabees, the separation between

Jews and Samaritans could scarcely have been generally observed, the

more so that Alexander the Great placed them in close

juxtaposition.[1888]1888

The first foreign colonists of Samaria brought their peculiar forms of

idolatry with them.[1889]1889 But the Providential judgments, by which

they were visited, led to the introduction of a spurious Judaism,

consisting of a mixture of their former superstitions with Jewish

doctrines and rites.[1890]1890 Although this state of matters

resembled that which had obtained in the original kingdom of Israel,

perhaps just because of this, Ezra and Nehemiah, when reconstructing

the Jewish commonwealth, insisted on a strict separation between those

who had returned from Babylon and the Samaritans, resisting equally

their offers of co-operation and their attempts at hindrance. This

embittered the national feeling of jealousy already existing, and led

to that constant hostility between Jews and Samaritans which has

continued to this day. The religious separation became final when (at

a date which cannot be precisely fixed[1891]1891) the Samaritans built

a rival temple on Mount Gerizim, and Manasseh,[1892]1892 the brother

of Jaddua, the Jewish High-Priest, having refused to annul his

marriage with the daughter of Sanballat, was forced to flee, and

became the High-Priest of the new Sanctuary. Henceforth, by impudent

assertion and falsification of the text of the Pentateuch,[1893]1893

Gerizim was declared the rightful centre of worship, and the doctrines

and rites of the Samaritans exhibited a curious imitation and

adaptation of those prevalent in Judæa.

We cannot here follow in detail the history of the Samaritans, nor

explain the dogmas and practices peculiar to them. The latter would be

the more difficult, because so many of their views were simply

corruptions of those of the Jews, and because, from the want of an

authenticated ancient literature,[1894]1894 the origin and meaning of

many of them have been forgotten.[1895]1895 Sufficient, however, must

be said to explain the mutual relations at the time when the Lord,

sitting on Jacob's well, first spake to the Samaritans of the better

worship 'in spirit and truth,' and opened that well of living water

which has never since ceased to flow.

The political history of the people can be told in a few sentences.

Their Temple,[1896]1896 to which reference has been made, was built,

not in Samaria but at Shechem - probably on account of the position

held by that city in the former history of Israel - and on Mount

Gerizim, which in the Samaritan Pentateuch was substituted for Mount

Ebal in Deut. xxvii. 4. It was Shechem also, with its sacred

associations of Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph, which became the real

capital of the Samaritans. The fate of the city of Samaria under the

reign of Alexander is uncertain - one account speaking of the

rebellion of the city, the murder of the Macedonian governor, the

consequent destruction of Samaria, and the slaughter of part, and

transportation of the rest, of its inhabitants to Shechem,[1897]1897

while Josephus is silent on these events. When, after the death of

Alexander, Palestine became the field of battle between the rulers of

Egypt and Syria, Samaria suffered even more than other parts of the

country. In 320 b.c. it passed from the rule of Syria to that of Egypt

(Ptolemy Lagi). Six years later[1898]1898 it again became Syrian

(Antigonus). Only three years afterwards,[1899]1899 Ptolemy

reconquered and held it for a very short time. On his retreat, he

destroyed the walls of Samaria and of other towns. In 301 it passed

again by treaty into the hands of Ptolemy, out in 298 it was once more

ravaged by the son of Antigonus. After that it enjoyed a season of

quiet under Egyptian rule, till the reign of Antiochus (III.) the

Great, when it again passed temporarily, and under his successor,

Seleucus IV. (Philopator),[1900]1900 permanently under Syrian

dominion. In the troublous times of Antiochus IV. Epiphanes,[1901]1901

the Samaritans escaped the fate of the Jews by repudiating all

connection with Israel, and dedicating their temple to

Jupiter.[1902]1902 In the contest between Syria and the Maccabees

which followed, the Samaritans, as might be expected, took the part of

the former. In 130 b.c. John Hyrcanus destroyed the Temple on Mount

Gerizim,[1903]1903 which was never rebuilt. The city of Samaria was

taken several years afterwards[1904]1904 [1905]1905 by the sons of

Hyrcanus (Antigonus and Aristobulus), after a year's siege, and the

successive defeat of Syrian and Egyptian armies of relief. Although

the city was now not only destroyed, but actually laid under water to

complete its ruin, it was rebuilt by Gabinius shortly before our

era,[1906]1906 and greatly enlarged and beautified by Herod, who

called it Sebaste in honour of Augustus, to whom he reared a

magnificent temple.[1907]1907 Under Roman rule the city enjoyed great

privileges - had even a Senate of its own.[1908]1908 By one of those

striking coincidences which mark the Rule of God in history, it was

the accusation brought against him by that Samaritan Senate which led

to the deposition of Pilate. By the side of Samaria, or Sebaste, we

have already marked as perhaps more important, and as the religious

capital, the ancient Shechem, which, in honour of the Imperial family

of Rome, ultimately obtained the name of Flavia Neapolis, which has

survived in the modern Nablus. It is interesting to notice that the

Samaritans also had colonies, although not to the same extent as the

Jews. Among them we may name those of Alexandria, Damascus, in

Babylonia, and even some by the shores of the Red Sea.[1909]1909

Although not only in the New Testament, but in 1 Macc. x. 30, and in

the writings of Josephus,[1910]1910 Western Palestine is divided into

the provinces of Judæa, Samaria, and Galilee, the Rabbis, whose ideas

were shaped by the observances of Judaism, ignore this division. For

them Palestine consisted only of Judæa, Peræa, and Galilee.[1911]1911

Samaria appears merely as a strip intervening between Judæa and

Galilee, being 'the land of the Cuthæans.'[1912]1912 Nevertheless, it

was not regarded like heathen lands, but pronounced clean. Both the

Mishnah[1913]1913 and Josephus[1914]1914 mark Anuath ({hebrew}) as the

southern boundary of Samaria (towards Judæa). Northward it extended to

Ginæa (the ancient En-Gannim) on the south side of the plain of

Jezreel; on the east it was bounded by the Jordan; and on the west by

the plain of Sharon, which was reckoned as belonging to Judæa. Thus it

occupied the ancient territories of Manasseh and Ephraim, and extended

about forty-eight miles (north and south) by forty (east and west). In

aspect and climate it resembled Judæa, only that the scenery was more

beautiful and the soil more fertile. The political enmity and

religious separation between the Jews and Samaritans account for their

mutual jealously. On all public occasions the Samaritans took the part

hostile to the Jews, while they seized every opportunity of injuring

and insulting them. Thus, in the time of Antiochus III. they sold many

Jews into slavery.[1915]1915 Afterwards they sought to mislead the

Jews at a distance, to whom the beginning of every month (so important

in the Jewish festive arrangements) was intimated by beacon fires, by

kindling spurious signals.[1916]1916 We also read that they tried to

desecrate the Temple on the eve of the Passover;[1917]1917 and that

they waylaid and killed pilgrims on their road to Jerusalem.[1918]1918

The Jews retaliated by treating the Samaritans with every mark of

contempt; by accusing them of falsehood, folly, and irreligion; and,

what they felt most keenly, by disowning them as of the same race or

religion, and this in the most offensive terms of assumed superiority

and self-righteous fanaticism.

In view of these relations, we almost wonder at the candour and

moderation occasionally displayed towards the Samaritans in Jewish

writings. These statements are of practical importance in this

history, since elaborate attempts have been made to show what articles

of food the disciples of Jesus might have bought in Samaria, in

ignorance that almost all would have been lawful. Our inquiry here is,

however, somewhat complicated by the circumstance that in Rabbinic

writings, as at present existing, the term Samaritans

(Cuthim[1919]1919) has, to avoid the censorship of the press, been

often purposely substituted for 'Sadducees,' or 'heretics,' i.e.

Christians.[1920]1920 Thus, when[1921]1921 the Samaritans are charged

with denying in their books that the Resurrection can be proved from

the Pentateuch, the real reference is supposed to have been to

Sadducean or Christian heretical writings. Indeed, the terms

Samaritans, Sadducees, and heretics are used so interchangeably, that

a careful inquiry is necessary, to show in each case which of them is

really meant. Still more frequent is the use of the term 'Samaritan'

({hebrew}) for 'stranger' ({hebrew}), the latter, and not strictly

Samaritan descent being meant.[1922]1922 The popular interchange of

these terms casts light on the designation of the Samaritan as 'a

stranger' by our Lord in St. Luke xvii. 18.

In general it may be said that, while on certain points Jewish opinion

remained always the same, the judgment passed on the Samaritans, and

especially as to intercourse with them, varied, according as they

showed more or less active hostility towards the Jews. Thus the Son of

Sirach would correctly express the feeling of contempt and dislike,

when he characterised the Samaritans as 'the foolish people' which his

'heart abhorred.'[1923]1923 The same sentiment appears in early

Christian Pseudepigraphic and in Rabbinic writings. In the so-called

'Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs' (which probably dates from the

beginning of the second century), 'Sichem' is the City of Fools,

derided by all men.[1924]1924 It was only natural, that Jews should be

forbidden to respond by an Amen to the benediction of Samaritans, at

any rate till they were sure it had been correctly spoken,[1925]1925

since they were neither in practice nor in theory regarded as

co-religionists.[1926]1926 [1927]1927 Yet they were not treated as

heathens, and their land, their springs, baths, houses, and roads were

declared clean.[1928]1928

The question was discussed, whether or not they were to be considered

'lion-proselytes' (from fear of the lions), or as genuine

converts;[1929]1929 and, again, whether or not they were to be

regarded as heathens.[1930]1930 This, and the circumstance that

different teachers at different times gave directly opposite replies

to these questions, proves that there was no settled principle on the

subject, but that opinions varied according to the national bearing of

the Samaritans. Thus, we are expressly told,[1931]1931 that at one

time both their testimony and their religious orthodoxy were more

credited than at others, and they are not treated as Gentiles, but

placed on the same level as an ignorant Jew. A marked difference of

opinion here prevails. The older tradition, as represented by Simon

the son of Gamaliel, regards them as in every respect like

Israelites;[1932]1932 whilst later authority (Rabbi Jehuda the Holy)

would have them considered and treated as heathens. Again, it is

expressly stated in the Babylon Talmud,[1933]1933 that the Samaritans

observed the letter of the Pentateuch, while one authority adds, that

in that which they observed they were more strict than the Jews

themselves.[1934]1934 Of this, indeed, there is evidence as regards

several ordinances. On the other hand, later authorities again

reproach them with falsification of the Pentateuch, charge them with

worshipping a dove,[1935]1935 and even when, on further inquiry, they

absolve them from this accusation, ascribe their excessive veneration

for Mount Gerizim to the circumstance that they worshipped the idols

which Jacob had buried under the oak at Shechem. To the same hatred,

caused by national persecution, we must impute such expressions

as[1936]1936 that he, whose hospitality receives a foreigner, has

himself to blame if his children have to go into captivity.

The expression, 'the Jews have no dealings with the

Samaritans,'[1937]1937 finds its exact counterpart[1938]1938 in this:

'May I never set eyes on a Samaritan;' or else, 'May I never be thrown

into company with him!' A Rabbi in Cæsarea explains, as the cause of

these changes of opinion, that formerly the Samaritans had been

observant of the Law, which they no longer were; a statement repeated

in another form to the effect, that their observance of it lasted as

long as they were in their own cities.[1939]1939 Matters proceeded so

far, that they were entirely excluded from fellowship.[1940]1940 The

extreme limit of this direction,[1941]1941 if, indeed, the statement

applies to the Samaritans,[1942]1942 is marked by the declaration,

that to partake of their bread was like eating swine's flesh. This is

further improved upon in a later Rabbinic work,[1943]1943 which gives

a detailed story of how the Samaritans had conspired against Ezra and

Nehemiah, and the ban been laid upon them, so that now not only was

all intercourse with them forbidden, but their bread declared like

swine's flesh; proselytes were not to be received from them; nor would

they have part in the Resurrection of the dead.[1944]1944 But there is

a great difference between all this extravagance and the opinions

prevailing at the time of Jesus. Even in the Rabbinic tractate on the

Samaritans[1945]1945 it is admitted, that in most of their usages they

resembled Israelites, and many rights and privileges are conceded to

them, from which a heathen would have been excluded. They are to be

'credited' on many points; their meat is declared clean, if an

Israelite had witnessed its killing, or a Samaritan ate of

it;[1946]1946 their bread[1947]1947 and, under certain conditions,

even their wine, are allowed; and the final prospect is held out of

their reception into the Synagogue, when they shall have given up

their faith in Mount Gerizim, and acknowledged Jerusalem and the

Resurrection of the dead. But Jewish toleration went even further. At

the time of Christ all their food was declared lawful.[1948]1948

There could, therefore, be no difficulty as regarded the purchase of

victuals on the part of the disciples of Jesus.

It has already been stated, that most of the peculiar doctrines of the

Samaritans were derived from Jewish sources. As might be expected,

their tendency was Sadducean rather than Pharisaic.[1949]1949

Nevertheless, Samaritan 'sages' are referred to.[1950]1950 But it is

difficult to form any decided opinion about the doctrinal views of the

sect, partly from the comparative lateness of their literature, and

partly because the Rabbinist charges against them cannot be absolutely

trusted. It seems at least doubtful, whether they really denied the

Resurrection, as asserted by the Rabbis,[1951]1951 from whom the

Fathers have copied the charge.[1952]1952 Certainly, they hold that

doctrine at present. They strongly believed in the Unity of God; they

held the doctrine of Angels and devils;[1953]1953 they received the

Pentateuch as of sole Divine authority;[1954]1954 they regarded Mount

Gerizim as the place chosen of God, maintaining that it alone had not

been covered by the flood, as the Jews asserted of Mount Moriah; they

were most strict and zealous in what of Biblical or traditional Law

they received; and lastly, and most important of all, they looked for

the coming of a Messiah, in Whom the promise would be fulfilled, that

the Lord God would raise up a Prophet from the midst of them, like

unto Moses, in Whom his words were to be, and unto Whom they should

hearken.[1955]1955 [1956]1956 Thus, while, in some respects, access to

them would be more difficult than to His own countrymen, yet in others

Jesus would find there a soil better prepared for the Divine Seed, or,

at least, less encumbered by the thistles and tares of traditionalism

and Pharisaic bigotry.

CHAPTER VIII.

JESUS AT THE WELL OF SYCHAR

(St. John iv. 1-42.)

THERE is not a district in 'the Land of Promise' which presents a

scene more fair or rich than the plain of Samaria (the modern El

Mukhna). As we stand on the summit of the ridge, on the way from

Shiloh, the eye travels over the wide sweep, extending more than seven

miles northward, till it rests on the twin heights of Gerizim and

Ebal, which enclose the valley of Shechem. Following the straight

olive-shaded road from the south, to where a spur of Gerizim, jutting

south-east, forms the Vale of Shechem, we stand by that 'Well of

Jacob' to which so many sacred memories attach. Here, in 'the parcel

of ground' afterwards given to Joseph,[1957]1957 which Jacob had

brought from the people of the land, the patriarch had, at great

labour and cost, sunk a well through the limestone rock. At present it

is partially filled with rubbish and stones, but originally it must

have gone down about 150 feet.[1958]1958 as the whole district abounds

in springs, the object of the patriarch must have been to avoid

occasion of strife with the Amorite herdsmen around. That well marks

the boundary of the Great Plain, or rather its extensions bear other

names. To the left (westwards), between Gerizim (on the south) and

Ebal (on the north), winds the valley of olive-clad Shechem, the

modern Nablus, though that town is not in view from the Well of

Sychar. Still higher up the same valley, the mud hovels of Sebastiyeh

mark the site of ancient Samaria, the magnificent Sebaste of Herod.

North of the entrance to the Vale of Shechem rises Mount Ebal, which

also forms. so to speak, the western wall of the northern extension of

the Plain of Samaria. Here it bears the name of El 'Askar, from Askar,

the ancient Sychar, which nestles at the foot of Ebal, at a distance

of about two miles from Shechem. Similarly, the eastern extension of

the plain bears the name of the Valley of Shalem, from the hamlet of

that name, which probably occupies the site of the ancient city before

which Jacob pitched his tent on his return to Canaan.[1959]1959

At 'the Well of Jacob' which, for our present purpose, may be regarded

as the centre of the scene, several ancient Roman roads meet and part.

That southward, to which reference has already been made, leads close

by Shiloh to Jerusalem; that westward traverses the vale of Shechem;

that northward brings us to the ancient Sychar, only about half a mile

from 'the Well.' Eastward there are two ancient Roman roads: one winds

south-east, till it merges in the main road; the other strikes first

due east, and then descends in a south-easterly direction through Wady

Farâh, which debouches into the Jordan. We can trace it as it crosses

the waters of that Wady, and we infer, that its immediate

neighbourhood must have been the scene where Jesus had taught, and His

disciples baptized. It is still in Judæa, and yet sufficiently removed

from Jerusalem; and the Wady is so full of springs that one spot near

it actually bears the name of 'Ainûn, 'springs,' like the ancient

Ænon. But, from the spot which we have indicated, it is about twenty

miles, across a somewhat difficult country to Jacob's Well. It would

be a long and toilsome day's journey thither on a summer day, and we

can understand how, at its end, Jesus would rest weary on the low

parapet which enclosed the Well, while His disciples went to buy the

necessary provisions in the neighbouring Sychar.

And it was, as we judge, the evening of a day in early

summer,[1960]1960 when Jesus, accompanied by the small band which

formed His disciples,[1961]1961 emerged into the rich Plain of

Samaria. Far as the eye could sweep, 'the fields' were 'already white

unto the harvest.' They had reached 'the Well of Jacob.' There Jesus

waited, while the others went to Sychar on their work of ministry.

Probably John remained with the Master. They would scarcely have left

Him alone, especially in that place; and the whole narrative reads

like that of one who had been present at what passed.[1962]1962 More

than any other, perhaps, in the Fourth Gospel, it bears the mark, not

only of Judæan, but of contemporary authorship. It seems utterly

incompatible with the modern theory of its Ephesian origin at the end

of the second century. The location of the scene, not in Sebaste or

Shechem, but at Sychar,[1963]1963 which in the fourth century at least

had so entirely ceased to be Samaritan, that it had become the home of

some celebrated Rabbis;[1964]1964 the intimate knowledge of Samaritan

and Jewish relations, which at the time of Christ allowed the purchase

of food, but would certainly not have conceded it two centuries later;

even the introduction of such a statement as 'Salvation is of the

Jews,' wholly inconsistent with the supposed scope of an Ephesian

Gospel - these are only some of the facts which will occur to the

student of that period, as bearing unsolicited testimony to the date

and nationality of the writer.

Indeed, there is such minuteness of detail about the narrative, and

with it such charm of simplicity, affectionateness, reverence, and

depth of spiritual insight, as to carry not only the conviction of its

truthfulness, but almost instinctively to suggest to us 'the beloved

disciple' as its witness. Already he had taken the place nearest to

Jesus and saw and spake as none other of the disciples. Jesus weary,

and resting while the disciples go to but food, is not an Ephesian,

but a truly Evangelic presentation of the Christ in His human weakness

and want.

All around would awaken in the Divinely-attuned soul of the Divine

Redeemer the thoughts which so soon afterwards found appropriate words

and deeds. He is sitting by Jacob's Well - the very well which the

ancestor of Israel had digged, and left as a memorial of his first and

symbolic possession of the land. Yet this was also the scene of

Israel's first rebellion against God's order, against the Davidic line

and the Temple. And now Christ is here, among those who are not of

Israel, and who persecute it. Surely this, of all others, would be the

place where the Son of David, cast out of Jerusalem and the Temple,

would think of the breach, and of what alone could heal it. He is

hungry, and those fields are white to the harvest; yet far more

hungering for that spiritual harvest which is the food of His soul.

Over against Him, sheer up 800 feet, rises Mount Gerizim, with the

ruins of the Samaritan rival Temple on it; just as far behind Him,

already overhung by the dark cloud of judgment, are that Temple and

City which knew not the day of their visitation. The one inquiring

woman, and she a Samaritan, and the few only partially comprehending

and much misunderstanding disciples; their inward thinking that for

the spiritual harvest it was but seed-time, and the reaping yet 'four

months distant,' while in reality, as even their eyes might see if

they but lifted them, the fields were white unto the harvest: all

this, and much more, forms a unique background to the picture of this

narrative.

To take another view of the varying lights on that picture: Jesus

weary and thirsty by Jacob's Well, and the water of life which was to

spring from, and by that Well, with its unfailing supply and its

unending refreshment! The spiritual in all this bears deepest symbolic

analogy to the outward - yet with such contrasts also, as the woman

giving to Christ the one, He to her the other; she unconsciously

beginning to learn, He unintendingly (for He had not even entered

Sychar) beginning to teach, and that, what He could not yet teach in

Judæa, scarcely even to His own disciples; then the complete change in

the woman, and the misapprehension[1965]1965 and

non-reception[1966]1966 of the disciples - and over it all the weary

form of the Man Jesus, opening as the Divine Christ the well of

everlasting life, the God-Man satisfied with the meat of doing the

Will, and finishing the Work, of Him that sent Him: such are some of

the thoughts suggested by the scene.

And still others rise, as we think of the connection in the narrative

of St. John of this with what preceded and with what follows. It

almost seems as if that Gospel were constructed in cycles, each

beginning, or at least connected, with Jerusalem, and leading up to a

grand climax. Thus, the first cycle[1967]1967 might be called that of

purification: first, that of the Temple; then, inward purification by

the Baptism from above; next, the symbolic Baptism of water; lastly,

the real water of life given by Jesus; and the climax - Jesus the

Restorer of life to them that believe. Similarly, the second

cycle,[1968]1968 beginning with the idea of water in its symbolic

application to real worship and life from Jesus, would carry us a

stage further; and so onward throughout the Gospel. Along with this we

may note, as another peculiarity of the Fourth Gospel, that it seems

arranged according to this definite plan of grouping together in each

instance the work of Christ, as followed by the illustrative word of

Christ. Thus the fourth would, both externally and internally, be the

pre-eminently Judæan Gospel, characterised by cyclical order,

illustrative conjunction of work and word, and progressively leading

up to the grand climax of Christ's last discourses, and finally of His

Death and Resurrection, with the teaching that flows from the one and

the other.

It was about six o'clock in the evening,[1969]1969 when the

travel-stained pilgrims reached that 'parcel of ground' which,

according to ancient Jewish tradition, Jacob had given to his son

Joseph.[1970]1970 Here (as already stated) by the 'Well of Jacob'

where the three roads - south, to Shechem, and to Sychar (Askar) -

meet and part, Jesus sat down, while the disciples (probably with the

exception of John) went on to the closely adjoining little town of

Sychar to buy food. Even this latter circumstance marks that it was

evening, since noon was not the time either for the sale of

provisions, nor for their purchase by travellers. Once more it is when

the true Humanity of Jesus is set before us, in the weakness of His

hunger and weariness,[1971]1971 that the glory of His Divine

Personality suddenly shines through it. This time it was a poor,

ignorant Samaritan woman,[1972]1972 who came, not for any religious

purpose - indeed, to whom religious thought, except within her own

very narrow circle, was almost unintelligible - who became the

occasion of it. She had come - like so many of us, who find the pearl

in the field which we occupy in the business of everyday-life - on

humble, ordinary duty and work. Men call it common; but there is

nothing common and unclean that God has sanctified by making use of

it, or which His Presence and teaching may transform into a vision

from heaven.

There was another well (the 'Ain 'Askar), on the east side of the

little town, and much nearer to Sychar than 'Jacob's Well;' and to it

probably the women of Sychar generally resorted. It should also be

borne in mind, that in those days such work no longer devolved, as in

early times, on the matrons and maidens of fair degree, but on women

in much humbler station. This Samaritaness may have chosen 'Jacob's

Well,' perhaps, because she had been at work in the fields close by;

or else, because her abode was nearer in that direction - for the

ancient Sychar may have extended southward; perhaps, because, if her

character was what seems implied in verse 18, the concourse of the

more common women at the village-well of an evening might scarcely be

a pleasant place of resort to one with her history. In any case, we

may here mark those Providential leadings in our everyday life, to

which we are so often almost as much spiritually indebted, as to grace

itself; which, indeed, form part of the dispensation of grace. Perhaps

we should note how, all unconsciously to her (as so often to us),

poverty and sin sometimes bring to the well by which Jesus sits weary,

when on His return from self-righteous Judæa.

But these are only symbols; the barest facts of the narrative are

themselves sufficiently full of spiritual interest. Both to Jesus and

to the woman, the meeting was unsought, Providential in the truest

sense - God-brought. Reverently, so far as the Christ is concerned, we

add, that both acted truly - according to what was in them. The

request: 'Give Me to drink,' was natural on the part of the thirsty

traveller, when the woman had come to draw water, and they who usually

ministered to Him were away.[1973]1973 Even if He had not spoken, the

Samaritaness would have recognised the Jew by His appearance[1974]1974

and dress, if, as seems likely, He wore the fringes on the border of

His garment.[1975]1975 His speech would, by its pronunciation, place

His nationality beyond doubt.[1976]1976 Any kindly address, conveying

a request not absolutely necessary, would naturally surprise the

woman; for, as the Evangelist explanatively adds: 'Jews have no

dealings with Samaritans,'[1977]1977 or rather, as the expression

implies, no needless, friendly, nor familiar intercourse with them - a

statement true at all times. Besides, we must remember that this was

an ignorant Samaritaness of the lower order. In the mind of such an

one, two points would mainly stand out: that the Jews in their wicked

pride would have no intercourse with them; and that Gerizim, not

Jerusalem, as the Jews falsely asserted, was the place of rightful

worship. It was, therefore, genuine surprise which expressed itself in

the question: 'How is it, Thou, being a Jew, of me askest to drink?'

It was the first lesson she learned, even before He taught her. Here

was a Jew, not like ordinary Jews, not like what she had hitherto

thought them: what was the cause of this difference?

Before we mark how the answer of Jesus met this very question, and so

as to direct it to spiritual profit, another and more general

reflection presses on our minds. Although Jesus may not have come to

Sychar with the conscious purpose of that which ensued, yet, given the

meeting with the Samaritan woman, what followed seems almost matter of

necessity. For it is certain that the Christ, such as the Gospels

describe Him, could not have been brought into contact with spiritual

ignorance and want, any more than with physical distress, without

offering it relief. It was, so to speak, a necessity, alike of His

Mission and of His Nature (as the God-Man). In the language of another

Gospel, 'power went out from Him;' and this, whether consciously

sought, or unconsciously felt after in the stretching forth of the

hands of the sightless or in the upward look of the speechless. The

Incarnate Son of God could not but bring health and life amidst

disease and death; the Saviour had come to seek and to save that which

was lost.

And so it was, that the 'How is it?' of the Samaritan women so soon,

and so fully, found its answer. 'How is it?' In this, that He, Who had

spoken to her, was not like what she thought and knew of the Jews. He

was what Israel was intended to have become to mankind; what it was

the final object of Israel to have been. In Him was God's gift to

mankind. Had she but known it, the present relation between them would

have been reversed; the Well of Jacob would have been a symbol, yet

but a symbol, of the living water, which she would have asked and He

given. As always, the seen is to Christ the emblem of the unseen and

spiritual; Nature, that in and through which, in manifold and divers

colouring, He ever sees the supernatural, even as the light lies in

varying hues on the mountain, or glows in changeful colouring on the

edge of the horizon. A view this of all things existent, which

Hellenism, even in its sublimest poetic conception of creation as the

impress of heavenly archetypes, has only materialised and reserved.

But to Jesus it all pointed upward, because the God of Nature was the

God of Grace, the One Living and True God in Whom all matter and

spirit lives, Whose world is one in design, workmanship, and purpose.

And so nature was but the echo of God's heard Voice, which ever, to

all and in all, speaks the same, if there be but listening ears. And

so He would have it speak to men in parables, that, to them who see,

it might be the Jacob's ladder leading from earth to heaven, while

they, whose sight and hearing are bound in the sleep of

heart-hardening, would see but not perceive, and hear but not

understand.

It was with the ignorant woman of Sychar, as it had been with the

learned 'Master in Israel.' As Nicodemus had seen, and yet not seen,

so this Samaritaness. In the birth of which Jesus spoke, he had failed

to apprehend the 'from above' and 'of the Spirit;' she now the thought

suggested by the contrast between the cistern in the limerock and the

well of living water. The 'How can these things be?' of Nicodemus

finds its parallel in the bewilderment of the woman. Jesus had nothing

wherewith to draw from the deep well. Whence, then, the 'living

water'? To outward appearance there was a physical impossibility. This

was one aspect of it. And yet, as Nicodemus' question not only

similarly pointed to a physical impossibility, but also indicated dim

searching after higher meaning and spiritual reality, so that of the

woman: 'No ! art Thou greater than our father Jacob?' who, at such

labour, had dug this well, finding no other means than this of

supplying his own wants and those of his descendants. Nor did the

answer of Jesus now differ in spirit from that which He had given to

the Rabbi of Jerusalem, though it lacked the rebuke, designed to show

how thoroughly the religious system, of which Nicodemus was a teacher,

failed in its highest object. But to this woman His answer must be

much simpler and plainer than to the Rabbi. And yet, if it be Divine

teaching, it cannot be quite plain, but must contain that which will

point upward, and lead to further inquiry. And so the Divine Teacher

explained, not only the difference between ordinary water and that of

which He had spoken, but in a manner to bring her to the threshold of

still higher truth. It was not water like that of Jacob's Well which

He would give, but 'living water.' In the Old Testament a perennial

spring had, in figurative language, been thus designated,[1978]1978 in

significant contrast to water accumulated in a cistern.[1979]1979 But

there was more than this: it was water which for ever quenched the

thirst, by meeting all the inward wants of the soul; water also,

which, in him who had drunk of it, became a well, not merely quenching

the thirst on this side time, but 'springing up into everlasting

life.' It was not only the meeting of wants felt, but a new life, and

that not essentially different, but the same as that of the future,

and merging in it.

The question has sometimes been asked, to what Jesus referred by that

well of living water springing up into everlasting life. Of the

various strange answers given, that, surely, is almost the worst,

which would apply it to the doctrine of Jesus, supporting such

explanation by a reference to Rabbinic sayings in which doctrine is

compared to 'water.' This is one of those not unfrequent instances in

which Rabbinic references mislead rather than lead, being

insufficiently known, imperfectly understood, or misapplied. It is

quite true, that in many passages the teaching of the Rabbis is

compared to water,[1980]1980 but never to a 'well of water springing

up.' The difference is very great. For it is the boast of Rabbinism,

that its disciples drink of the waters of their teachers; chief merit

lies in receptiveness, not spontaneity, and higher praise cannot be

given than that of being 'a well-plastered cistern, which lets not out

a drop of water,'[1981]1981 and in that sense to 'a spring whose

waters ever grow stronger.' But this is quite the opposite of what our

Lord teaches. For, it is only true of what man can give when we read

this (in Ecclus. xxiv. 21): 'They that drink me shall yet be

thirsty.'[1982]1982 More closely related to the words of Christ is it,

when we read[1983]1983 of a 'fountain of wisdom;' while, in the Targum

on Cant. iv. 14, 'the words of the Law' are likened 'unto a well of

living waters.' The same idea was carried perhaps even further, when,

at the Feast of Tabernacles, amidst universal rejoicing, water from

Siloam was poured from a golden pitcher on the altar, as emblem of the

outpouring of the Holy Ghost.[1984]1984 But the saying of our Lord to

the Samaritaness referred neither to His teaching, nor to the Holy

Ghost, nor yet to faith, but to the gift of that new spiritual life in

Him, of which faith is but the outcome.

If the humble, ignorant Samaritaness had formerly not seen, though she

had imperfectly guessed, that there was a higher meaning in the words

of Him Who spake to her, a like mixture of ill-apprehension and rising

faith seems to underlie her request for this water, that she might

thirst no more, neither again come thither to draw.[1985]1985 She now

believes in the incredible; believes it, because of Him and in Him;

believes, also, in a satisfaction through Him of outward wants,

reaching up beyond this to the everlasting life. But all these

elements are yet in strange confusion. Those who know how difficult it

is to lodge any new idea in the mind of uneducated rustics in our own

land, after all our advantages of civilising contact and education,

will understand, how utterly at a loss this Samaritan countrywoman

must have been to grasp the meaning of Jesus. But He taught, not as we

teach. And thus He reached her heart in that dimly conscious longing

which she expressed, though her intellect was incapable of

distinguishing the new truth.

Surely, it is a strange mistake to find in her words[1986]1986 'a

touch of irony,' while, on the other hand, it seems an exaggeration to

regard them simply as the cry of realised spiritual need. Though

reluctantly, a somewhat similar conclusion is forced upon us with

reference to the question of Jesus about the woman's husband, her

reply, and the Saviour's rejoinder. It is difficult to suppose, that

Christ asked the woman to call her husband with the primary object of

awakening in her a sense of sin. This might follow, but the text gives

no hint of it. Nor does anything in the bearing of the woman indicate

any such effect; indeed, her reply[1987]1987 and her after-reference

to it[1988]1988 rather imply the contrary. We do not even know for

certain, whether the five previous husbands had died or divorced her,

and, if the latter, with whom the blame lay, although not only the

peculiar mode in which our Lord refers to it, but the present

condition of the woman, seem to point to a sinful life in the past. In

Judæa a course like hers would have been almost impossible; but we

know too little of the social and moral condition of Samaria to judge

of what might there be tolerated. On the other hand, we have abundant

evidence that, when the Saviour so unexpectedly laid open to her a

past, which He could only supernaturally have known, the conviction at

once arose in her that He was a Prophet, just as in similar

circumstances it had been forced upon Nathanael.[1989]1989 But to be a

Prophet meant to a Samaritan that He was the Messiah, since they

acknowledged none other after Moses. Whether or not the Messiah was

known by the present Samaritan designation of Him as 'the Converter'

and 'the Returner' (Restorer?), is of comparatively small importance,

though, if we felt certain of this, the influence of the new

conviction on the mind of the woman would appear even more clearly. In

any case it was an immense, almost immeasurable, advance, when this

Samaritan recognised in the stranger Jew, Who had first awakened

within her higher thoughts, and pointed her to spiritual and eternal

realities, the Messiah, and this on the strength of evidence the most

powerfully convincing to a mind like hers: that of telling her,

suddenly and startlingly, what He could not have known, except through

higher than human means of information.

It is another, and much more difficult question, why Jesus should have

asked for the presence of her husband. The objection, that to do so,

knowing the while that she had no husband, seems unworthy of our Lord,

may, indeed, be answered by the consideration, that such 'proving' of

those who were in His training was in accordance with His mode of

teaching, leading upwards by a series of moral questions.[1990]1990

But perhaps a more simple explanation may offer even a better reply.

It seems, as if the answer of verse 15 marked the utmost limit of the

woman's comprehension. We can scarcely form an adequate notion of the

narrowness of such a mental horizon as hers. This also explains, at

least from one aspect, the reason of His speaking to her about His own

Messiahship, and the worship of the future, in words far more plain

than He used to His own disciples. None but the plainest statements

could she grasp; and it is not unnatural to suppose that, having

reached the utmost limits of which she was capable, the Saviour now

asked for her husband, in order that, through the introduction of

another so near to her, the horizon might be enlarged. This is also

substantially the view of some of the Fathers.[1991]1991 But, if

Christ was in earnest in asking for the presence of her husband, it

surely cannot be irreverent to add, that at that moment the peculiar

relationship between the man and the woman did not stand out before

His mind. Nor is there anything strange in this. The man was, and was

not, her husband. Nor can we be sure that, although unmarried, the

relationship involved anything absolutely contrary to the law; and to

all intents the man might be known as her husband. The woman's answer

at once drew the attention of the Christ to this aspect of her

history, which immediately stood out fully before His Divine

knowledge. At the same time her words seemed like a confession -

perhaps we should say, a concession to the demands of her own

conscience, rather than a confession. Here, then, was the required

opportunity, both for carrying further truth to her mind, by proving

to her that He Who spake to her was a Prophet, and at the same time

for reaching her heart.

But whether or not this view of the history be taken, it is difficult

to understand, how any sober interpreter could see in the five

husbands of the woman either a symbolical, or a mythical, reference to

the five deities whom the ancestors of the Samaritans

worshipped,[1992]1992 the spurious service of Jehovah representing the

husband, yet no husband, of the woman. It is not worth while

discussing this strange suggestion from any other than the mythical

standpoint. Those who regard the incidents of the Gospel-narratives as

myths, having their origin in Jewish ideas, are put to even greater

straits by the whole of this narrative than they who regard this

Gospel as of Ephesian authorship. We may put aside the general

objections raised by Strauss, since none of his successors has

ventured seriously to urge them. It is more important to notice, how

signally the author of the mythical theory has failed in suggesting

any historical basis for this 'myth.' To speak of meetings at the

well, such as those with Rebekah or Zipporah, is as much beside the

question as an appeal to Jewish expectancy of an omniscient Messiah.

Out of these two elements almost any story might be constructed.

Again, to say that this story of Jesus' success among the Samaritans

was invented, in order to vindicate the later activity of the Apostles

among that people, is simply to beg the whole question. In these

straits so distinguished a writer as Keim[1993]1993 has hazarded the

statement: 'The meeting with the Samaritaness has, for every one who

has eyes, only a symbolical meaning, by the side of which no

historical fact exists.' An assertion this, which is perhaps best

refuted by being simply quoted.[1994]1994 On the other hand, of all

the myths likely to enter into Jewish imagination, the most unlikely

would be one representing the Christ in familiar converse with a

woman, and she a Samaritan, offering to her a well of water springing

into everlasting life, and setting before her a spiritual worship of

which Jerusalem was not the centre. Where both the Ephesian and the

mythical theory so signally fail, shall we not fall back upon the

natural explanation, borne out by the simplicity and naturalness of

the narrative - that the story here related is real and true? And, if

so, shall we not all the more thankfully gather its lessons?

The conviction, sudden but firm, that He Who had laid open the past to

her was really a Prophet, was already faith in Him; and so the goal

had been attained - not, perhaps, faith in His Messiahship, about

which she might have only very vague notions, but in Him. And faith in

the Christ, not in anything about Him, but in Himself, has eternal

life. Such faith also leads to further inquiry and knowledge. As it

has been the traditional practice to detect irony in this or that

saying of the woman, or else to impute to her spiritual feelings far

in advance of her possible experience, so, on the other hand, has her

inquiry about the place of proper worship, Jerusalem or Gerizim, been

unduly depreciated. It is indeed too true that those, whose

consciences are touched by a presentation of their sin, often seek to

turn the conversation into another and quasi-religious channel. But of

neither the one nor the other is there evidence in the present case.

Similarly, it is also only too true, that their one point of

difference is, to narrow-minded sectarians, their all-in-all of

religion. But in this instance we feel that the woman has no

after-thought, no covert purpose in what she asks. All her life long

she had heard that Gerizim was the mount of worship, the holy hill

which the waters of the Flood had never covered,[1995]1995 and that

the Jews were in deadly error. But here was an undoubted Prophet, and

He a Jew. Were they then in error about the right place of worship,

and what was she to think, and to do? To apply with such a question to

Jesus was already to find the right solution, even although the

question itself might indicate a lower mental and religious

standpoint. It reminds us of the inquiry which the healed Naaman put

to Elisha about the Temple of Rimmon, and of his request for a mule's

burden of earth from the land of the True God, and for true worship.

Once more the Lord answers her question by leading her far beyond it -

beyond all controversy: even on to the goal of all His teaching. So

marvellously does He speak to the simple in heart. It is best here to

sit at the feet of Jesus, and, realising the scene, to follow as His

Finger points onwards and upwards. 'There cometh an hour, when neither

in this mountain, nor yet in Jerusalem, ye shall worship the Father.'

Words of sad warning, these; words of prophecy also, that already

pointed to the higher solution in the worship of a common Father,

which would be the worship neither of Jews nor of Samaritans, but of

children. And yet there was truth in their present differences. 'Ye

worship ye know not what: we worship what we know, since salvation is

from out of the Jews.'[1996]1996 The Samaritan was aimless worship,

because it wanted the goal of all the Old Testament institutions, that

Messiah 'Who was to be of the seed of David'[1997]1997 - for, of the

Jews, 'as concerning the flesh,' was Christ to come.[1998]1998 But

only of present interest could such distinctions be; for an hour would

come, nay, already was, when the true worshippers would 'worship the

Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father also seeketh such for

His worshippers. Spirit is God'[1999]1999 - and only worship in spirit

and in truth could be acceptable to such a God.

Higher or more Christlike teaching than this could not be uttered. And

she who heard, thus far understood it, that in the glorious picture,

which was set before her, she saw the coming of the Kingdom of the

Messiah. 'I know that Messiah cometh.[2000]2000 When He cometh, He

will tell us all things.' It was then that, according to the need of

that untutored woman, He told her plainly what in Judæa, and even by

His disciples, would have been carnally misinterpreted and misapplied:

that He was the Messiah. So true is it, that 'babes' can receive what

often must remain long hidden 'from the wise and prudent.'

It was the crowning lesson of that day. Nothing more could be said;

nothing more need be said. The disciples had returned from Sychar.

That Jesus should converse with a woman, was so contrary to all Judæan

notions of a Rabbi,[2001]2001 that they wondered. Yet, in their

reverence for Him, they dared not ask any questions. Meanwhile the

woman, forgetful of her errand, and only conscious of that new

well-spring of life which had risen within her, had left the unfilled

waterpot by the Well, and hurried into 'the City.' They were strange

tidings which she brought; the very mode for her announcement

affording evidence of their truth: 'Come, see a man who told me all

that I have done. No - is this the Christ?' We are led to infer, that

these strange tidings soon gathered many around her; that they

questioned, and, as they ascertained from her the indisputable fact of

His superhuman knowledge, believed on Him, so far as the woman could

set Him before them as object of faith.[2002]2002 Under this

impression 'they went out of the City, and came on their way towards

Him.'[2003]2003 [2004]2004

Meantime the disciples had urged the Master to eat of the food which

they had brought. But His Soul was otherwise engaged. Thoughts were

present of the glorious future, of a universal worship of the Father

by those whom He had taught, and of which He had just seen such

unexpected earnest. These mingled with feelings of pain at the

spiritual dulness of those by whom He was surrounded, who could see in

that conversation with a Samaritan woman nothing but a strange

innovation on Rabbinic custom and dignity, and now thought of nothing

beyond the immediate errand on which they had gone to Sychar. Even His

words of rebuke only made them wonder whether, unknown to them, some

one had brought Him food. It was not the only, nor the last, instance

of their dulness to spiritual realities.[2005]2005

Yet with Divine patience He bore with them: 'My meat is, that I may do

the Will of Him that sent Me, and that I may accomplish (bring to a

perfect end) His work.' To the disciples that work appeared still in

the far future. To them it seemed as yet little more than seed-time;

the green blade was only sprouting; the harvest of such a Messianic

Kingdom as they expected was still months distant. To correct their

mistake, the Divine Teacher, as so often, and as best adapted to His

hearers, chose His illustration from what was visible around. To show

their meaning more clearly, we venture to reverse the order of the

sentences which Jesus spoke: 'Behold, I say unto you, lift up your

eyes and look [observantly] at the fields, that they are white to the

harvest. [But] do ye not say (viz. in your hearts[2006]2006) that

there are yet four months, and the harvest cometh?' The words will

appear the more striking, if (with Professor Westcott) we bear in mind

that, perhaps at that very moment, the Samaritans, coming to Him from

Sychar, were appearing in sight.

But we also regard it as marking the time, when this conversation took

place. Generally the words, 'yet four months, and then cometh the

harvest,' are regarded either as a proverbial expression, or as

indicating, that the Lord spake at the Well of Jacob four months

before the harvest-time - that is, about the month of January, if the

barley-harvest, or in February, if the wheat-harvest, was meant. The

suggestion that it was a proverb may be dismissed, first, because

there is not a trace of such a proverb, and then because, to give it

even the scantiest meaning, it is necessary to supply: 'Between

seed-time and harvest there are four months,' which is not true, since

in Palestine about six months intervene between them. On the other

hand, for reasons explained in another place,[2007]2007 we conclude,

that it could not have been January or February. when Jesus was in

Sychar. But why not reverse the common theory, and see in the second

clause, introduced by the words, 'Behold! lift up your eyes and

observe,' a mark of the time and circumstances; while the expression,

'Do ye not say, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest,'

would be understood as parabolically spoken? Admittedly, one of the

two clauses is a literal mark of time, and the other is spoken

parabolically. But there is no reason why the second clause may not

mark the time, while on independent grounds we must

conclude,[2008]2008 that Christ returned from Judæa to Galilee in the

early summer.

Passing from this point, we notice how the Lord further unfolded His

own lesson of present harvesting, and their inversion of what was

sowing, and what reaping time. 'Already'[2009]2009 he that reaped

received wages, and gathered fruit unto eternal life (which is the

real reward of the Great Reaper, the seeing of the travail of His

soul), so that in this instance the sower rejoiced equally[2010]2010

as the reaper. And, in this respect, the otherwise cynical proverb,

that one was the sower, another the reaper of his sowing, found a true

application. It was indeed so, that the servants of Christ were sent

to reap what others had sown, and to enter into their labour. One had

sowed, another would reap. And yet, as in this instance of the

Samaritans, the sower would rejoice as well as the reaper; nay, both

would rejoice together, in the gathered fruit unto eternal life. And

so the sowing in tears is on the spiritual field often mingled with

the harvest of gladness, and to the spiritual view both are really

one. 'Four months' do not intervene between them; so that, although

one may sow and another reap, yet the sower seeth that harvest for

which the harvester gets wages, and rejoices with him in the fruit

which is gathered into the eternal storehouse.

It was as Christ had said. The Samaritans, who believed 'because of

the word' (speech) 'of the woman [what she said] as she testified' of

the Christ, 'when they came' to that well, 'asked Him to abide with

them. And He abode there two days. And many more believed because of

His own word (speech, discourse), and said unto the woman: No longer

because of thy speaking[2011]2011 do we believe. For we ourselves have

heard, and know, that this is truly the Saviour of the

world.'[2012]2012

We know not what passed these two days. Apparently no miracles were

wrought, but those of His Word only. It was the deepest and purest

truth they learned, these simple men of simple faith, who had not

learned of man, but listened to His Word only. The sower as well as

the reaper rejoiced, and rejoiced together. Seed-time and harvest

mingled, when for themselves they knew and confessed, that this was

truly the Saviour of the world.

CHAPTER IX.

THE SECOND VISIT TO CANA - CURE OF THE 'NOBLEMAN'S' SON AT CAPERNAUM.

(St. Matt. iv. 12; St. Mark i. 14; St. Luke iv. 14, 15; St. John iv.

43-54.)

THE brief harvest in Samaria was, as Jesus had indicated to His

disciples, in another sense also the beginning of sowing-time, or at

least that when the green blade first appeared above ground. It formed

the introduction to that Galilean ministry, when 'the Galileans

received Him, having seen all the things that He did at Jerusalem at

the Feast.'[2013]2013 Nay, in some respects, it was the real beginning

of His Work also, which, viewed as separate and distinct, commenced

when the Baptist was cast into prison.[2014]2014 Accordingly, this

circumstance is specially marked by St. Matthew,[2015]2015 and by St.

Mark,[2016]2016 while St. Luke, as if to give greater emphasis to it,

abruptly connects this beginning of Christ's sole and separate Work

with the history of the Temptation.[2017]2017 All that intervened

seems to him but introductory, that 'beginning' which might be summed

up by the words, 'in the power of the Spirit,' with which he describes

His return to Galilee. In accordance with this view, Christ is

presented as taking up the message of His Forerunner,[2018]2018 only

with wider sweep, since, instead of adding to His announcement of the

Kingdom of Heaven and call to repentance that to a Baptism of

preparation, He called those who heard Him to 'believe the Gospel'

which He brought them.[2019]2019

But here also - as Eusebius had already noted[2020]2020 - the Fourth

Gospel, in its more comprehensive presentation of the Christ, as

adding, not merely in the external succession of events, but in their

internal connection, feature to feature in the portraiture of the

Divine Redeemer, supplies the gap in the Synoptic narratives, which so

often read only like brief historical summaries, with here and there

special episodes or reports of teaching inserted. For St. John not

only tells us of that early Ministry, which the Synoptists designedly

pass over, but while, like them, referring to the captivity of John as

the occasion of Christ's withdrawal from the machinations of the

Pharisaic party in Judæa, he joins this departure from Judæa with the

return to Galilee by supplying, as connecting link, the brief stay in

Samaria with its eventful results. St. John, also, alone supplies the

first-recorded event of this Galilean ministry.[2021]2021 We therefore

follow his guidance, simply noting that the various stages of this

Galilean residence should be grouped as follows: Cana,[2022]2022

Nazareth,[2023]2023 and Capernaum, with general itineration from that

centre.[2024]2024 The period occupied, by what is thus briefly

indicated in the Gospels, was from early summer, say, the beginning of

June, to the unnamed 'feast of the Jews.'[2025]2025 If it is objected,

that the events seem too few for a period of about three months, the

obvious answer is, that, during most of this time, Jesus was in great

measure unattended, since the call of the Apostles[2026]2026 only took

place after the 'unnamed feast;' that, indeed, they had probably

returned to their homes and ordinary occupations when Jesus went to

Nazareth,[2027]2027 and that therefore, not having themselves been

eye-witnesses of what had passed, they confined themselves to a

general summary. At the same time, St. Luke expressly marks that Jesus

taught in the various Synagogues of Galilee,[2028]2028 and also that

He made a longer stay in Capernaum.[2029]2029

When Jesus returned to Galilee, it was in circumstances entirely

different from those under which He had left it. As He Himself

said,[2030]2030 there had, perhaps naturally, been prejudices

connected with the humbleness of His upbringing, and the familiarity

engendered by knowledge[2031]2031 of His home-surroundings. These were

overcome, when the Galileans had witnessed at the feast in Jerusalem,

what He had done. Accordingly, they were now prepared to receive Him

with the reverent attention which His Word claimed. We may conjecture,

that it was partially for reasons such as these that He first bent His

steps to Cana. The miracle, which had there been wrought,[2032]2032

would still further prepare the people for His preaching. Besides,

this was the home of Nathanael, who had probably followed Him to

Jerusalem, and in whose house a gladsome homage of welcome would now

await Him. It was here that the second recorded miracle of His

Galilean ministry was wrought, with what effect upon the whole

district, may be judged from the expectancies which the fame of it

excited even in Nazareth, the city of His early upbringing[2033]2033

It appears that the son of one of Herod Antipas' officers, either

civil or military,[2034]2034 was sick, and at the point of death. When

tidings reached the father that the Prophet, or more than Prophet,

Whose fame had preceded Him to Galilee, had come to Cana, he resolved,

in his despair of other means, to apply to Him for the cure of His

child. Nothing can be gained for the spiritual interest of this or any

other Biblical narrative, by exaggeration; but much is lost, when the

historical demands of the case are overlooked. It is not from any

disbelief in the supernatural agency at work, that we insist on the

natural and rational sequence of events. And having done so, we can

all the more clearly mark, by the side of the natural, the

distinctively higher elements at work. Accordingly, we do not assume

that this 'court-officer' was actuated by spiritual belief in the Son

of God, when applying to Him for help. Rather would we go to almost

the opposite extreme, and regard him as simply actuated by what, in

the circumstances, might be the views of a devout Jew. Instances are

recorded in the Talmud, which may here serve as our guide. Various

cases are related in which those seriously ill, and even at the point

of death, were restored by the prayers of celebrated Rabbis. One

instance is specially illustrative.[2035]2035 We read that, when the

son of Rabban Gamaliel was dangerously ill, he sent two of his

disciples to one Chanina ben Dosa to entreat his prayers for the

restoration of his son. On this, Chanina is said to have gone up to

the Aliyah (upper chamber) to pray. On his return, he assured the

messengers that the young man was restored, grounding his confidence,

not on the possession of any prophetic gift, but on the circumstance

that he knew his request was answered from the freedom he had in

prayer. The messengers noted down the hour, and on their arrival at

the house of Gamaliel found, that at that very hour 'the fever left

him, and he asked for water.' Thus far the Rabbinic story. Even

supposing that it was either invented or coloured in imitation of the

New Testament, it shows, at least, what a devout Jew might deem lawful

to expect from a celebrated Rabbi, who was regarded as having power in

prayer.

Having indicated the illustrated part of this story, we may now mark

the contrast between it and the event in the Gospels. There

restoration is not merely asked, but expected, and that, not in answer

to prayer, but by Christ's Personal presence. But the great and vital

contrast lies, alike in what was thought of Him Who was instrumental

in the cure - performed it - and in the moral effects which it

wrought. The history just quoted from the Talmud is immediately

followed by another of similar import, when a celebrated Rabbi

accounts on this wise for his inability to do that in which Chanina

had succeeded, that Chanina was like 'a servant of the King,' who went

in and out familiarly, and so might beg favours; while he (the failing

Rabbi) was 'like a lord before the King,' who would not be accorded

mere favours, but discussed matters on a footing of equality. This

profane representation of the relation between God and His servants,

the utterly unspiritual view of prayer which it displays, and the

daring self-exaltation of the Rabbi, surely mark sufficiently an

absolute contrast in spirit between the Jewish view and that which

underlies the Evangelic narrative.

Enough has been said to show, that the application to Jesus on the

part of the 'royal officer' did not, in the peculiar circumstances,

lie absolutely beyond the range of Jewish ideas. What the

'court-officer' exactly expected to be done, is a question secondary

to that of his state of receptiveness, as it may be called, which was

the moral condition alike of the outward help, and of the inward

blessing which he received. One thing, however, it is of importance to

notice. We must not suppose, that when, to the request that Jesus

would come down to Capernaum to perform the cure, the Master replied,

that unless they saw[2036]2036 signs and wonders they would not

believe, He meant thereby to convey that his Jewish hearers, in

opposition to the Samaritans, required 'signs and wonders' in order to

believe. For the application of 'the officer' was itself an expression

of faith, although imperfect. Besides, the cure, which was the object

of the application, could not have been performed without a miracle.

What the Saviour reproved was not the request for a miracle, which was

necessary, but the urgent plea that He should come down to Capernaum

for that purpose, which the father afterwards so earnestly

repeated.[2037]2037 That request argued ignorance of the real

character of the Christ, as if He were either merely a Rabbi endowed

with special power, or else a miracle-monger. What He intended to

teach this man was, that He, Who had life in Himself, could restore

life at a distance as easily as by His Presence; by the word of his

Power as readily as by personal application. A lesson this of the

deepest importance, as regarded the Person of Christ; a lesson, also,

of the widest application to us and for all circumstances, temporal

and spiritual. When the 'court-officer' had learned this lesson, he

became 'obedient unto the faith,' and 'went his way,'[2038]2038

presently to find his faith both crowned and perfected.[2039]2039 And

when both 'he and his house' had learned that lesson, they would never

afterwards think of the Christ either as the Jews did, who simply

witnessed His miracles, or unspiritually. It was the completion of

that teaching which had first come to Nathanael, the first believer of

Cana.[2040]2040 So, also, is it when we have learned that lesson, that

we come to know alike the meaning and the blessedness of believing in

Jesus.

Indeed, so far as its moral import is concerned, the whole history

turns upon this point. It also marks the fundamental difference

between this and the somewhat similar history of the healing of the

Centurion's servant in Capernaum.[2041]2041 Critics have noticed

marked divergences in almost every detail of the two

narratives,[2042]2042 which some - both orthodox and negative

interpreters - have so strangely represented as only different

presentations of one and the same event.[2043]2043 But, besides these

marked differences of detail, there is also fundamental difference in

the substance of the narratives, and in the spirit of the two

applicants, which made the Saviour in the one instance reprove as the

requirement of sight, which by itself could only produce a transitory

faith, that which in the other He marvelled at as greatness of faith,

for which He had in vain looked in Israel. The great point in the

history of the 'court-officer' is Israel's mistaken view of the Person

and Work of the Christ. That in the narrative of the Centurion is the

preparedness of a simple faith, unencumbered by Jewish realism,

although the outcome of Jewish teaching. The carnal realism of the

one, which looks for signs and wonders, is contrasted with the

simplicity and straightforwardness of the other. Lastly, the point in

the history of the Syro-Phoenician woman, which is sometimes

confounded with it,[2044]2044 is the intensity of the same faith

which, despite discouragements, nay, seeming improbabilities, holds

fast by the conviction which her spiritual instinct had grasped - that

such an One as Jesus must be not only the Messiah of the Jews, but the

Saviour of the world.

We may as well here complete our critical notices, at least as

concerns those views which have of late been propounded. The extreme

school of negative critics seems here involved in hopeless

self-contradiction. For, if this narrative of a Jewish courtier is

really only another recension of that of the heathen centurion, how

comes it that the 'Jewish' Gospel of St. Matthew makes a Gentile,

while the so-called 'anti-Jewish,' 'Ephesian' Gospel of St. John makes

a Jew, the hero of the story? As signally does the 'mythical' theory

break down. For, admittedly, there is no Rabbinic basis for the

invention of such a story; and by far the ablest representative of the

negative school[2045]2045 has conclusively shown, that it could not

have originated in an imitation of the Old Testament account of

Naaman's cure by Elisha the prophet.[2046]2046 But, if Christ had

really spoken those words to the courtier, as this critic seems to

admit, there remains only, as he puts it, this 'trilemma:' either He

could really work the miracle in question; or, He spoke as a mere

fanatic; or else, He was simply a deceiver. It is a relief to find

that the two last hypotheses are discarded. But, as negative criticism

- may we not say, from the same spirit which Jesus reproved in the

courtier - is unwilling to admit that Jesus really wrought this

miracle, it is suggested in explanation of the cure, that the sick

child, to whom the father had communicated his intended application to

Jesus, had been in a state of expectancy which, when the courtier

returned with the joyous assurance that the request was granted,

issued in actual recovery.[2047]2047 To this there is the obvious

answer, that the explanation wants the first requirement - that of an

historical basis. There is not a tittle of evidence that the child

expected a cure; while, on the other hand, the narrative expressly

states that he was cured before his father's return. And, if the

narrative may be altered at will to suit the necessities of a

groundless hypothesis, it is difficult to see which, or whether any,

part of it should be retained. It is not so that the origin of a

faith, which has transformed the world, can be explained. But we have

here another evidence of the fact, that objections which, when

regarded as part of a connected system, seem so formidable to some,

utterly break down, when each narrative is carefully examined in

detail.

There are other circumstances in this history, which require at least

passing consideration. Of these the principal are the time when the

servants of the court-officer met him, on his return journey, with the

joyful tidings that his son lived; and, connected with it, the time

when 'he began to do nicely;'[2048]2048 [2049]2049 and, lastly, that

when the 'court-official' applied to Jesus. The two latter events were

evidently contemporaneous.[2050]2050 The exact time indicated by the

servants as the commencement of the improvement is, 'Yesterday, at the

seventh hour.' Now, however the Jewish servants may originally have

expressed themselves, it seems impossible to assume, that St. John

intended any other than the Roman notation of the civil day, or that

he meant any other hour than 7 p.m. The opposite view, that it marks

Jewish notation of time, or 1 p.m., is beset by almost unsurmountable

difficulties.[2051]2051 For it must be borne in mind, that, as the

distance between Capernaum and Cana is about twenty-five miles, it

would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the

courtier, leaving his home that morning, not only to have reached

Cana, but to have had the interview with Jesus by 1 p.m. The

difficulty is only increased, when we are asked to believe, that after

such a journey the courtier had immediately set out on his return. But

this is absolutely necessary for the theory, since a Jew would not

have set out on such a journey after dusk. But farther, on the above

supposition, the servants of the court official must have taken the

road immediately, or very soon after, the improvement commenced. This

is itself unlikely, and, indeed, counter-indicated by the terms of the

conversation between the courtier and the servants, which imply that

they had waited till they were sure that it was recovery, and not

merely a temporary improvement.[2052]2052 Again, on the theory

combated, the servants, meeting the 'courtier,' as we must suppose,

midway, if not near to Capernaum, would have said, 'Yesterday at the

seventh hour the fever left him,' meaning thereby, that, as they spoke

in the evening, when another Jewish day had begun, the fever had left

him on the afternoon of the same day, although, according to Jewish

reckoning, 'yesterday,' since 1 P.M. would be reckoned as the previous

day. But it may be safely affirmed, that no Jew would have so

expressed himself. If, on the evening of a day, they had referred to

what had taken place five or six hours previously, at 1 P.M., they

would have said: 'At the seventh hour the fever left him;' and not

'Yesterday at the seventh hour.'

It is needless to follow the matter further. We can understand how,

leaving Capernaum in the morning, the interview with Jesus and the

simultaneous cure of the child would have taken place about seven

o'clock of the evening. Its result was, not only the restoration of

the child, but that, no longer requiring to see signs and wonders,

'the man believed the word which Jesus had spoken unto him.' In this

joyous assurance, which needed no more ocular demonstration, he 'went

his way,' either to the hospitable home of a friend, or to some near

lodging-place on the way, to be next day met by the gladsome tidings,

that it had been to him according to his faith. As already noted, the

whole morale of the history lies in this very matter, and it marks the

spiritual receptiveness of the courtier, which, in turn, was the moral

condition of his desire being granted. Again, we learn how, by the

very granting of his desire, the spiritual object of Christ in the

teaching of the courtier was accomplished, how, under certain

spiritual conditions in him and upon him, the temporal benefit

accomplished its spiritual object. And in this also, as in other

points which will occur to the devout reader, there are lessons of

deepest teaching to us, and for all times and circumstances.

Whether this 'royal officer' was Chuza, Herod's steward, whose wife,

under the abiding impression of this miracle to her child, afterwards

humbly, gratefully ministered to Jesus,[2053]2053 must remain

undermined on this side time. Suffice it, to mark the progress in the

'royal officer' from belief in the power of Jesus to faith in His

word,[2054]2054 and thence to absolute faith in Him,[2055]2055 with

its blessed expansive effect on that whole household. And so are we

ever led faithfully and effectually, yet gently, by His benefits,

upwards from the lower stage of belief by what we see Him do, to that

higher faith which is absolute and unseeing trust, springing from

experimental knowledge of what He is.

CHAPTER X.

THE SYNAGOGUE AT NAZARETH - SYNAGOGUE-WORSHIP AND ARRANGEMENTS.

(St. Luke iv. 16.)

The stay in Cana, though we have no means of determining its length,

was probably of only short duration. Perhaps the Sabbath of the same

week already found Jesus in the Synagogue of Nazareth. We will not

seek irreverently to lift the veil of sacred silence, which here, as

elsewhere, the Gospel-narratives have laid over the Sanctuary of His

inner Life. That silence is itself theopneustic, of Divine breathing

and inspiration; it is more eloquent than any eloquence, a guarantee

of the truthfulness of what is said. And against this silence, as the

dark background, stands out as the Figure of Light the Person of the

Christ. Yet, as we follow Jesus to the city of His Childhood and home

of His humility, we can scarcely repress thoughts of what must have

stirred His soul, as He once more entered the well-known valley, and

beheld the scenes to each of which some early memory must have

attached.

Only a few months since He had left Nazareth, but how much that was

all-decisive to Him, to Israel, and to the world had passed! As the

lengthening shadows of Friday's sun closed around the quiet valley, He

would hear the well-remembered double blast of the trumpet from the

roof of the Synagogue-minister's house, proclaiming the advent of the

holy day.[2056]2056 Once more it sounded through the still summer-air,

to tell all, that work must be laid aside.[2057]2057 Yet a third time

it was heard, ere the 'minister' put it aside close by where he stood,

not to profane the Sabbath by carrying it; for now the Sabbath had

really commenced, and the festive Sabbath-lamp was lit.

Sabbath morn dawned, and early He repaired to that Synagogue where, as

a Child, a Youth, a Man, He had so often worshipped in the humble

retirement of His rank, sitting, not up there among the elders and the

honoured, but far back. The old well-known faces were around Him, the

old well-remembered words and services fell on His ear. How different

they had always been to Him than to them, with whom He had thus

mingled in common worship! And now He was again among them, truly a

stranger among His own countrymen; this time, to be looked at,

listened to, tested, tried, used or cast aside, as the case might be.

It was the first time,[2058]2058 so far as we know, that He taught in

a Synagogue, and this Synagogue that of His own Nazareth.

It was, surely, a wondrously linked chain of circumstances, which

bound the Synagogue to the Church. Such a result could never have been

foreseen, as that, what really was the consequence of Israel's

dispersion, and, therefore, indirectly the punishment of their sin,

should become the means of fulfilling Israel's world-mission. Another

instance this, of how Divine judgment always bears in its bosom larger

mercy; another illustration how the dying of Israel is ever life to

the world; another manifestation of that supernatural Rule of God, in

which all is rule, that is, law and order, and all the supernatural,

bringing to pass, in the orderly succession of events, what at the

outset would have seemed, and really is, miraculous. For the Synagogue

became the cradle of the Church. Without it, as indeed without

Israel's dispersion, the Church Universal would, humanely speaking,

have been impossible, and the conversation of the Gentiles have

required a succession of millennial miracles.

That Synagogues originated during, or in consequence of the Babylonish

captivity, is admitted by all. The Old Testament contains no allusion

to their existence,[2059]2059 and the Rabbinic attempts to trace them

even to patriarchal times[2060]2060 deserve, of course, no serious

consideration. We can readily understand how during the long years of

exile in Babylon, places and opportunities for common worship on

Sabbaths and feast-days must have been felt almost a necessity. This

would furnish, at least, the basis for the institution of the

Synagogue. After the return to Palestine, and still more by 'the

dispersed abroad,' such 'meeting-houses' (Battey Khenesiyoth, domus

congregationum, Synagogues) would become absolutely requisite. Here

those who were ignorant even of the language of the Old Testament

would have the Scriptures read and 'targumed' to them.[2061]2061 It

was but natural that prayers, and, lastly, addresses, should in course

of time be added. Thus the regular Synagogue, service would gradually

arise; first on Sabbaths and on feast, or fast-days, then on ordinary

days, at the same hours as, and with a sort of internal correspondence

to, the worship of the Temple. The services on Mondays and Thursdays

were special, these being the ordinary market-days, when the

country-people came into the towns, and would avail themselves of the

opportunity for bringing any case that might require legal decision

before the local Sanhedrin, which met in the Synagogue, and consisted

of its authorities. Naturally, these two days would be utilised to

afford the country-people, who lived far from the Synagogues,

opportunities for worship;[2062]2062 and the services on those days

were of a somewhat more elaborate character. Accordingly, Monday and

Thursday were called 'the days of congregation' or 'Synagogue' (Yom

ha-Kenisah).

In another place[2063]2063 it has been shown, how rapidly and

generally the institution of Synagogues spread among the Jews of the

Dispersion in all lands, and what important purposes they served. In

Palestine they were scattered over the whole country, though it is

only reasonable to suppose, that their number greatly increased after

the destruction of the Temple, and this without crediting the Jewish

legend as to their extraordinary number in certain cities, such as

480, or 460, in Jerusalem.[2064]2064 In the capital, and probably in

some other large cities, there were not only several Synagogues, but

these arranged according to nationalities, and even crafts.[2065]2065

At the same time it deserves notice, that even in so important a place

as Capernaum there seems either not to have been a Synagogue, or that

it was utterly insignificant, till the want was supplied by the pious

gentile centurion.[2066]2066 This would seem to dispose of the

question whether, as is generally assumed, a Jewish community in a

place, if numbering ten heads of families, was obliged to build a

Synagogue, and could enforce local taxation for the purpose. Such was

undoubtedly the later Rabbinic ordinance,[2067]2067 but there is no

evidence that it obtained in Palestine, or in early times.

Generally, of course, a community would build its own Synagogue, or

else depend on the charitable assistance of neighbours, or on private

munificence. If this failed, they might meet for worship in a private

dwelling, a sort of 'Synagogue in the house.'[2068]2068 For, in early

times the institution would be much more simple than at a later

period. In this, as in other respects, we must remember that later

Jewish arrangements afford no evidence of those which prevailed while

the Temple stood, nor yet the ordinances of the chiefs of Babylonian

Academies of the customs existing in Palestine, and, lastly, that the

Rabbinic directions mark rather an ideal than the actual state of

things. Thus - to mention an instance of some importance, because the

error has been so often repeated as to be generally believed, and to

have misled recent explorers in Palestine - there is no evidence that

in Palestine Synagogues always required to be built in the highest

situation in a town, or, at least, so as to overtop the other houses.

To judge from a doubtful[2069]2069 passage in the Talmud,[2070]2070

this seems to have been the case in Persia, while a later

notice[2071]2071 appeals in support of it to Prov. viii. 2. But even

where the Jews were most powerful and influential, the rule could not

have been universally enforced, although later Rabbis lay it down as a

principle.[2072]2072 Hence, the inference, that the Galilean

Synagogues lately excavated cannot date from an early period, because

they are not in prominent positions, is erroneous.[2073]2073

But there were two rules observed, which seem to have been enforced

from early times. One of these enjoined, that a Synagogue should not

be erected in a place, unless it contained ten Batlanim,[2074]2074 or

men of leisure, who could devote their time to the Synagogue worship

and administration.[2075]2075 This was proved by the consideration,

that common worship implied a congregation, which, according to Jewish

Law, must consist of at least ten men.[2076]2076 Another, and perhaps

more important rule was as to the direction in which Synagogues were

to be built, and which worshippers should occupy during prayer. Here

two points must be kept in view: 1st. Prayer towards the east was

condemned, on the ground of the false worship towards the east

mentioned in Ezek. viii. 16.[2077]2077 2ndly. The prevailing direction

in Palestine was towards the west, as in the Temple. Thus, we

read[2078]2078 that the entrance into the Synagogue was by the east,

as the entrance through the Beautiful Gate into the Sanctuary. This,

however, may refer, not to the door, but to the passage (aisle) into

the interior of the building. In other places,[2079]2079 the advice is

simply given to turn towards Jerusalem, in whatever direction it be.

In general, however, it was considered that since the Shekhinah was

everywhere in Palestine, direction was not of paramount importance.

If we combine these notices, and keep in view the general desire to

conform to the Temple arrangements, the ruined Synagogues lately

excavated in the north of Galilee seem, in a remarkable manner, to

meet the Talmudic requirements. With the exception of one (at 'Irbid,

which has its door to the east), they all have their entrances on the

south. We conjecture that the worshippers, imitating in this the

practice in the Temple, made a circuit, either completely to the

north, or else entered at the middle of the eastern aisle, where, in

the ground-plan of the Synagogue at Capernaum, which seems the most

fully preserved ruin, two pillars in the colonnade are

wanting.[2080]2080 The so-called 'Ark' would be at the south end; the

seats for the elders and honourable in front of it, facing the people,

and with their back to the Ark.[2081]2081 Here two pillars are wanting

in the Synagogue at Capernaum. The lectern of the reader would be in

the centre, close to where the entrance was into the double colonnade

which formed the Synagogue, where, at present, a single pillar is

marked in the plan of the Capernaum Synagogue; while the women's

gallery was at the north end, where two columns and pillars of

peculiar shape, which may have supported the gallery, are traceable.

For it is a mistake to suppose that the men and women sat in opposite

aisles, separated by a low wall. Philo notices, indeed, this

arrangement in connection with the Therapeutæ;[2082]2082 but there is

no indication that the practice prevailed in the Synagogues, or in

Palestine.

[fig3a.jpg]

Figure 3a.

We can now, with the help given by recent excavations, from a

conception of these ancient Synagogues. The Synagogue is built of the

stone of the country. On the lintels over the doors there are various

ornamentations - a seven-branched candlestick, an open flower between

two Paschal lambs, or vine-leaves with bunches of grapes, or, as at

Capernaum, a pot of manna between representations of Aaron's rod. Only

glancing at the internal decorations of mouldings or cornice, we

notice that the inside plan is generally that of two double

colonnades, which seem to have formed the body of the Synagogue, the

aisles east and west being probably used as passages. The

intercolumnar distance is very small, never greater than 9½

feet.[2083]2083 The 'two corner columns at the northern end invariably

have their two exterior faces square like pillars, and the two

interior ones formed by half-engaged pillars.' Here we suppose the

women's gallery to have risen. The flooring is formed of slabs of

white limestone;[2084]2084 the walls are solid (from 2 even to 7 feet

in thickness), and well built of stones, rough in the exterior, but

plastered in the interior. The Synagogue is furnished with sufficient

windows to admit light. The roof is flat, the columns being sometimes

connected by blocks of stone, on which massive rafters rest.

Entering by the door at the southern end, and making the circuit to

the north, we take our position in front of the women's gallery. These

colonnades form the body of the Synagogue.[2085]2085 At the south end,

facing north, is a movable 'Ark,' containing the sacred rolls of the

Law and the Prophets. It is called the Holy Chest or Ark, Aron

haqqodesh (to call it simply 'aron' was sinful),[2086]2086 but chiefly

the Tebhah, Ark.[2087]2087 It was made movable, so that it might be

carried out, as on public fasts.[2088]2088 Steps generally led up to

it (the Darga or Saphsel). In front hangs (this probably from an early

period) the Vilon or curtain. But the Holy Lamp is never wanting, in

imitation of the undying light in the Temple.[2089]2089 Right before

the Ark, and facing the people, are the seats of honour, for the

rulers of the Synagogue and the honourable.[2090]2090 The place for

him who leads the devotion of the people is also in front of the Ark,

either elevated, or else, to mark humility, lowered.[2091]2091 In the

middle of the Synagogue (so generally) is the Bima,[2092]2092 or

elevation, on which there is the Luach, or desk,[2093]2093 from which

the Law is read. This is also called the Kurseya, chair, or

throne,[2094]2094 or Kissé, and Pergulah. Those who are to read the

Law will stand, while he who is to preach or deliver an address will

sit. Beside them will be the Methurgeman, either to interpret, or to

repeat aloud, what is said.

As yet the Synagogue is empty, and we may therefore call to mind what

we ought to think, and how to bear ourselves. To neglect attendance on

its services would not only involve personal guilt, but bring

punishment upon the whole district. Indeed, to be effectual, prayer

must be offered in the Synagogue.[2095]2095 At the same time, the more

strict ordinances in regard to the Temple, such as, that we must not

enter it carrying a staff, nor with shoes, nor even dust on the feet,

nor with scrip or purse, do not apply to the Synagogue, as of

comparatively inferior sanctity.[2096]2096 However, the Synagogue must

not be made a thoroughfare. We must not behave lightly in

it.[2097]2097 We may not joke, laugh, eat, talk, dress, nor resort

there for shelter from sun or rain. Only Rabbis and their disciples,

to whom so many things are lawful, and who, indeed, must look upon the

Synagogue as if it were their own dwelling, may eat, drink, perhaps

even sleep there. Under certain circumstances, also, the poor and

strangers may be fed there.[2098]2098 But in general, the Synagogue

must be regarded as consecrated to God. Even if a new one be built,

care must be taken not to leave the old edifice till the other is

finished. Money collected for the building may, in cases of necessity,

be used for other purposes, but things dedicated for it are

inalienable by sale. A Synagogue may be converted into an Academy,

because the latter is regarded as more sacred, but not vice versa.

Village Synagogues may be disposed of, under the direction of the

local Sanhedrin, provided the locale be not afterwards used for

incongruous purposes, such as public baths, a wash-house, a tannery,

&c. But town Synagogues are inalienable, because strangers may have

contributed to them; and, even if otherwise, they have a right to look

for some place of worship. At the same time, we must bear in mind that

this rule had its exceptions; notably that, at one time, the guild of

coppersmiths in Jerusalem sold their Synagogue.[2099]2099

All this, irrespective of any Rabbinic legends, shows with what

reverence these 'houses of congregation' were regarded. And now the

weekly Sabbath, the pledge between Israel and God, had once more come.

To meet it as a bride or queen, each house was adorned on the Friday

evening. The Sabbath lamp was lighted; the festive garments put on;

the table provided with the best which the family could afford; and

the Qiddush, or benediction, spoken over the cup of wine, which, as

always, was mixed with water.[2100]2100 And as Sabbath morning broke,

they hastened with quick steps to the Synagogue; for such was the

Rabbinic rule in going, while it was prescribed to return with slow

and lingering steps. Jewish punctiliousness defined every movement and

attitude in prayer. If those rules were ever observed in their

entirety, devotion must have been crushed under their weight. But we

have evidence that, in the time of our Lord, and even later, there was

much personal freedom left;[2101]2101 for, not only was much in the

services determined by the usage of each place, but the leader of the

devotions might preface the regular service by free prayer, or insert

such between certain parts of the liturgy.

We are now in the Nazareth Synagogue. The officials are all assembled.

The lowest of these is the Chazzan, or minister,[2102]2102 who often

acts also as schoolmaster. For this reason, and because the conduct of

the services may frequently devolve upon him, great care is taken in

his selection. He must be not only irreproachable, but, if possible,

his family also. Humility, modesty, knowledge of the Scriptures,

distinctness and correctness in pronunciation, simplicity and neatness

in dress, and an absence of self-assertion, are qualities sought for,

and which, in some measure, remind us of the higher qualifications

insisted on by St. Paul in the choice of ecclesiastical officers. Then

there are the elders (Zeqenim), or rulers (_rcontev), whose chief is

the Archisynagogos, or Rosh ha-Keneseth. These are the rulers

(Parnasim) or shepherds (poim_nev). There can be no question (from the

inscriptions on the Jewish tombstones in Rome),[2103]2103 that the

Archisynagogos[2104]2104 was chief among the rulers, and that, whether

or not there was, as in the community at Rome, and probably also among

the dispersed in the West, besides him, a sort of political chief of

the elders, or Gerousiarch.[2105]2105 All the rulers of the Synagogue

were duly examined as to their knowledge, and ordained to the office.

They formed the local Sanhedrin or tribunal. But their election

depended on the choice of the congregation; and absence of pride, as

also gentleness and humility, are mentioned as special

qualifications.[2106]2106 Sometimes the office was held by regular

teachers.[2107]2107

If, as in Rome, there was an apparently unordained eldership

(Gerousia), it had probably only the charge of outward affairs, and

acted rather as a committee of management. Indeed, in foreign

Synagogues, the rulers seem to have been chosen, sometimes for a

specified period, at others for life. But, although it may be admitted

that the Archisynagogos, or chief ruler of the Synagogue, was only the

first among his equals, there can be no doubt that the virtual rule of

the Synagogue devolved upon him. He would have the superintendence of

Divine service, and, as this was not conducted by regular officials,

he would in each case determine who were to be called up to read from

the Law and the Prophets, who was to conduct the prayers, and act as

Sheliach Tsibbur, or messenger of the congregation, and who, if any,

was to deliver an address. He would also see to it that nothing

improper took place in the Synagogue,[2108]2108 and that the prayers

were properly conducted. In short, the supreme care, both of the

services and of the building, would devolve upon him. To these regular

officials we have to add those who officiated during the service, the

Sheliach Tsibbur, or delegate of the congregation - who, as its

mouthpiece, conducted the devotions - the Interpreter or Methurgeman,

and those who were called on to read in the Law and the Prophets, or

else to preach.

We are now in some measure prepared to follow the worship on that

Sabbath in Nazareth. On His entrance into the Synagogue, or perhaps

before that, the chief ruler would request Jesus to act for that

Sabbath as the Sheliach Tsibbur. For according to the

Mishnah,[2109]2109 the person who read in the Synagogue the portion

from the Prophets, was also expected to conduct the devotions, at

least in greater part.[2110]2110 If this rule was enforced at that

time, then Jesus would ascend the Bima, and standing at the lectern,

begin the service by two prayers, which in their most ancient form, as

they probably obtained in the time of our Lord, were as follows: -

I. 'Blessed be Thou, O Lord, King of the world, Who formest the light

and createst the darkness, Who makest peace, and createst everything;

Who, in mercy, givest light to the earth, and to those who dwell upon

it, and in Thy goodness, day by day, and every day, renewest the works

of creation. Blessed be the Lord our God for the glory of His

handiworks, and for the light-giving lights which He has made for His

praise. Selah. Blessed be the Lord our God, Who has formed the

lights.'

II. 'With great love hast Thou loved us, O Lord our God, and with much

overflowing pity hast Thou pitied us, our Father and our King. For the

sake of our fathers who trusted in Thee, and Thou taughtest them the

statutes of life, have mercy upon us, and teach us. Enlighten our eyes

in Thy Law; cause our hearts to cleave to Thy commandments; unite our

hearts to love and fear Thy Name, and we shall not be put to shame,

world without end. For Thou art a God Who preparest salvation, and us

hast Thou chosen from among all nations and tongues, and hast in truth

brought us near to Thy great Name - Selah - that we may lovingly

praise Thee and Thy Unity. Blessed be the Lord, Who in love chose His

people Israel.'

After this followed what may be designated as the Jewish Creed, called

the Shema, from the word 'shema,' or 'hear,' with which it begins. It

consisted of three passages from the Pentateuch,[2111]2111 so

arranged, as the Mishnah notes,[2112]2112 that the worshipper took

upon himself first the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, and only after

it the yoke of the commandments; and in the latter, again, first those

that applied to night and day, and then those that applied to the day

only. They were probably but later determinations, conceived in a

spirit of hostility to what was regarded as the heresy of

Christianity, which insisted that, as the first sentence in the Shema,

asserting the Unity of God, was the most important, special emphasis

should be laid on certain words in it. The recitation of the Shema was

followed by this prayer: -

'True it is that Thou art Jehovah, our God, and the God of our

fathers, our King, and the King of our fathers, our Saviour, and the

Saviour of our fathers, our Creator, the Rock of our Salvation, our

Help and our Deliverer. Thy Name is from everlasting, and there is no

God beside Thee. A new song did they that were delivered sing to Thy

Name by the sea-shore; together did all praise and own Thee King, and

say, Jehovah shall reign, world without end! Blessed be the God Who

saveth Israel.'

This prayer finished, he who officiated took his place before the Ark,

and there repeated what formed the prayer in the strictest sense, or

certain 'Eulogies' or Benedictions. These are eighteen, or rather

nineteen, in number, and date from different periods. But as on

Sabbaths only the three first and the three last of them, which are

also those undoubtedly of greatest age, were repeated, and between

them certain other prayers inserted, only these six, with which the

series respectively began and ended, need here find a place. The first

Benediction was said with bent body. It was as follows: -

I. 'Blessed be the Lord our God, and the God of our fathers, the God

of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; the Great, the

Mighty, and the Terrible God, the Most High God, Who showeth mercy and

kindness. Who createth all things, Who remembereth the gracious

promises to the fathers, and bringeth a Saviour to their children's

children, for His own Name's sake, in love. O King, Helper, Saviour,

and Shield! Blessed art Thou, O Jehovah, the Shield of Abraham.'

II. 'Thou O Lord, art mighty for ever; Thou. Who quickenest the dead,

art mighty to save. In Thy mercy Thou preservest the living, Thou

quickenest the dead; in Thine abundant pity Thou bearest up those who

fall, and healest those who are diseased, and loosest those who are

bound, and fulfillest Thy faithful word to those who sleep in the

dust. Who is like unto Thee, Lord of strength, and who can be compared

to Thee, Who killest and makest alive, and causest salvation to spring

forth? And faithful art Thou to give life to the dead. Blessed art

Thou, Jehovah, Who quickenest the dead!'

III. 'Thou art Holy, and Thy name is Holy. Selah. Blessed art Thou

Jehovah God, the Holy One.'

After this, such prayers were inserted as were suited to the day. And

here it may be noticed that considerable latitude was allowed. For,

although[2113]2113 it was not lawful to insert any petition in the

three first or the three last Eulogies, but only in the intermediate

Benedictions, in practice this was certainly not observed. Thus,

although, by the rubric, prayer for rain and dew was to be inserted up

to the season of the Passover in the ninth Benediction, yet

occasionally reference to this seems also to have been made in the

second Benediction, as connected with the quickening of that which is

dead.[2114]2114 Nay, some Rabbis went so far as to recommend a brief

summary of the eighteen Eulogies, while yet another (R. Eliezer)

repudiated all fixed forms of prayer.[2115]2115 But gradually, and

especially after the insertion of the well-known prayer against the

heretics or rather Christian converts (Eulogy XI.[2116]2116), the

present order of the eighteen Eulogies (Amidah) seems to have been

established. Both the Jerusalem[2117]2117 and the Babylon

Talmud[2118]2118 contain much on this subject which is of very great

interest.[2119]2119

Following the order of the service, we now come to the concluding

Eulogies, which were as follows: -

XVII. (XVI.) 'Take gracious pleasure, O Jehovah our God, in Thy

people Israel and in their prayers, and in love accept the

burnt-offerings of Israel, and their prayers with Thy good pleasure,

and may the services of Thy people be ever acceptable unto Thee. And O

that our eyes may see it, as Thou turnest in mercy to Zion. Blessed be

Thou, O Jehovah, Who restoreth His Shekhinah to Zion.'

XVIII. (XVII.) In saying this Eulogy, which was simply one of thanks,

it was ordered that all should bend down. It was as follows: - 'We

give praise to Thee, because Thou art He, Jehovah, our God, and the

God of our fathers, for ever and ever. The Rock of our life, the

Shield of our salvation, Thou art He, from generation to generation.

We laud Thee, and declare Thy praise. For our lives which are bound up

in Thine Hand, for our souls which are committed to Thee, and for Thy

wonders which are with us every day and for Thy marvellous deeds and

Thy goodnesses which are at all seasons, evening, and morning, and

midday - Thou Gracious One, for Thy compassions never end, Thou

Pitying One, for Thy mercies never cease, for ever do we put our trust

in Thee. And for all this, blessed and exalted be Thy Name, our King,

always, world without end. And all the living bless Thee - Selah - and

praise Thy Name in truth, O God, our Salvation and our Help. Selah.

Blessed art Thou, Jehovah. The Gracious One is Thy Name, and to Thee

it is pleasant to give praise.'

After this the priests, if any were in the Synagogue, spoke the

blessing, elevating their hands up to the shoulders[2120]2120 (in the

Temple above the head). This was called the lifting up of

hands.[2121]2121 In the Synagogue the priestly blessing was spoken in

three sections, the people each time responding by an Amen.[2122]2122

Lastly, in the Synagogue, the word 'Adonai' was substituted for

Jehovah.[2123]2123 [2124]2124 If no descendants of Aaron were present,

the leader of the devotions repeated the usual priestly

benediction.[2125]2125 After the benediction followed the last Eulogy,

which, in its abbreviated form (as presently used in the Evening

Service), is as follows: -

XIX. (XVIII.) 'O bestow on Thy people Israel great peace for ever. For

Thou art King, and Lord of all peace. And it is good in Thine eyes to

bless Thy people Israel at all times and at every hour with Thy peace.

Blessed art Thou, Jehovah, Who blesseth His people Israel with peace!'

It was the practice of leading Rabbis, probably dating from very early

times, to add at the close of this Eulogy certain prayers of their

own, either fixed or free, of which the Talmud gives specimens. From

very early times also, the custom seems to have obtained that the

descendants of Aaron, before pronouncing the blessing, put off their

shoes. In the benediction the priests turned towards the people, while

he who led the ordinary prayers stood with his back to the people,

looking towards the Sanctuary. The superstition, that it was unlawful

to look at the priests while they spoke the blessing,[2126]2126 must

be regarded as of later date. According to the Mishnah, they who

pronounce the benediction must have no blemish on their hands, face,

or feet, so as not to attract attention; but this presumably refers to

those officiating in the Temple.[2127]2127 It is a curious statement,

that priests from certain cities in Galilee were not allowed to speak

the words of blessing, because their pronunciation of the gutturals

was misleading.[2128]2128 According to the Jerusalem Talmud,[2129]2129

moral blemishes, or even sin, did not disqualify a priest from

pronouncing the benediction, since it was really God, and not man, Who

gave the blessing.[2130]2130 On the other hand, strict sobriety was

insisted on on such occasions. Later Judaism used the priestly

benediction as a means for counteracting the effects of evil dreams.

The public prayers closed with an Amen, spoken by the congregation.

The liturgical part being thus completed, one of the most important,

indeed, what had been the primary object of the Synagogue service,

began. The Chazzan, or minister, approached the Ark, and brought out a

roll of the Law. It was taken from its case (têq, teqah), and unwound

from those cloths (mitpachoth) which held it. The time had now come

for the reading of portions from the Law and the Prophets. On the

Sabbath, at least seven persons were called upon successively to read

portions from the Law, none of them consisting of less than three

verses. On the 'days of congregation' (Monday and Thursday), three

persons were called up; on New Moon's Day, and on the intermediate

days of a festive week, four; on feast days, five; and on the Day of

Atonement, six.[2131]2131 No doubt, there was even in ancient times a

lectionary, though certainly not that presently in use, which occupies

exactly a year.[2132]2132 On the contrary, the Palestinian lectionary

occupied three[2133]2133 or, according to some, three and a half

years,[2134]2134 half a Sabbatic period. Accordingly, we find that the

Massorah divides the Pentateuch into 154 sections. In regard to the

lectionary of three and a half years we read of 175 sections. It

requires, however, to be borne in mind, that preparatory to, and on

certain festive days, the ordinary reading was interrupted, and

portions substituted which bore on the subject of the feast. Possibly,

at different periods different cycles may have obtained - those for

three and a half years, three years, and even for one year.[2135]2135

[2136]2136 According to the Talmud,[2137]2137 a descendant of Aaron

was always called up first to the reading;[2138]2138 then followed a

Levite, and afterwards five ordinary Israelites. As this practice, as

well as that of priestly benediction,[2139]2139 has been continued in

the Synagogue from father to son, it is possible still to know who are

descendants of Aaron, and who Levites. The reading of the Law was both

preceded and followed by brief Benedictions.

Upon the Law followed a section from the Prophets,[2140]2140 the

so-called Haphtarah.[2141]2141 The origin of this practice is not

known, although it is one that must evidently have met a requirement

on the part of the worshippers. Certain it is, that the present

lectionary from the Prophets did not exist in early times; nor does it

seem unlikely that the choice of the passage was left to the reader

himself. At any rate, as regarded the ordinary Sabbath days,[2142]2142

we are told that a reader might omit one or more verses, provided

there was no break. As the Hebrew was not generally understood, the

Methurgeman, or Interpreter, stood by the side of the

reader,[2143]2143 and translated into the Aramæan verse by verse, and

in the section from the Prophets, or Haphtarah, after every three

verses.[2144]2144 But the Methurgeman was not allowed to read his

translation, lest it might popularly be regarded as authoritative.

This may help us in some measure to understand the popular mode of Old

Testament quotations in the New Testament. So long as the substance of

the text was given correctly, the Methurgeman might paraphrase for

better popular understanding. Again, it is but natural to suppose,

that the Methurgeman would prepare himself for his work by such

materials as he would find to hand, among which, of course, the

translation of the LXX. would hold a prominent place. This may in part

account alike for the employment of the LXX., and for its Targumic

modifications, in the New Testament quotations.

The reading of the section from the Prophets (the Haphtarah) was in

olden times immediately followed by an address, discourse, or sermon

(Derashah), that is, where a Rabbi capable of giving such instruction,

or a distinguished stranger, was present. Neither the leader of the

devotions ('the delegate of the congregation' in this matter, or

Sheliach Tsibbur), nor the Methurgeman, nor yet the preacher, required

ordination.[2145]2145 That was reserved for the rule of the

congregation, whether in legislation or administration, doctrine or

discipline.

The only points required in the preacher were the necessary

qualifications, both mental and moral.[2146]2146 When a great Rabbi

employed a Methurgeman to explain to the people his sermon, he would,

of course, select him for the purpose. Such an interpreter was also

called Amora, or speaker. Perhaps the Rabbi would whisper to him his

remarks, while he would repeat them aloud; or else he would only

condescend to give hints, which the Amora would amplify; or he would

speak in Hebrew, and the Amora translate it into Aramæan, Greek,

Latin, or whatever the language of the people might be, for the sermon

must reach the people in the vulgar tongue. The Amora would also, at

the close of the sermon, answer questions or meet objections. If the

preacher was a very great man, he would, perhaps, not condescend to

communicate with the Amora directly, but employ one of his students as

a middleman. This was also the practice when the preacher was in

mourning for a very near relative - for so important was his office

that it must not be interrupted, even by the sorrows or the religious

obligations of 'mourning.'[2147]2147

Indeed, Jewish tradition uses the most extravagant terms to extol the

institution of preaching. To say that it glorified God, and brought

men back, or at least nearer to Him, or that it quenched the soul's

thirst, was as nothing. The little city, weak and besieged, but

delivered by the wise man in it,[2148]2148 served as symbol of the

benefit which the preacher conferred on his hearers. The Divine Spirit

rested on him, and his office conferred as much merit on him as if he

had offered both the blood and the fat upon the altar of burnt

offering.[2149]2149 No wonder that tradition traced the institution

back to Moses, who had directed that, previous to, and on the various

festivals, addresses, explanatory of their rites, and enforcing them,

should be delivered to the people.[2150]2150 The Targum Jonathan

assumes the practice in the time of the Judges;[2151]2151 the men of

the Great Synagogue are, of course, credited with it, and Shemayah and

Abhtalyon are expressly designated as 'preachers.'[2152]2152 How

general the practice was in the time of Jesus and His Apostles, the

reader of the New Testament need not be told, and its witness is fully

borne out by Josephus[2153]2153 and Philo.[2154]2154 Both the

Jerusalem and the Babylon Talmud assume it as so common, that in

several passages 'Sabbath-observance' and the 'Sabbath-sermon' are

identified. Long before Hillel we read of Rabbis preaching - in Greek

or Latin - in the Jewish Synagogues of Rome,[2155]2155 just as the

Apostles preached in Greek in the Synagogues of the dispersed. That

this practice, and the absolute liberty of teaching, subject to the

authority of the 'chief ruler of the Synagogue,' formed important

links in the Christianisation of the world, is another evidence of

that wonder-working Rule of God, which brings about marvellous results

through the orderly and natural succession of events - nay, orders

these means with the view to their ultimate issue.

But this is not all. We have materials for drawing an accurate picture

of the preacher, the congregation, and the sermon, as in those days.

We are, of course, only speaking of the public addresses in the

Synagogues on Sabbaths - not of those delivered at other times or in

other places. Some great Rabbi, or famed preacher, or else a

distinguished stranger, is known to be in the town. He would, of

course, be asked by the ruler of the Synagogue to deliver a discourse.

But who is a great preacher? We know that such a reputation was much

coveted, and conferred on its possessor great distinction. The popular

preacher was a power, and quite as much an object of popular homage

and flattery as in our days. Many a learned Rabbi bitterly complained

on finding his ponderous expositions neglected, while the multitude

pushed and crowded into the neighbouring Synagogue to hear the

declamations of some shallow popular Haggadist.[2156]2156 And so it

came, that many cultivated this branch of theology. When a popular

preacher was expected, men crowded the area of the Synagogue, while

women filled the gallery.[2157]2157 On such occasions, there was the

additional satisfaction of feeling that they had done something

specially meritorious in running with quick steps, and crowding into

the Synagogue.[2158]2158 For, was it not to carry out the spirit of

Hos. vi. 3; xi. 10 - at least, as Rabbinically understood? Even grave

Rabbis joined in this 'pursuit to know the Lord,' and one of them

comes to the somewhat caustic conclusion, that 'the reward of a

discourse is the haste.'[2159]2159 However, more unworthy motives

sometimes influenced some of the audience, and a Talmudic

passage[2160]2160 traces the cause of many fasts to the meetings of

the two sexes on such occasions.

The type of a popular preacher was not very different from what in our

days would form his chief requisites. He ought to have a good

figure,[2161]2161 a pleasant expression, and melodious voice (his

words ought to be 'like those of the bride to the bridegroom'),

fluency, speech 'sweet as honey,' 'pleasant as milk and honey' -

'finely sifted like fine flour,' a diction richly adorned, 'like a

bride on her wedding day;' and sufficient confidence in his own

knowledge and self-assurance never to be disconcerted. Above all he

must be conciliatory, and avoid being too personal. Moses had

addressed Israel as rebellious and hard-hearted, and he was not

allowed to bring them into the land of promise. Elijah had upbraided

them with having broken the covenant, and Elisha was immediately

appointed his successor. Even Isaiah had his lips touched with burning

coals, because he spoke of dwelling among a people of sinful

lips.[2162]2162 [2163]2163 As for the mental qualifications of the

preacher, he must know his Bible well. As a bride knows properly to

make use of her twenty-four ornaments, so must the preacher of the

twenty-four books of the Bible. He must carefully prepare his subject

- he is 'to hear himself' before the people hear him. But whatever

else he may be or do, he must be attractive.[2164]2164 In earlier

times the sermon might have consisted of a simple exposition of some

passages from Scripture, or the Book of Sirach, which latter was

treated and quoted by some of the Rabbis almost as if it had been

canonical.[2165]2165 But this, or the full discussion of a single

text[2166]2166 ({hebrew}, to bore), would probably not be so

attractive as the adaptation of a text to present circumstances, or

even its modification and alteration for such purposes. There were

scarcely bounds to the liberties taken by the preacher. He would

divide a sentence, cut off one or two syllables from a word and join

them to the next, so producing a different meaning, or giving a new

interpretation to a text. Perhaps the strangest method was that of

introducing Greek words and expressions into the Hebrew, and this not

only to give a witty repartee,[2167]2167 but in illustration of

Scripture.[2168]2168 Nay, many instances occur, in which a Hebrew word

is, from the similarity of its sound with the Greek, rendered as if it

were actually Greek, and thus a new meaning is given to a

passage.[2169]2169

If such licence was taken, it seems a comparatively small thing that a

doctrine was derived from a word, a particle, or even a letter. But,

as already stated, the great point was to attract the hearers.

Parables, stories, allegories, witticisms, strange and foreign words,

absurd legends, in short, anything that might startle an audience, was

introduced.[2170]2170 Sometimes a discourse was entirely Haggadic; at

others, the Haggadah served to introduce the Halakhah. Sometimes the

object of the preacher was purely homiletical; at others, he dealt

chiefly with the explanation of Scripture, or of the rites and meaning

of festivals. A favourite method was that which derived its name from

the stringing together of pearls (Charaz), when a preacher, having

quoted a passage or section from the Pentateuch, strung on to it

another and like-sounding, or really similar, from the Prophets and

the Hagiographa. Or else he would divide a sentence, generally under

three heads, and connect with each of the clauses a separate doctrine,

and then try to support it by Scripture. It is easy to imagine to what

lengths such preachers might go in their misinterpretation and

misrepresentations of the plain text of Holy Scripture. And yet a

collection of short expositions (the Pesiqta), which, though not

dating from that period, may yet fairly be taken as giving a good idea

of this method of exposition, contains not a little that is fresh,

earnest, useful, and devotional. It is interesting to know that, at

the close of his address, the preacher very generally referred to the

great Messianic hope of Israel. The service closed with a short

prayer, or what we would term an 'ascription.'

We can now picture to ourselves the Synagogue, its worship, and

teaching. We can see the leader of the people's devotions as

(according to Talmudic direction) he first refuses, with mock-modesty,

the honour conferred on him by the chief ruler; then, when urged,

prepares to go; and when pressed a third time, goes up with slow and

measured steps to the lectern, and then before the Ark. We can imagine

how one after another, standing and facing the people, unrolls and

holds in his hand a copy of the Law or of the Prophets, and reads from

the Sacred Word, the Methurgeman interpreting. Finally, we can picture

it, how the preacher would sit down and begin his discourse, none

interrupting him with questions till he had finished, when a

succession of objections, answers, or inquiries might await the Amora,

if the preacher had employed such help. And help it certainly was not

in many cases, to judge by the depreciatory and caustic remarks, which

not unfrequently occur, as to the manners, tone, vanity, self-conceit,

and silliness of the Amora[2171]2171 [2172]2172 who, as he stood

beside the Rabbi, thought far more of attracting attention and

applause to himself, then of benefitting his hearers. Hence some

Rabbis would only employ special and trusted interpreters of their

own, who were above fifty years of age.[2173]2173 In short, so far as

the sermon was concerned, the impression it produced must have been

very similar to what we know the addresses of the monks in the Middle

Ages to have wrought. All the better can we understand, even from the

human aspect, how the teaching of Jesus, alike in its substance and

form, in its manner and matter, differed from that of the scribes; how

multitudes would hang entranced on His word; and how, everywhere and

by all, its impression was felt to be overpowering.

But it is certainly not the human aspect alone which here claims our

attention. The perplexed inquiry: 'Whence hath this man this wisdom

and this knowledge?' must find another answer than the men of Nazareth

could suggest, although to those in our days also who deny His Divine

character, this must ever seem an unanswered and unanswerable

question.

CHAPTER XI.

THE FIRST GALILEAN MINISTRY.

(St. Matt. iv. 13-17; St. Mark i. 14, 15; St. Luke iv. 15-32.)

The visit to Nazareth was in many respects decisive. It presented by

anticipation an epitome of the history of the Christ. He came to His

own, and His own received Him not. The first time He taught in the

Synagogue, as the first time He taught in the Temple, they cast Him

out. On the one and the other occasion, they questioned His authority,

and they asked for a 'sign.' In both instances, the power which they

challenged was, indeed, claimed by Christ, but its display, in the

manner which they expected, refused. The analogy seems to extend even

farther - and if a misrepresentation of what Jesus had said when

purifying the Temple formed the ground of the final false charge

against Him,[2174]2174 the taunt of the Nazarenes: 'Physician, heal

thyself!' found an echo in the mocking cry, as He hung on the Cross:

'He saved others, Himself He cannot save.'[2175]2175

It is difficult to understand how, either on historical grounds, or

after study of the character of Christ, the idea could have

arisen[2176]2176 that Jesus had offered, or that He had claimed, to

teach on that Sabbath in the Synagogue of Nazareth. Had He attempted

what, alike in spirit and form, was so contrary to all Jewish notions,

the whole character of the act would have been changed. As it was, the

contrast with those by whom He was surrounded is almost as striking,

as the part which He bore in the scene. We take it for granted, that

what had so lately taken place in Cana, at only four miles' distance,

or, to speak more accurately, in Capernaum, had become known in

Nazareth. It raised to the highest pitch of expectancy the interest

and curiosity previously awakened by the reports, which the Galileans

had brought from Jerusalem, and by the general fame which had spread

about Jesus. They were not to test, whether their countryman would be

equal to the occasion, and do in His own city what they had heard had

been done for Capernaum. To any ordinary man the return to Nazareth in

such circumstances must have been an ordeal. Not so to the Christ,

Who, in utter self-forgetfulness, had only this one aim of life - to

do the Will of Him that sent Him. And so His bearing that day in the

Synagogue is itself evidence, that while in, He was not of, that time.

Realising the scene on such occasions, we mark the contrast. As there

could be no un-Jewish forwardness on the part of Jesus, so, assuredly,

would there be none of that mock-humility of reluctance to officiate,

in which Rabbinism delighted. If, as in the circumstances seems

likely, Jesus commenced the first part of the service, and then

pronounced before the 'Ark' those Eulogies which were regarded as, in

the strictest sense, the prayer (Tephillah), we can imagine - though

we can scarcely realise - the reverent solemnity, which would seem to

give a new meaning to each well-remembered sentence. And in His mouth

it all had a new meaning. We cannot know what, if any, petitions He

inserted, though we can imagine what their spirit would have been. And

now, one by one, Priest, Levite, and, in succession, five Israelites,

had read from the Law. There is no reason to disturb the almost

traditional idea, that Jesus Himself read the concluding portion from

the Prophets, or the so-called Haphtarah. The whole narrative seems to

imply this. Similarly, it is most likely that the Haphtarah for that

day was taken from the prophecies of Isaiah,[2177]2177 and that it

included the passage[2178]2178 quoted by the Evangelist as read by the

Lord Jesus.[2179]2179 We know that the 'rolls' on which the Law was

written were distinct from those of the Prophets;[2180]2180 and every

probability points to it, that those of the Prophets, at least the

Greater, were also written on separate scrolls. In this instance we

are expressly told, that the minister 'delivered unto Him the book of

the prophet Esaias,' we doubt not, for the Haphtarah,[2181]2181 and

that, 'when He had unrolled the book,' He 'found' the place from which

the Evangelist makes quotation.

When unrolling, and holding the scroll, much more than the sixty-first

chapter of Isaiah must have been within range of His eyes. On the

other hand, it is quite certain that the verses quoted by the

Evangelist could not have formed the whole Haphtarah. According to

traditional rule,[2182]2182 the Haphtarah ordinarily consisted of not

less than twenty-one verses,[2183]2183 though, if the passage was to

be 'targumed,' or a sermon to follow, that number might be shortened

to seven, five, or even three verses. Now the passage quoted by St.

Luke consists really of only one verse (Is. lxi. 1), together with a

clause from Is. lviii. 6,[2184]2184 and the first clause of Is. lxi.

2. This could scarcely have formed the whole Haphtarah. There are

other reasons also against this supposition. No doubt Jesus read alike

the Haphtarah and the text of His discourse in Hebrew, and then

'targumed' or translated it: while St. Luke, as might be expected,

quotes (with but two trifling alterations[2185]2185) from the

rendering of the LXX. But, on investigation, it appears that one

clause is omitted from Is. lxi. 1,[2186]2186 and that between the

close of Is. lxi. 1 and the clause of verse 2, which is added, a

clause is inserted from the LXX. of Is. lviii. 6.[2187]2187 This could

scarcely have been done in reading the Haphtarah. But, if as we

suppose, the passages quoted formed the introductory text of Christ's

discourse, such quotation and combination were not only in accordance

with Jewish custom, but formed part of the favourite mode of teaching

- the Charaz - or stringing, like pearls, passage to passage,

illustrative of each other.[2188]2188 In the present instance, the

portion of the scroll which Jesus unrolled may have exhibited in close

proximity the two passages which formed the introductory text (the

so-called Pethichah). But this is of comparatively small interest,

since both the omission of a clause from Is. lxi. 1, and the insertion

of another adapted from Is. lviii. 6, were evidently intentional. It

might be presumptuous to attempt stating the reasons which may have

influenced the Saviour in this, and yet some of them will

instinctively occur to every thoughtful reader.

It was, indeed, Divine 'wisdom' - 'the Spirit of the Lord' upon Him,

which directed Jesus in the choice of such a text for His first

Messianic Sermon. It struck the key-note to the whole of His Galilean

ministry. The ancient Synagogue regarded Is. lxi. 1, 2, as one of the

three passages,[2189]2189 in which mention of the Holy Ghost was

connected with the promised redemption.[2190]2190 In this view, the

application which the passage received in the discourse of our Lord

was peculiarly suitable. For the words in which St. Luke reports what

followed the Pethichah, or introductory text, seem rather a summary,

than either the introduction or part of the discourse of Christ. 'This

day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.' A summary this, which

may well serve to guide in all preaching. As regards its form, it

would be: so to present the teaching of Holy Scripture, as that it can

be drawn together in the focus of one sentence; as regards its

substance, that this be the one focus: all Scripture fulfilled by a

present Christ. And this - in the Gospel which He bears to the poor,

the release which He announces to the captives, the healing which He

offers to those whom sin had blinded, and the freedom He brings to

them who were bruised; and all as the trumpet-blast of God's Jubilee

into His world of misery, sin, and want! A year thus begun would be

glorious indeed in the blessings it gave.

There was not a word in all this of what common Jewish expectancy

would have connected with, nay, chiefly accentuated in an announcement

of the Messianic redemption; not a word to raise carnal hopes, or

flatter Jewish pride. Truly, it was the most un-Jewish discourse for a

Jewish Messiah of those days, with which to open His Ministry. And yet

such was the power of these 'words of grace.' that the hearers hung

spell-bound upon them. Every eye was fastened on Him with hungry

eagerness. For the time they forgot all else - Who it was that

addressed them, even the strangeness of the message, so unspeakably in

contrast to any preaching of Rabbi or Teacher that had been heard in

that Synagogue. Indeed, one can scarcely conceive the impression which

the Words of Christ must have produced, when promise and fulfilment,

hope and reality, mingled, and wants of the heart, hitherto

unrealised, were wakened, only to be more than satisfied. It was

another sphere, another life. Truly, the anointing of the Holy Ghost

was on the Preacher, from Whose lips dropped these 'words of grace.'

And if such was the announcement of the Year of God's Jubilee, what

blessings must it bear in its bosom!

The discourse had been spoken, and the breathless silence with which,

even according to Jewish custom, it had been listed to,[2191]2191 gave

place to the usual after-sermon hum of an Eastern Synagogue. On one

point all were agreed: that they were marvellous words of grace, which

had proceeded out of His mouth. And still the Preacher waited, with

deep longing of soul, for some question, which would have marked the

spiritual application of what He had spoken. Such deep longing of soul

is kindred to, and passes into almost sternness, just because he who

so longs is so intensely in earnest, in the conviction of the reality

of his message. It was so with Jesus in Nazareth. They were indeed

making application of the Sermon to the Preacher, but in quite

different manner from that to which His discourse had pointed. It was

not the fulfilment of the Scripture in Him, but the circumstance, that

such an one as the Son of Joseph, their village carpenter, should have

spoken such words, that attracted their attention. Not, as we take it,

in a malevolent spirit, but altogether unspiritually, as regarded the

effect of Christ's words, did one and another, here and there, express

wonderment to his neighbour.

They had heard, and now they would fain have seen. But already the

holy indignation of Him, Whom they only knew as Joseph's son, was

kindled. The turn of matters; their very admiration and expectation;

their vulgar, unspiritual comments: it was all so entirely contrary to

the Character, the Mission, and the Words of Jesus. No doubt they

would next expect, that here in His own city, and all the more because

it was such, He would do what they had heard had taken place in

Capernaum. It was the world-old saying, as false, except to the ear,

and as speciously popular as most such sayings: 'Charity begins at

home' - or, according to the Jewish proverb, and in application to the

special circumstances: 'Physician, heal thyself.'[2192]2192 Whereas,

if there is any meaning in truth and principle; if there was any

meaning and reality in Christ's Mission, and in the discourse He had

just spoken, Charity does not begin at home; and 'Physician, heal

thyself' is not of the Gospel for the poor, nor yet the preaching of

God's Jubilee, but that of the Devil, whose works Jesus had come to

destroy. How could He, in His holy abhorrence and indignation, say

this better than by again repeating, though now with different

application, that sad experience, 'No prophet is accepted in his own

country,' which He could have hoped was for ever behind Him;[2193]2193

and by pointing to those two Old Testament instances of it, whose

names and authority were most frequently on Jewish lips? Not they who

were 'their own,' but they who were most receptive in faith - not

Israel, but Gentiles, were those most markedly favoured in the

ministry of Elijah and of Elisha.[2194]2194

As we read the report of Jesus' words, we perceive only dimly that

aspect of them which stirred the wrath of His hearers to the utmost,

and yet we do understand it. That He should have turned so fully the

light upon the Gentiles, and flung its large shadows upon them; that

'Joseph's Son' should have taken up this position towards them; that

He would make to them spiritual application unto death of His sermon,

since they would not make it unto life: it stung them to the quick.

Away He must out of His city; it could not bear His Presence any

longer, not even on that holy Sabbath. Out they thrust Him from the

Synagogue; forth they pressed Him out of the city; on they followed,

and around they beset Him along the road by the brow of the hill on

which the city is built - perhaps to that western angle, at present

pointed out as the site.[2195]2195 This, with the unspoken intention

of crowding Him over the cliff,[2196]2196 which there rises abruptly

about forty feet out of the valley beneath.[2197]2197 If we are

correct in indicating the locality, the road here

bifurcates,[2198]2198 and we can conceive how Jesus, Who had hitherto,

in the silence of sadness, allowed Himself almost mechanically to be

pressed onwards by the surrounding crowd, now turned, and by that look

of commanding majesty, the forthbreaking of His Divine Being, which

ever and again wrought on those around miracles of subjection,

constrained them to halt and give way before Him, while unharmed He

passed through their midst.[2199]2199 So did Israel of old pass

through the cleft waves of the sea, which the wonder-working rod of

Moses had converted into a wall of safety. Yet, although He parted

from it in judgment, not thus could the Christ have finally and for

ever left His own Nazareth.[2200]2200

Cast out of His own city, Jesus pursued His solitary way towards

Capernaum.[2201]2201 There, at least, devoted friends and believing

disciples would welcome Him. There, also, a large draught of souls

would fill the Gospel-net. Capernaum would be His Galilean

home.[2202]2202 Here He would, on the Sabbath-days, preach in that

Synagogue, of which the good centurion was the builder,[2203]2203 and

Jairus the chief ruler.[2204]2204 These names, and the memories

connected with them, are a sufficient comment on the effect of His

preaching: that 'His word was with power.' In Capernaum, also, was the

now believing and devoted household of the court-officer, whose only

son the Word of Christ, spoken at a distance, had restored to life.

Here also, or in the immediate neighbourhood, was the home of His

earliest and closest disciples, the brothers Simon and Andrew, and of

James and John, the sons of Zebedee.

From the character of the narrative, and still more from the later

call of these four,[2205]2205 it would seem that, after the return of

Jesus from Judæa into Galilee, His disciples had left Him, probably in

Cana, and returned to their homes and ordinary avocations. They were

not yet called to forsake all and follow Him - not merely to

discipleship, but to fellowship and Apostolate. When He went from Cana

to Nazareth, they returned to Capernaum. They knew He was near them.

Presently He came; and now His Ministry was in their own Capernaum, or

in its immediate neighbourhood.

For Capernaum was not the only place where He taught. Rather was it

the center for itinerancy through all that district, to preach in its

Synagogues.[2206]2206 Amidst such ministry of quiet 'power,' chiefly

alone and unattended by His disciples, the summer passed. Truly, it

was summer in the ancient land of Zebulun and Naphtali, in the Galilee

of the Gentiles, when the glorious Light that had risen chased away

the long winter's darkness, and those who had been the first exiles in

Assyrian bondage were the first brought back to Israel's true liberty,

and by Israel's Messiah-King. To the writer of the first Gospel, as,

long years afterwards, he looked back on this, the happy time when he

had first seen the Light, till it had sprung up even to him 'in the

region and shadow of death,' it must have been a time of peculiarly

bright memories. How often, as he sat at the receipt of custom, must

he have seen Jesus passing by; how often must he have heard His Words,

some, perhaps, spoken to himself, but all falling like good seed into

the field of his heart, and preparing him at once and joyously to obey

the summons when it came: Follow Me! And not to him only, but to many

more, would it be a glowing, growing time of heaven's own summer.

There was a dim tradition in the Synagogue, that this

prediction,[2207]2207 'The people that walk in the darkness see a

great light,' referred to the new light, with which God would

enlighten the eyes of those who had penetrated into the mysteries of

Rabbinic lore, enabling them to perceive concerning 'loosing and

binding, concerning what was clean and what was unclean.'[2208]2208

Others[2209]2209 regarded it as a promise to the early exiles,

fulfilled when the great liberty came to them. To Levi-Matthew it

seemed as if both interpretations had come true in those days of

Christ's first Galilean ministry. Nay, he saw them combined in a

higher unity when to their eyes, enlightened by the great Light, came

the new knowledge of what was bound and what loosed, what unclean and

clean, though quite differently from what Judaism had declared it to

them; and when, in that orient Sun, the promise of liberty to

long-banished Israel was at last seen fulfilled. It was, indeed, the

highest and only true fulfilment of that prediction of

Isaiah,[2210]2210 in a history where all was prophetic, every partial

fulfilment only an unfolding and opening of the bud, and each symbolic

of further unfolding till, in the fulness of time, the great Reality

came, to which all that was prophetic in Israel's history and

predictions pointed. And so as, in the evening of his days,

Levi-Matthew looked back to distant Galilee, the glow of the setting

sun seemed once more to rest on that lake, as it lay bathed in its

sheen of gold. It lit up that city, those shores, that custom-house;

it spread far off, over those hills, and across the Jordan. Truly, and

in the only true sense, had then the promise been fulfilled:[2211]2211

'To them which sat in the region and shadow of death, light is sprung

up.'

CHAPTER XII.

AT THE 'UNKNOWN' FEAST IN JERUSALEM, AND BY THE POOL OF BETHESDA.

(St. John v.)

The shorter days of early autumn had come,[2212]2212 and the country

stood in all its luxurious wealth of beauty and fruitfulness, as Jesus

passed from Galilee to what, in the absence of any certain evidence,

we must still be content to call 'the Unknown Feast' in Jerusalem.

Thus much, however, seems clear that it was either the 'Feast of

Wood-offering' on the 15th of Abh (in August), when, amidst

demonstrations of joy, willing givers brought from all parts of the

country the wood required for the service of the Altar; or else the

'Feast of Trumpets' on the 1st of Tishri (about the middle of

September), which marked the beginning of the New (civil)

Year.[2213]2213 The journey of Christ to that Feast and its results

are not mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, because that Judæan

ministry which, if the illustration be lawful, was the historical

thread on which St. John strung his record of what the Word spake,

lay, in great measure, beyond their historical standpoint. Besides,

this and similar events belonged, indeed, to that grand

Self-Manifestation of Christ, with the corresponding growth of

opposition consequent upon it, which it was the object of the Fourth

Gospel to set forth; but it led to no permanent results, and so was

outside the scope of the more popular, pragmatic record, which the

other Gospels has in view.

There may in this instance, however, have been other reasons also for

their silence. It has already been indicated that, during the summer

of Christ's first Galilean ministry, when Capernaum was His centre of

action, the disciples had returned to their homes and usual

avocations, while Jesus moved about chiefly alone and unattended. This

explains the circumstance of a second call, even to His most intimate

and closest followers. It also accords best with that gradual

development in Christ's activity, which commencing with the more

private teaching of the new Preacher of Righteousness in the villages

by the lake, or in the Synagogues, expanded into that publicity in

which He at last appears, surrounded by His Apostles, attended by the

loving ministry of those to whom He had brought healing of body or

soul, and followed by a multitude which everywhere pressed around Him

for teaching and help.

This more public activity commenced with the return of Jesus from 'the

Unknown Feast' in Jerusalem. There He had, in answer to the challenge

of the Jewish authorities, for the first time set forth His Messianic

claims in all their fulness. And there, also, He had for the first

time encountered that active persecution unto death, of which Golgotha

was the logical outcome. This Feast, then, was the time of critical

decision. Accordingly, as involving the separation from the old state

and the commencement of a new condition of things, it was immediately

followed by the call of His disciples to a new Apostleship. In this

view, we can also better understand the briefness of the notices of

His first Galilean ministry, and how, after Christ's return from that

Feast, His teaching became more full, and the display of His

miraculous power more constant and public.

It seems only congruous, accordant with all the great decisive steps

of Him in Whose footprints the disciples trod, only after He had

marked them, as it were, with His Blood, that He should have gone up

to that Feast alone and unattended. That such had been the case, has

been inferred by some from this, that the narrative of the healing of

the impotent man reads so Jewish, that the account of it appears to

have been derived by St. John from a Jew at Jerusalem.[2214]2214

[2215]2215 Others[2216]2216 have come to the same conclusion from the

meagreness of details about the event. But it seems implied in the

narrative itself, and the marked and exceptional absence of any

reference to disciples leads to the obvious conclusion, that they had

not been with their Master.

But, if Jesus was alone and unattended at the Feast, the question

arises, whence the report was derived of what He said in reply to the

challenge of the Jews? Here the answer naturally suggests itself, that

the Master Himself may, at some later period of His life - perhaps

during His last stay in Jerusalem - have communicated to His

disciples, or else to him who stood nearest to Him, the details of

what had passed on the first occasion when the Jewish authorities had

sought to extinguish His Messianic claims in His blood. If that

communication was made when Jesus was about to be offered up, it would

also account for what otherwise might seem a difficulty: the very

developed form of expression in which His relation to the Father, and

His own Office and Power, are presented. We can understand how, from

the very first, all this should have been laid before the teachers of

Israel. But in view of the organic development of Christ's teaching,

we could scarcely expect it to have been expressed in such very full

terms, till near the close of His Ministry.[2217]2217

But we are anticipating. The narrative transports us at once to what,

at the time, seems to have been a well-known locality in Jerusalem,

though all attempts to identify it, or even to explain the name

Bethesda, have hitherto failed. All we know is, that it was a pool

enclosed within five porches, by the sheep-market, presumably close to

the 'Sheep-Gate.'[2218]2218 This, as seems most likely, opened from

the busy northern suburb of markets, bazaars, and workshops, eastwards

upon the road which led over the Mount of Olives and Bethany to

Jericho.[2219]2219 In that case, most probability would attach to the

identification of the Pool Bethesda with a pool somewhat north of the

so-called Birket Israîl. At present it is wholly filled with rubbish,

but in the time of the Crusaders it seems to have borne the name of

the Sheep-pond, and, it was thought, traces of the five porches could

still be detected. Be this as it may, it certainly bore in the

'Hebrew' - or rather Aramæan - 'tongue,' the name Bethesda. No doubt

this name was designative, though the common explanations - Beth

Chisda (so most modern writers, and Watkins) 'House of Mercy' (?),

Beth Istebha ({hebrew}, Delitzsch), 'House of Porches,' and Beth

Zeytha (Westcott) 'House of the Olive' - seem all unsatisfactory. More

probability attaches to the rendering Beth Asutha (Wünsche), or Beth

Asyatha, 'House of Healing.' But as this derivation offers linguistic

difficulties, we would suggest that the second part of the name

(Beth-Esda) was really a Greek word Aramaised. Here two different

derivations suggest themselves. The root-word of Esda might either

express to 'become well' - Beth __sqai - or something akin to the

Rabbinic Zit[2220]2220 ({hebrew}=z_qi). In that case, the designation

would agree with an ancient reading of the name, Bethzatha. Or else,

the name Bethesda might combine, according to a not uncommon Rabbinic

practice, the Hebrew Beth with some Aramaised form derived from the

Greek word z_w, 'to boil' or 'bubble up' (subst. z_siv); in which case

it would mean 'the House of Bubbling-up,' viz. water. Any of the three

derivations just suggested would not only give an apt designation for

the pool, but explain why St. John, contrary to his usual practice,

does not give a Greek equivalent for a Hebrew term.

All this is, however, of very subordinate importance, compared with

the marvellous facts of the narrative itself. In the five porches

surrounding this pool lay 'a great multitude of the impotent,' in

anxious hope of a miraculous cure. We can picture to ourselves the

scene. The popular superstitions,[2221]2221 which gave rise to what we

would regard as a peculiarly painful exhibition of human misery of

body and soul, is strictly true to the times and the people. Even now

travellers describe a similar concourse of poor crippled sufferers, on

their miserable pallets or on rugs, around the mineral springs near

Tiberias, filling, in true Oriental fashion, the air with their

lamentations. In the present instance there would be even more

occasion for this than around any ordinary thermal spring. For the

popular idea was, that an Angel descended into the water, causing it

to bubble up, and that only he who first stepped into the pool would

be cured. As thus only one person could obtain benefit, we may imagine

the lamentations of the 'many' who would, perhaps, day by day, be

disappointed in their hopes. This bubbling up of the water was, of

course, due not to supernatural but to physical causes. Such

intermittent springs are not uncommon, and to this day the so-called

'Fountain of the Virgin' in Jerusalem exhibits the phenomenon. It is

scarcely necessary to say, that the Gospel-narrative does not ascribe

this 'troubling of the waters' to Angelic agency, nor endorses the

belief, that only the first who afterwards entered them, could be

healed. This was evidently the belief of the impotent man, as of all

the waiting multitude.[2222]2222 But the words in verse 4 of our

Authorised Version, and perhaps, also, the last clause of verse 3, are

admittedly an interpolation.[2223]2223

In another part of this book it is explained at length,[2224]2224 how

Jewish belief at the time attached such agency to Angels, and how it

localised (so to speak) special Angels in springs and rivers; and we

shall have presently to show, what were the popular notions about

miraculous cures. If, however, the belief about Bethesda arose merely

from the mistaken ideas about the cause of this bubbling of the water,

the question would naturally suggest itself, whether any such cases as

those described had ever really occurred, and, if not, how such a

superstition could have continued. But that such healing might

actually occur in the circumstances, no one would be prepared to deny,

who has read the accounts of pilgrimages to places of miraculous cure,

or who considers the influence of a firm expectancy on the

imagination, especially in diseases which have their origin in the

nervous system. This view of the matter is confirmed, and Scripture

still further vindicated from even the faintest appearance of

endorsing the popular superstition, by the use of the article in the

expression 'a multitude of the impotent' (pl_qov t_n _sqeno_ntwn),

which marks this impotence as used in the generic sense, while the

special diseases, afterwards enumerated without the article, are

ranged under it as instances of those who were thus impotent. Such use

of the Greek term, as not applying to any one specific malady, is

vindicated by a reference to St. Matt. viii. 17 and St. Mark vi. 56,

and by its employment by the physician Luke. It is, of course, not

intended to imply, that the distempers to which this designation is

given had all their origin in the nervous system; but we argue that,

if the term 'impotent' was the general, of which the diseases

mentioned in verse 3 were the specific - in other words, that, if it

was an 'impotence,' of which these were the various manifestations -

it may indicate, that they all, so far as relieved, had one common

source, and this, as we would suggest, in the nervous

system.[2225]2225

With all reverence, we can in some measure understand, what feelings

must have stirred the heart of Jesus, in view of this suffering,

waiting 'great multitude.' Why, indeed, did He go into those five

porches, since He had neither disease to cure, nor cry for help and

come to Him from those who looked for relief to far other means? Not,

surely, from curiosity. But as one longs to escape from the stifling

atmosphere of a scene of worldly pomp, with its glitter and unreality,

into the clearness of the evening-air, so our Lord may have longed to

pass from the glitter and unreality of those who held rule in the

Temple, or who occupied the seat of Moses in their Academies, to what

was the atmosphere of His Life on earth, His real Work, among that

suffering, ignorant multitude, which, in its sorrow, raised a piteous,

longing cry for help where it had been misdirected to seek it.

And thus we can here also perceive the deep internal connection

between Christ's miracle of healing 'the impotent man' and the address

of mingled sadness and severity,[2226]2226 in which He afterwards set

before the Masters in Israel the one truth fundamental in all things.

We have only, so to speak, to reverse the formal order and succession

of that discourse, to gain an insight into what prompted Jesus to go

to Bethesda, and by His power to perform this healing.[2227]2227 He

had been in the Temple at the Feast; He had necessarily been in

contact - it could not be otherwise, when in the Temple - with the

great ones of Israel. What a stifling atmosphere there of glitter and

unreality! What had He in common with those who 'received glory one of

another, and the glory which cometh from the One only God' they sought

not?[2228]2228 How could such men believe? The first meaning, and the

object of His Life and Work, was as entirely different from their aims

and perceptions, as were the respective springs of their inner being.

They clung and appealed to Moses; to Moses, whose successors they

claimed to be, let them go![2229]2229 Their elaborate searching and

sifting of the Law in hope that, by a subtle analysis of its every

particle and letter, by inferences from, and a careful drawing of a

prohibitive hedge around, its letter, they would possess themselves of

eternal life,[2230]2230 what did it all come to? Utterly

self-deceived, and far from the truth in their elaborate attempts to

outdo each other in local ingenuity, they would, while rejecting the

Messiah sent from God, at last become the victims of a coarse

Messianic impostor.[2231]2231 And even in the present, what was it

all? Only the letter - the outward! All the lessons of their past

miraculous history had been utterly lost on them. What had there been

of the merely outward in its miracles and revelations?[2232]2232 It

had been the witness of the Father; but this was the very element

which, amidst their handling of the external form, they perceived not.

Nay, not only the unheard Voice of the Father, but also the heard

voice of the Prophets - a voice which they might have heard even in

John the Baptist. They heard, but did not perceive it - just as, in

increasing measure, Christ's sayings and doings, and the Father and

His testimony, were not perceived. And so all hastened on to the

judgment of final unbelief, irretrievable loss, and self-caused

condemnation.[2233]2233 It was all utterly mistaken; utter, and, alas!

guilty perversion, their elaborate trifling with the most sacred

things, while around them were suffering, perishing men, stretching

'lame hands' into emptiness, and wailing out their mistaken hopes into

the eternal silence.

While they were discussing the niceties of what constituted labour on

a Sabbath, such as what infringed its sacred rest or what constituted

a burden, multitudes of them who laboured and were heavy laden were

left to perish in their ignorance. That was the Sabbath, and the God

of the Sabbath of Pharisaism; this the rest, the enlightenment, the

hope for them who laboured and were heavy laden, and who longed and

knew not where to find the true Sabbatismos! Nay, if the Christ had

not been the very opposite of all that Pharisaism sought, He would not

have been the Orient Sun of the Eternal Sabbath. But the God Who ever

worked in love, Whose rest was to give rest, Whose Sabbath to remove

burdens, was His Father. He knew Him; He saw His working; He was in

fellowship of love, of work, of power with Him. He had come to loose

every yoke, to give life, to bring life, to be life - because He had

life: life in its fullest sense. For, contact with Him, whatever it

may be, gives life: to the diseased, health; to the spiritually dead,

the life of the soul; to the dead in their graves, the life of

resurrection. And all this was the meaning of Holy Scripture, when it

pointed forward to the Lord's Anointed; and all this was not merely

His own, but the Father's Will - the Mission which He had given Him,

the Work which He had sent Him to do.[2234]2234

Translate this into deed, as all His teachings have been, are, and

will be, and we have the miraculous cure of the impotent man, with its

attendant circumstances. Or, conversely, translate that deed, with its

attendant circumstances, into words, and we have the discourse of our

Lord. Moreover, all this is fundamental to the highest understanding

of our Lord's history. And, therefore, we understand how, many years

afterwards, the beloved disciple gave a place to this miracle, when,

in the full ripeness of spiritual discernment, he chose for record in

his Gospel from among those 'many signs,' which Jesus truly

did,[2235]2235 only five as typical, like the five porches of the

great Bethesda of His help to the impotent, or like the five divisions

into which the Psalter of praise was arranged. As he looked back, from

the height where he stood at his journey's end, to where the sun was

setting in purple and golden glory far across the intervening

landscape, amidst its varying scenes this must have stood out before

his sight, as what might show to us that 'Jesus was the Christ, the

Son of God, and that believing we might have life through His

Name.'[2236]2236

And so, understanding from what He afterwards said to 'the Jews' what

He thought and felt in going thither, we are better prepared to follow

the Christ to Bethesda. Two pictures must have been here

simultaneously present to His mind. On the one side, a multitude whose

sufferings and false expectancies rose, like the wail of the starving

for bread; and, on the other side, the neighbouring Temple, with its

priesthood and teachers, who, in their self-seeking and the trifling

of their religious externalism, neither understood, heard, nor would

have cared for such a cry. If there was an Israel, Prince with God,

and if there was a God of the Covenant, this must not, cannot be; and

Christ goes to Bethesda as Israel's Messiah, the Truth, and the Life.

There was twofold suffering there, and it were difficult to know which

would have stirred Him most: that of the body, or the mistaken

earnestness which so trustfully looked for Heaven's relief - yet

within such narrow limits as the accident or good fortune of being

first pushed into the Angel-troubled waters. But this was also a true

picture of His people in their misery, and in their narrow notions of

God and of the conditions of His blessing. And now Israel's Messiah

had at last come. What would we expect Him to have done? Surely not to

preach controversial or reformatory doctrines; but to do, if it were

in Him, and in doing to speak. And so in this also the

Gospel-narrative proves itself true, by telling that He did, what

alone would be true in a Messiah, the Son of God. It is, indeed,

impossible to think of Incarnate Deity - and this, be it remembered,

is the fundamental postulate of the Gospels - as brought into contact

with misery, disease, and death without their being removed. That

power went forth from Him always, everywhere, and to all, is

absolutely necessary, if He was the Son of God, the Saviour of the

world. And so the miracles, as we mistakingly term the result of the

contact of God with man, of the Immanuel (God with us), are not only

the golden ladder which leads up to the Miracle, God manifest in the

flesh, but the steps by which He descends from His height to our

lowliness.

The waters had not yet been 'troubled,' when He stood among that

multitude of sufferers and their attendant friends. It was in those

breathless moments of the intense suspense of expectancy, when every

eye was fixed on the pool, that the eye of the Saviour searched for

the most wretched object among them all. In him, as a typical case,

could He best do and teach that for which He had come. This 'impotent'

man, for thirty-eight years a hopeless sufferer, without attendant or

friend[2237]2237 among those whom misery - in this also the true

outcome of sin - made so intensely selfish; and whose sickness was

really the consequence of his sin,[2238]2238 and not merely in the

sense which the Jews attached to it[2239]2239 - this now seemed the

fittest object for power and grace. For, most marked in this history

is the entire spontaneity of our Lord's help.[2240]2240 It is idle to

speak either of faith or of receptiveness on the man's part. The

essence of the whole lies in the utter absence of both; in Christ's

raising, as it were, the dead, and calling the things that are not as

though they were. This, the fundamental thought concerning His Mission

and power as the Christ shines forth as the historical background in

Christ's subsequent, explanatory discourse. The 'Wilt thou be made

whole?' with which Jesus drew the man's attention to Himself, was only

to probe and lay bare his misery. And then came the word of power, or

rather the power spoken forth, which made him whole every whit. Away

from this pool, in which there was no healing; away - for the Son of

God had come to him with the outflowing of His power and pitying help,

and he was made whole. Away with his bed, not, although it was the

holy Sabbath, but just because it was the Sabbath of holy rest and

holy delight!

In the general absorbedness of all around, no ear, but that to which

it had been spoken, had heard what the Saviour had said. The waters

had not been troubled, and the healing had been all unseen. Before the

healed man, scarcely conscious of what had passed, had, with new-born

vigour, gathered, himself up and rolled together his coverlet to

hasten after Him, Jesus had already withdrawn.[2241]2241 [2242]2242 In

that multitude, all thinking only of their own sorrows and wants, He

had come and gone unobserved. But they all now knew and observed this

miracle of healing, as they saw this unbefriended and most wretched of

them all healed, without the troubling of waters or first immersion in

them. Then there was really help in Israel, and help not limited to

such external means! How could Christ have taught that multitude, nay,

all Jerusalem and Jewry, all this, as well as all about Himself, but

by what He did? And so we learn here also another aspect of miracles,

as necessary for those who, weary of Rabbinic wrangling, could, in

their felt impotence, only learn by what He did that which He would

say.

We know it not, but we cannot believe that on that day, nor, perhaps,

thenceforth on any other day, any man stepped for healing into the

bubbling waters of Bethesda. Rather would they ask the healed man,

Whose was the word that had brought him healing? But he knew Him not.

Forth he stepped into God's free air, a new man. It was truly the holy

Sabbath within, as around him; but he thought not of the day, only of

the rest and relief it had brought. It was the holy Sabbath, and he

carried on it his bed. If he remembered that it was the Sabbath, on

which it was unlawful to carry forth anything - a burden, he would not

be conscious that it was a burden, or that he had any burden; but very

conscious that He, Who had made him whole, had bidden him take up his

bed and walk. These directions had been bound up with the very word

('Rise') in which his healing had come. That was enough for him. And

in this lay the beginning and root of his inward healing. Here was

simple trust, unquestioning obedience to the unseen, unknown, but real

Saviour. For he believed Him,[2243]2243 and therefore trusted in Him,

that He must be right; and so, trusting without questioning, be

obeyed.

The Jews saw him, as from Bethesda he carried home his 'burden.' Such

as that he carried were their only burdens. Although the law of

Sabbath-observance must have been made stricter in later Rabbinic

development, when even the labour of moving the sick into the waters

of Bethesda would have been unlawful, unless there had been present

danger to life,[2244]2244 yet, admittedly, this carrying of the bed

was an infringement of the Sabbatic law, as interpreted by

traditionalism. Most characteristically, it was this external

infringement which they saw, and nothing else; it was the Person Who

had commanded it Whom they would know, not Him Who had made whole the

impotent man. Yet this is quite natural, and perhaps not so different

from what we may still witness among ourselves.

It could not have been long after this - most likely, as soon as

possible - that the healed man and his Healer met in the Temple. What

He then said to him, completed the inward healing. On the ground of

his having been healed, let him be whole. As he trusted and obeyed

Jesus in the outward cure, so let him now inwardly and morally trust

and obey. Here also this looking through the external to the internal,

through the temporal to the spiritual and eternal, which is so

characteristic of the after-discourse of Jesus, nay, of all His

discourses and of His deeds, is most marked. The healed man now knew

to Whom he owed faith, gratitude, and trust of obedience; and the

consequences of this knowledge must have been incalculable. It would

make him a disciple in the truest sense. And this was the only

additional lesson which he, as each of us, must learn individually and

personally: that the man healed by Christ stands in quite another

position, as regards the morally right, from what he did before, not

only before his healing, but even before his felt sickness, so that,

if he were to go back to sin, or rather, as the original implies,

'continue to sin,'[2245]2245 a thing infinitely worse would come to

him.

It seems an idle question, why the healed man told the Jews that it

was Jesus. It was only natural that he should do so. Rather do we ask,

How did he know that He Who had spoken to him was Jesus? Was it by the

surrounding of keen-eyed, watchful Rabbis, or by the contradiction of

sinners? Certain we are, that it was far better Jesus should have

silently withdrawn from the porches of Bethesda to make it known in

the Temple, Who it was that had done this miracle. Far more

effectually could He so preach its lesson to those who had been in

Bethesda, and to all Jewry.

And yet something further was required. He must speak it out in clear,

open words, what was the hidden inward meaning of this miracle. As so

often, it was the bitter hatred of His persecutors which gave Him the

opportunity. The first forthbursting of His Messianic Mission and

Character had come in that Temple, when He realised it as His Father's

House, and His Life as about His Father's business. Again had these

thoughts about His Father kindled within Him in that Temple, when, on

the first occasion of His Messianic appearance there, He had sought to

purge it, that it might be a House of Prayer. And now, once more in

that House, it was the same consciousness about God as His Father, and

His Life as the business of His Father, which furnished the answer to

the angry invectives about His breach of the Sabbath-Law. The Father's

Sabbath was His; the Father worked hitherto and He worked; the

Father's work and His were the same; He was the Son of the

Father.[2246]2246 And in this He also taught, what the Jews had never

understood, the true meaning of the Sabbath-Law, by emphasising that

which was the fundamental thought of the Sabbath - 'Wherefore the Lord

blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it:' not the rest of inactivity,

but of blessing and hallowing.

Once more it was not His whole meaning, but only this one point, that

He claimed to be equal with God, of which they took hold. As we

understand it, the discourse beginning with verse 19 is not a

continuation of that which had been begun in verse 17, but was

delivered on another, though probably proximate occasion. By what He

had said about the Father working hitherto and His working, He had

silenced the multitude, who must have felt that God's rest was truly

that of beneficence, not of inactivity. But He had raised another

question, that of His equality with God, and for this He was taken to

task by the Masters in Israel. To them it was that He addressed that

discourse which, so to speak, preached His miracle at the Pool of

Bethesda. Into its details we cannot enter further than has already

been done. Some of its reasonings can be clearly traced, as starting

from certain fundamental positions, held in common alike by the

Sanhedrists and by Christ. Others, such as probably in answer to

unreported objections, we may guess at. This may also account for what

may seem occasional abruptness of transitions.

But what most impresses us, is the majestic grandeur of Christ's

self-consciousness in presence of His enemies, and yet withal the tone

of pitying sadness which pervades His discourse. The time of the

judgment of silence had not yet come. And for the present the majesty

of His bearing overawed them, even as it did His enemies to the end,

and Christ could pass unharmed from among them. And so ended that day

in Jerusalem. And this is all that is needful for us to know of His

stay at the Unknown Feast. With this inward separation, and the

gathering of hostile parties closes the first and begins the second,

stage of Christ's Ministry.

CHAPTER XIII.

BY THE SEA OF GALILEE - THE FINAL CALL OF THE FIRST DISCIPLES, AND THE

MIRACULOUS DRAUGHT OF FISHES

(St. Matt. iv. 18-22; St. Mark i. 16-20; St. Luke v. 1-11.)

We are once again out of the stifling spiritual atmosphere of the

great City, and by the glorious Lake of Galilee. They were other men,

these honest, simple, earnest, impulsive Galileans, than that

self-seeking, sophistical, heartless assemblage of Rabbis, whose first

active persecution Jesus had just encountered, and for the time

overawed by the majesty of His bearing. His return to Capernaum could

not have remained unknown. Close by, on either side of the city, the

country was studded with villages and towns, a busy, thriving, happy

multitude. During that bright summer He had walked along that Lake,

and by its shore and in the various Synagogues preached His Gospel.

And they had been 'astonished at His doctrine, for His word was with

power.' For the first time they had heard what they felt to be 'the

Word of God,' and they had learned to love its sound. What wonder

that, immediately on His return, 'the people pressed upon Him to hear'

it.

If we surrender ourselves to the impression which the Evangelic

narratives give us when pieced together,[2247]2247 it would almost

seem, as if what we are about to relate had occurred while Jesus was

returning from Jerusalem. For, the better reading of St. Mark i. 16

gives this as the mark of time: 'As He was passing on by the Sea of

Galilee.' But perhaps, viewed in connection with what follows, the

impression may be so far modified, that we may think of it as on the

first morning after His return. It had probably been a night of storm

on the Lake. For, the toil of the fishermen had brought them no

draught of fishes,[2248]2248 and they stood by the shore, or in the

boats drawn up on the beach, casting in their nets to 'wash'

them[2249]2249 of the sand and pebbles, with which such a night's work

would clog them, or to mend what had been torn by the violence of the

waves. It was a busy scene; for, among the many industries by the Lake

of Galilee, that of fishing was not only the most generally pursued,

but perhaps the most lucrative.

Tradition had it, that since the days of Joshua, and by one of his ten

ordinances, fishing in the Lake, though under certain necessary

restrictions, was free to all.[2250]2250 And as fish was among the

favourite articles of diet, in health and sickness, on week-days and

especially at the Sabbath-meal, many must have been employed in

connection with this trade. Frequent, and sometimes strange, are the

Rabbinic advices, what kinds of fish to eat at different times, and in

what state of preparation. They were eaten fresh, dried, or

pickled;[2251]2251 a kind of 'relish' or sauce was made of them, and

the roe also prepared.[2252]2252 or twine,[2253]2253 and the smaller

fish in baskets or casks. In truth, these Rabbis are veritable

connoisseurs in this delicacy; they discuss their size with

exaggerations, advise when they are in season, discern a peculiar

flavour in the same kinds if caught in different waters, and tell us

how to prepare them most tastefully, cautioning us to wash them down,

if it cannot be with water, with beer rather than wine.[2254]2254

[2255]2255 It is one of their usual exaggerations, when we read of 300

different kinds of fish at a dinner given to a great Rabbi,[2256]2256

although the common proverb had it, to denote what was abundant, that

it was like 'bringing fish to Acco.'[2257]2257 Besides, fish was also

largely imported from abroad.[2258]2258 It indicates the importance of

this traffic, that one of the gates of Jerusalem was called 'the

fish-gate.'[2259]2259 Indeed, there is a legend[2260]2260 to the

effect, that not less than 600,000 casks of sardines were every week

supplied for the fig-dressers of King Jannæus. But, apart from such

exaggerations, so considerable was this trade that, at a later period,

one of the Patriarchs of the Sanhedrin engaged in it, and actually

freighted ships for the transport of fish.[2261]2261

These notices, which might be largely multiplied, are of more than

antiquarian interest. They give a more vivid idea of life by the Lake

of Galilee, and show that those engaged in that trade, like Zebedee

and his sons ({hebrew}, 'the God-given,' like Theodore and Dorothea),

were not unfrequently men of means and standing. This irrespective of

the fact, that the Rabbis enjoined some trade or industrial occupation

on every man, whatever his station. We can picture to ourselves, on

that bright autumn morning, after a stormy night of bootless toil, the

busy scene by the Lake, with the fishermen cleaning and mending their

nets. Amidst their work they would scarcely notice the gathering

crowd. As we have suggested from the better reading of St. Mark i. 16,

it was Christ's first walk by the Lake on the morning after His return

from Judæa. Engaged in their fishing on the afternoon, evening, and

night of His arrival in Capernaum, they would probably not have known

of His presence till He spake to them. But He had come that morning

specially to seek four of these fishers, that He might, now that the

time for it had come, call them to permanent discipleship - and, what

is more, fit them for the work to which he would call them.

Jewish customs and modes of thinking at that time do not help us

further to understand the Lord's call of them, except so far as they

enable us more clearly to apprehend what the words of Jesus would

convey to them. The expression 'Follow Me' would be readily

understood, as implying a call to become the permanent disciple of a

teacher.[2262]2262 Similarly, it was not only the practice of the

Rabbis, but regarded as one of the most sacred duties, for a Master to

gather around him a circle of disciples.[2263]2263 Thus, neither Peter

and Andrew, nor the sons of Zebedee, could have misunderstood the call

of Christ, or even regarded it as strange. On that memorable return

from His Temptation in the wilderness they had learned to know Him as

the Messiah,[2264]2264 and they followed Him. And, now that the time

had come for gathering around Him a separate discipleship, when, with

the visit to the Unknown Feast, the Messianic activity of Jesus had

passed into another stage, that call would not come as a surprise to

their minds or hearts.

So far as the Master was concerned, we mark three points. First, the

call came after the open breach with, and initial persecution of, the

Jewish authorities. It was, therefore, a call to fellowship in His

peculiar relationship to the Synagogue. Secondly, it necessitated the

abandonment of all their former occupations, and, indeed, of all

earthly ties.[2265]2265 Thirdly, it was from the first, and clearly,

marked as totally different from a call to such discipleship, as that

of any other Master in Israel. It was not to learn more of doctrine,

nor more fully to follow out a life-direction already taken, but to

begin, and to become, something quite new, of which their former

occupation offered an emblem. The disciples of the Rabbis, even those

of John the Baptist, 'followed,' in order to learn; they, in order to

do, and to enter into fellowship with His Work. 'Follow Me, and I will

make you fishers of men.' It was then quite a new call this, which at

the same time indicated its real aim and its untold difficulties. Such

a call could not have been addressed to them, if they had not already

been disciples of Jesus, understood His Mission, and the character of

the Kingdom of God. But, the more we think of it, the more do we

perceive the magnitude of the call and of the decision which it

implied - for, without doubt, they understood what it implied, as

clearly, in some respects perhaps more clearly, than we do. All the

deeper, then, must have been their loving belief in Him, and their

earnest attachment, when, with such unquestioning trust, and such

absolute simplicity and entireness of self-surrender, that it needed

not even a spoken Yea on their part, they forsook ship and home to

follow Him. And so, successively, Simon[2266]2266 and Andrew, and John

and James - those who had been the first to hear, were also the first

to follow Jesus. And ever afterwards did they remain closest to Him,

who had been the first fruits of His Ministry.

It is not well to speak too much of the faith of men. With all the

singleness of spiritual resolve - perhaps, as yet, rather impulse -

which it implied, they probably had not themselves full or adequate

conception of what it really meant. That would evolve in the course of

Christ's further teaching, and of their learning in mind and heart.

But, even thus, we perceive, that in their own call they had already,

in measure, lived the miracle of the draught of fishes which they were

about to witness. What had passed between Jesus and, first, the sons

of Jona, and then those of Zebedee, can scarcely have occupied many

minutes. But already the people were pressing around the Master in

eager hunger for the Word; for, all the livelong night their own

teachers had toiled, and taken nothing which they could give them as

food. To such call the Fisher of Men could not be deaf. The boat of

Peter shall be His pulpit; He had consecrated it by consecrating its

owner. The boat has been thrust out a little from the land, and over

the soft ripple of the waters comes the strange melody of that Word.

We need scarcely ask what He spake. It would be of the Father, of the

Kingdom, and of those who entered it - like what He spake from the

Mount, or to those who laboured and were heavy laden. But it would

carry to the hearers the wondrous beauty and glory of that opening

Kingdom, and, by contrast, the deep poverty and need of their souls.

And Peter had heard it all in the boat, as he sat close by, in the

shadow of His Majesty. Then, this was the teaching of which he had

become a disciple; this, the net and the fishing to which he was just

called. How utterly miserable, in one respect, must it have made him.

Could such an one as he ever hope, with whatever toil, to be a

successful fisher?

Jesus had read his thoughts, and much more than read them. It was all

needed for the qualifying of Peter especially, but also of the others

who had been called to be fishers of men. Presently it shall be all

brought to light; not only that it may be made clear, but that, alike,

the lesson and the help may be seen. And this is another object in

Christ's miracles to His disciples: to make clear their inmost

thoughts and longings, and to point them to the right goal. 'Launch

out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught.' That they

toil in vain all life's night, only teaches the need of another

beginning. The 'nevertheless, at Thy word,' marks the new trust, and

the new work as springing from that trust. When Christ is in the boat

and bids us let down the net, there must be 'a great multitude of

fishes.' And all this in this symbolic miracle. Already 'the net was

breaking,' when they beckoned to their partners in the other ship,

that they should come and help them. And now both ships are burdened

to the water's edge.

But what did it all mean to Simon Peter? He had been called to full

discipleship, and he had obeyed the call. He had been in his boat

beside the Saviour, and heard what He had spoken, and it had gone to

his heart. And now this miracle which he had witnessed! Such shoal of

fish in one spot on the Lake of Galilee was not strange. The

miraculous was, that the Lord had seen through those waters down where

the multitude of fishes was, and bidden him let down for a draught. He

could see through the intervening waters, right down to the bottom of

that sea; He could see through him, to the very bottom of Peter's

heart. He did see it - and all that Jesus had just spoken meant it,

and showed him what was there. And could he then be a fisher of men,

out of whose heart, after a life's night of toil, the net would come

up empty, or rather only clogged with sand and torn with pebbles? This

is what he meant when 'he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying: Depart

from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.' And this is why Jesus

comforted him: 'Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.' And

so also, and so only, do we, each of us, learn the lesson of our

calling, and receive the true comfort in it. Nor yet can anyone become

a true fisher of men in any other than such manner.

The teaching and the comfort required not to be repeated in the life

of Peter, nor in that of the others who witnessed and shared in what

had passed. Many are the truths which shine out from the symbolism of

this scene, when the first disciples were first called. That call

itself; the boat; the command of Christ, despite the night of vain

toil; the unlikely success; the net and its cast at the bidding of

Christ, with the absolute certitude of result, where He is and when He

bids; the miraculous direction to the spot; the multitude of fishes

enclosed; the net about to break, yet not breaking; the surprise, as

strange perhaps as the miracle itself; and then, last of all, the

lesson of self-knowledge and humiliation: all these and much more has

the Church most truly read in this history. And as we turn from it,

this stands out to us as its final outcome and lesson: 'And when they

had brought their ships to land, they forsook all and followed

Him.'[2267]2267

CHAPTER XIV.

A SABBATH IN CAPERNAUM

(St. Matt. viii 14-17; St. Mark i. 21-34; St. Luke iv. 33-41.)

It was the Holy Sabbath - the first after He had called around Him His

first permanent disciples; the first, also, after His return from the

Feast at Jerusalem. Of both we can trace indications in the account of

that morning, noon, and evening which the Evangelists furnish. The

greater detail with which St. Mark, who wrote under the influence of

St. Peter, tells these events, shows the freshness and vividness of

impression on the mind of Peter of those early days of his new life.

As indicating that what is here recorded took place immediately after

the return of Jesus from Jerusalem, we mark, that as yet there were no

watchful enemies in waiting to entrap Him in such breach of the Law,

as might furnish ground for judicial procedure. But, from their

presence and activity so soon afterwards,[2268]2268 we infer, that the

authorities of Jerusalem had sent some of their familiars to track His

steps in Galilee.

But as yet all seemed calm and undisturbed. Those simple, warm-hearted

Galileans yielded themselves to the power of His words and works, not

discerning hidden blasphemy in what He said, nor yet

Sabbath-desecration in His healing on God's holy day. It is morning,

and Jesus goes to the Synagogue at Capernaum.[2269]2269 To teach

there, was now His wont. But frequency could not lessen the

impression. In describing the Influence of His Person or words the

Evangelists use a term, which really means amazement.[2270]2270 And

when we find the same word to describe the impression of the 'Sermon

on the Mount,'[2271]2271 the inference is naturally suggested, that it

presents the type, if it does not sum up the contents, of some of His

Synagogue-discourses. It is not necessary to suppose that, what held

His hearers spell-bound, had necessarily also its effect on their

hearts and lives. Men may be enraptured by the ideal without trying to

make it the real. Too often it is even in inverse proportion; so that

those who lead not the most moral lives even dare to denounce the New

Testament standpoint, as below their own conceptions of right and

duty. But there is that in man, evidence of his origin and destiny,

which always and involuntarily responds to the presentation of the

higher. And in this instance it was not only what He taught, but the

contrast with that to which they had been accustomed on the part of

'the Scribes,' which filled them with amazement. There was no appeal

to human authority, other than that of the conscience; no subtle

logical distinctions, legal niceties, nor clever sayings. Clear,

limpid, and crystalline, flowed His words from out the spring of the

Divine Life that was in Him.

Among the hearers in the Synagogue that Sabbath morning was one of a

class, concerning whose condition, whatever difficulties may attach to

our proper understanding of it, the reader of the New Testament must

form some definite idea. The term 'demoniacal possession' occurs not

in the New Testament. We owe it to Josephus,[2272]2272 from whom it

has passed into ecclesiastical language. We dismiss it the more

readily, that, in our view, it conveys a wrong impression. The New

Testament speaks of those who had a spirit, or a demon, or demons, or

an unclean spirit, or the spirit of an unclean demon, but chiefly of

persons who were 'demonised.'[2273]2273 Similarly, it seems a strange

inaccuracy on the part of commentators to exclude from the Gospel, of

St. John all notice of the 'demonised.' That the Fourth Gospel,

although not reporting any healing of the demonised, shares the

fundamental view of the Synoptists, appears not only from St. John

vii. 20, viii. 48, 52, but especially from viii. 49 and x. 20,

21.[2274]2274 We cannot believe that the writer of the Fourth Gospel

would have put into the mouth of Jesus the answer 'I am not a demon,'

or have allowed Him to be described by His friends as not one

'demonised,' without a single word to show dissent from the popular

view, if he had not shared the ideas of the Synoptists. In discussing

a question of such very serious import in the study and criticism of

the Gospels, the precise facts of the case should in the first place

be clearly ascertained.

The first question here is, whether Christ Himself shared the views,

not indeed of His contemporaries (for these, as we shall see, were

very different), but of the Evangelists in regard to what they call

the 'demonised?' This has been extensively denied, and Christ

represented as only unwilling needlessly to disturb a popular

prejudice, which He could not at the time effectually combat. But the

theory requires more than this; and, since Christ not only tolerated,

but in addressing the demonised actually adopted, or seemed to adopt,

the prevailing view, it has been argued, that, for the sake of these

poor afflicted persons, He acted like a physician who appears to enter

into the fancy of his patient, in order the more effectually to heal

him of it. This view seems, however, scarcely worth refuting, since it

imputes to Jesus, on a point so important, a conduct not only unworthy

of Him, or indeed of any truly great man, but implies a canon of

'accommodation' which might equally be applied to His Miracles, or to

anything else that contravened the notions of an interpreter, and so

might transform the whole Gospel-narratives into a series of

historically untrustworthy legends. But we will not rest the case on

what might be represented as an appeal to prejudice. For, we find that

Jesus not only tolerated the popular 'prejudice,' or that He 'adopted

it for the sake of more readily healing those thus afflicted' - but

that He even made it part of His disciples' commission to 'cast out

demons,'[2275]2275 and that, when the disciples afterwards reported

their success in this, Christ actually made it a matter of

thanksgiving to God.[2276]2276 The same view underlies His reproof to

the disciples, when failing in this part of their work;[2277]2277

while in St. Luke xi. 19, 24, He adopts, and argues on this view as

against the Pharisees. Regarded therefore in the light of history,

impartial criticism can arrive at no other conclusion, than that Jesus

of Nazareth shared the views of the Evangelists as regards the

'demonised.'[2278]2278

Our next inquiry must be as to the character of the phenomenon thus

designated. In view of the fact that in St. Mark ix. 21, the demonised

had been such 'of a child,' it is scarcely possible to ascribe it

simply to moral causes. Similarly, personal faith does not seem to

have been a requisite condition of healing. Again, as other diseases

are mentioned without being attributed to demoniacal influence, and as

all who were dumb, deaf, or paralysed would not have been described as

'demonised,' it is evident that all physical, or even mental

distempers of the same class were not ascribed to the same cause: some

might be natural, while others were demoniacal. On the other hand,

there were more or less violent symptoms of disease in every demonised

person, and these were greatly aggravated in the last paroxysm, when

the demon quitted his habitation. We have, therefore, to regard the

phenomena described as caused by the influence of such 'spirits,'

primarily, upon that which forms the nexus between body and mind, the

nervous system, and as producing different physical effects, according

to the part of the nervous system affected. To this must be added a

certain impersonality of consciousness, so that for the time the

consciousness was not that of the demonised, but the demoniser, just

as in certain mesmeric states the consciousness of the mesmerised is

really that of the mesmeriser. We might carry the analogy farther, and

say, that the two states are exactly parallel - the demon or demons

taking the place of the mesmeriser, only that the effects were more

powerful and extensive, perhaps more enduring. But one point seems to

have been assumed, for which there is, to say the least, no evidence,

viz., that because, at least in many cases, the disease caused by the

demon was permanent, therefore those who were so affected were

permanently or constantly under the power of the demon. Neither the

New Testament, nor even Rabbinic literature, conveys the idea of

permanent demoniac indwelling, to which the later term 'possession'

owes its origin.[2279]2279 On the contrary, such accounts, as that of

the scene in the Synagogue of Capernaum, convey the impression of a

sudden influence, which in most cases seems occasioned by the

spiritual effect of the Person or of the Words of the Christ. To this

historical sketch we have only to add, that the phenomenon is not

referred to either in the Old Testament.[2280]2280 or in the

Apocrypha,[2281]2281 nor, for that matter in the Mishnah,[2282]2282

where, indeed, from the character of its contents, one would scarcely

expect to find it. But we find it mentioned not only in the New

Testament, but in the writings of Josephus.[2283]2283 The references

in heathen or in Christian writings posterior to those of the New

Testament lie beyond our present inquiry.[2284]2284

In view of these facts, we may arrive at some more definite

conclusions. Those who contend that the representations of the

Evangelists are identical with the popular Jewish notions of the time,

must be ill acquainted with the latter. What these were, is explained

in another place.[2285]2285 Suffice it here to state that, whatever

want of clearness there may be about the Jewish ideas of demoniac

influences, there is none as to the means proposed for their removal.

These may be broadly classified as: magical means for the prevention

of such influences (such as the avoidance of certain places, times,

numbers, or circumstances; amulets, &c.); magical means for the cure

of diseases; and direct exorcism (either by certain outward means, or

else by formulas of incantation). Again, while the New Testament

furnishes no data by which to learn the views of Jesus or of the

Evangelists regarding the exact character of the phenomenon, it

furnishes the fullest details as to the manner in which the demonished

were set free. This was always the same. It consisted neither in

magical means formulas of exorcism, but always in the Word of Power

which Jesus spake, or entrusted to His disciples, and which the demons

always obeyed. There is here not only difference, but contrariety in

comparison with the current Jewish notions, and it leads to the

conclusion that there was the same contrast in His views, as in His

treatment of the 'demonised.'

Jewish superstition in regard to the demoniacal state can, therefore,

no more affect the question of the credibility of the Gospel-accounts

of it, than can quotations from heathen or from post-Apostolic

Christian writers. In truth, it must be decided purely on New

Testament grounds; and resolves itself into that of the general

trustworthiness of the Evangelic narratives, and of our estimate of

the Person of Christ. Thus viewed, he who regards Jesus as the Messiah

and the Son of God can be in no doubt. If we are asked to explain the

rationale of the phenomenon, or of its cessation - if, indeed, it has

wholly and everywhere ceased - we might simply decline to attempt that

for which we have not sufficient data, and this, without implying that

such did not exist, or that, if known, they would not wholly vindicate

the facts of the case. At any rate, it does not follow that there are

no such data because we do not possess them; nor is there any ground

for the contention that, if they existed, we ought to possess them.

For, admittedly, the phenomenon was only a temporary one.

And yet certain considerations will occur to the thoughtful reader,

which, if they do not explain, will at least make him hesitate to

designate as inexplicable, the facts in question. In our view, at

least, he would be a bold interpreter who would ascribe all the

phenomena even of heathen magic to jugglery, or else to purely

physical causes. Admittedly they have ceased, or perhaps, as much

else, assumed other forms, just as, so far as evidence goes, demoniac

influence has - at least in the form presented in the New Testament.

But, that it has so ceased, does not prove that it never existed. If

we believe that the Son of God came to destroy the works of the Devil,

we can understand the developed enmity of the kingdom of darkness; and

if we regard Christ as Very God, taking, in manner to us mysterious,

Humanity, we can also perceive how the Prince of Darkness might, in

counterfeit, seek through the demonised a temporary dwelling in

Humanity for purposes of injury and destruction, as Christ for healing

and salvation. In any case, holding as we do that this demoniac

influence was not permanent in the demonised, the analogy of certain

mesmeric influences seems exactly to apply. No reference is here made

to other supernatural spirit-influences of which many in our days

speak, and which, despite the lying and imposture probably connected

with them, have a background of truth and reality, which, at least in

the present writer's experience, cannot be absolutely denied. In the

mysterious connection between the sensuous and supersensuous, spirit

and matter, there are many things which the vulgar 'bread-and-butter

philosophy' fails rightly to apportion, or satisfactorily to explain.

That, without the intervention of sensuous media, mind can, may, and

does affect mind; that even animals, in proportion to their

sensitiveness, or in special circumstances, are affected by that which

is not, or else not yet, seen, and this quite independently of man;

that, in short, there are not a few phenomena 'in heaven and earth' of

which our philosophy dreams not - these are considerations which,

however the superficial sciolist may smile at them, no earnest

inquirer would care to dismiss with peremptory denial. And

superstition only begins when we look for them, or else when we

attempt to account for and explain them, not in the admission of their

possibility.

But, in our view, it is of the deepest importance always to keep in

mind, that the 'demonised' was not a permanent state, or possession by

the powers of darkness. For, it establishes a moral element, since,

during the period of their temporary liberty, the demonised might have

shaken themselves free from the overshadowing power, or sought release

from it. Thus the demonised state involved personal responsibility,

although that of a diseased and disturbed consciousness.

In one respect those who were 'demonised' exhibited the same

phenomenon. They all owned the Power of Jesus. It was not otherwise in

the Synagogue at Capernaum on that Sabbath-morning. What Jesus had

spoken produced an immediate effect on the demonised, though one which

could scarcely have been anticipated. For, there is authority for

inserting the word 'straightway'[2286]2286 immediately after the

account of Jesus' preaching. Yet, as we think of it, we cannot imagine

that the demon would have continued silent nor yet that he could have

spoken other than the truth in the Presence of the God-Man. There must

be, and yet there cannot be, resistance. The very Presence of the

Christ meant the destruction of this work of the Devil. Involuntarily,

in his confessed inability of disguise or resistance, he owns defeat,

even before the contest. 'What have we to do with Thee, Jesus of

Nazareth?[2287]2287 Thou art come to destroy us![2288]2288 I know Thee

Who Thou art, the Holy One of God.' And yet there seems in these words

already an emergence of the consciousness of the demonised, at least

in so far that there is no longer confusion between him and his

tormenter, and the latter speaks in his own name. One stronger than

the demon had affected the higher part in the demonised. It was the

Holy One of God, in Whose Presence the powers of moral destruction

cannot be silent, but must speak, and own their subjection and doom.

The Christ needs not to contend: that He is the Christ, is itself

victory.

But this was not all. He had come not only to destroy the works of the

Devil. His Incarnation meant this - and more: to set the prisoners

free. By a word of command He gagged[2289]2289 the confessions of the

demon, unwilling made, and even so with hostile intent. It was not by

such voices that He would have His Messiahship ever proclaimed. Such

testimony was wholly unfitting and incongruous; it would have been a

strange discord on the witness of the Baptist and the Voice Which had

proclaimed Him from heaven. And, truly, had it been admitted, it would

have strangely jarred in a Life which needed not, and asked not even

the witness of men, but appealed straightway to God Himself. Nor can

we fail to perceive how, had it been allowed, it would have given a

true ground to what the Pharisees sought to assign as the

interpretation of His Power, that by the Prince of Demons He cast out

demons. And thus there is here also deep accord with the fundamental

idea which was the outcome of His Temptation: that not the seemingly

shortest, but the Divine way must lead Him to the goal, and that goal

not Royal proclamation, but the Resurrection.

The same power which gagged the confession also bade the demon

relinquish his prey. One wild paroxysm - and the sufferer was for ever

free. But on them all who saw and heard it fell the utter stupor and

confusion of astonishment.[2290]2290 Each turned to his neighbour with

the inquiry: 'What is this? A new doctrine with authority! And He

commandeth the unclean spirits, and they obey Him.'[2291]2291 Well

might they inquire. It had been a threefold miracle: 'a new doctrine;'

'with authority;' and obedience of the unclean spirits to His command.

There is throughout, and especially in the account of the casting out

of the demon, such un-Jewish simplicity, with entire absence of what

would have been characteristic in a Jewish exorcist; such want of all

that one would have expected, if the event had been invented, or

coloured for a purpose, or tinged by contemporary notions; and,

withal, such sublimity and majesty, that it is difficult to understand

how any one can resist the impression of its reality, or that He Who

so spake and did was in truth the Son of God.

From the Synagogue we follow the Saviour, in company with His called

disciples, to Peter's wedded home. But no festive meal, as was Jewish

wont, awaited them there. A sudden access of violent 'burning

fever,'[2292]2292 such as is even now common in that district, had

laid Peter's mother-in-law prostrate. If we had still any lingering

thought of Jewish magical cures as connected with those of Jesus, what

is now related must dispel it. The Talmud gives this disease precisely

the same name ({hebrew} Eshatha Tsemirta), 'burning fever,' and

prescribes for it a magical remedy, of which the principal part is to

tie a knife wholly of iron by a braid of hair to a thornbush, and to

repeat on successive days Exod. iii. 2,3, then ver. 4, and finally

ver. 5, after which the bush is to be cut down, while a certain

magical formula is pronounced.[2293]2293 How different from this,

alike in its sublime simplicity and in the majestic bearing of Him Who

healed, is the Evangelic narrative of the cure of Peter's

mother-in-law. To ignore, in our estimate of the trustworthiness of

the Gospels, this essential contrast, would be a grave historical

mistake. Jesus is 'told' of the sickness; He is besought for her who

is stricken down. In His Presence disease and misery cannot continue.

Bending over the sufferer, He 'rebuked the fever,' just as He had

rebuked[2294]2294 'the demon' in the Synagogue, and for the same

reason, since all disease, in the view of the Divine Healer, is the

outcome of sin. Then lifting her by the hand, she rose up, healed, to

'minister' unto them. It was the first Diaconate[2295]2295 of woman in

the Church - might we not almost say, in the world? - a Diaconate to

Christ, and to those that were His; the Diaconate of one healed by

Christ; a Diaconate immediately following such healing. The first,

this, of a long course of woman's Diaconate to Christ, in which, for

the first time, woman attained her true position. And what a

Sabbath-meal it must have been, after that scene in the Synagogue and

after that healing in the house, when Jesus was the Guest, they who

had witnessed it all sat at meat with Him, and she who had been healed

was the Deaconess. Would that such were ever our Christian festive

meals!

It was evening. The sun was setting, and the Sabbath past. All that

day it had been told from home to home what had been done in the

Synagogue; it had been whispered what had taken place in the house of

their neighbour Simon. This one conviction had been borne in upon them

all, that 'with authority' He spake, with authority and power He

commanded even the unclean spirits, and they obeyed. No scene more

characteristic of the Christ than that on this autumn evening at

Capernaum. One by one the stars had shone out over the tranquil Lake

and the festive city, lighting up earth's darkness with heaven's soft

brilliancy, as if they stood there witnesses, that God had fulfilled

His good promise to Abraham.[2296]2296 On that evening no one in

Capernaum thought of business, pleasure, or rest. There must have been

many homes of sorrow, care, and sickness there, and in the populous

neighbourhood around. To them, to all, had the door of hope now been

opened. Truly, a new Sun had risen on them, with healing in His wings.

No disease too desperate, when even the demons owned the authority of

His mere rebuke. From all parts they bring them: mothers, widows,

wives, fathers, children, husbands - their loved ones, the treasures

they had almost lost; and the whole city throngs - a hushed,

solemnised, overawed multitude - expectant, waiting at the door of

Simon's dwelling. There they laid them, along the street up to the

market-place, on their beds; or brought them, with beseeching look and

word. What a symbol of this world's misery, need, and hope; what a

symbol, also, of what the Christ really is as the Consoler in the

world's manifold woe! Never, surely, was He more truly the Christ; nor

is He in symbol more truly such to us and to all time, than when, in

the stillness of that evening, under the starlit sky, He went through

that suffering throng, laying His hands in the blessing of healing on

every one of them, and casting out many devils. No picture of the

Christ more dear to us, than this of the unlimited healing of whatever

disease of body or soul. In its blessed indefiniteness it conveys the

infinite potentiality of relief, whatever misery have fallen on us, or

whatever care or sorrow oppress us. He must be blind, indeed, who sees

not in this Physician the Divine Healer; in this Christ the Light of

the World; the Restoror of what sin had blighted; the Joy in our

world's deep sorrow. Never was prophecy more truly fulfilled than, on

that evening, this of Isaiah: 'Himself took our infirmities, and bare

our sicknesses.'[2297]2297 By His Incarnation and Coming, by His

taking our infirmities, and bearing our sicknesses - for this in the

truest and widest sense is the meaning of the Incarnation of the

Christ - did He become the Healer, the Consoler of humanity, its

Saviour in all ills of time, and from all ills of eternity. The most

real fulfilment this, that can be conceived, of Isaiah's rapt vision

of Who and what the Messiah was to be, and to do; not, indeed, what is

sometimes called fulfilment, or expected as such, in a literal and

verbal correspondence with the prediction. An utterly mechanical,

external, and unspiritual view this of prophecy, in which, in quite

Jewish literalism, the spirit is crushed by the letter. But, viewed in

its real bearing on mankind with its wants, Christ, on that evening,

was the real, though as yet only initial, fulfilment of the world's

great hope, to which, centuries before, the God-directed hand of the

prophet had pointed.[2298]2298

So ended that Sabbath in Capernaum: a Sabbath of healing, joy, and

true rest. But far and wide, into every place of the country around,

throughout all the region of Galilee, spread the tidings, and with

them the fame of Him Whom demons must obey, though they dare not

pronounce Him the Son of God. And on men's ears fell His Name with

sweet softness of infinite promise, 'like rain upon the mown grass, as

showers that water the earth.'

CHAPTER XV.

SECOND JOURNEY THROUGH GALILEE - THE HEALING OF THE LEPER.

(St. Matt. iv. 23; viii. 2-4; St. Mark i. 35-45; St. Luke iv. 42-44;

v. 12-16.)

A DAY and an evening such as of that Sabbath of healing in Capernaum

must, with reverence be it written, have been followed by what opens

the next section.[2299]2299 To the thoughtful observer there is such

unbroken harmony in the Life of Jesus, such accord of the inward and

outward, as to carry instinctive conviction of the truth of its

record. It was, so to speak, an inward necessity that the God-Man,

when brought into contact with disease and misery, whether from

physical or supernatural causes, should remove it by His Presence, by

His touch, by His Word. An outward necessity also, because no other

mode of teaching equally convincing would have reached those

accustomed to Rabbinic disputations, and who must have looked for such

a manifestation from One Who claimed such authority. And yet, so far

from being a mere worker of miracles, as we should have expected if

the history of His miracles had been of legendary origin, there is

nothing more marked than the pain, we had almost said the humiliation,

which their necessity seems to have carried to His heart. 'Except ye

see signs and wonders, ye will not believe;' 'an evil and adulterous

generation seeketh a sign;' 'blessed are they that have not seen, and

yet have believed' - such are the utterances of Him Who sighed when He

opened the ears of the deaf,[2300]2300 and bade His Apostles look for

higher and better things than power over all diseases or even over

evil spirits.[2301]2301 [2302]2302 So would not the Messiah of Jewish

legend have spoken or done; nor would they who invented such miracles

have so referred to them.

In truth, when, through the rift in His outward history, we catch a

glimpse of Christ's inner Being, these miracles, so far as not the

outcome of the mystic union of the Divine and the Human in His Person,

but as part of His Mission, form part of His Humiliation. They also

belong to that way which He had chosen in his initial conquest of the

Tempter in the Wilderness, when He chose, not the sudden display of

absolute power for the subdual of His people, but the painful, slow

method of meeting the wants, and addressing Himself to the

understanding and capacity of those over Whom He would reign. In this

view, it seems as if we could gain a fresh understanding, not only of

the expediency of His final departure, so far as concerned the future

teaching of the disciples by the Holy Spirit, but of His own longing

for the Advent of the Comforter. In truth, the two teachers and the

two modes of teaching could not be together, and the Ascension of the

Christ, as the end of His Humiliation, marked the Advent of the Holy

Ghost, as bestowing another mode of teaching than that of the days of

His Humiliation.

And so, thinking of the scene on the evening before, we can understand

how, 'very early, while it was still very dark,'[2303]2303 Jesus rose

up, and went into a solitary place to pray. The use of the same

expression[2304]2304 in St. Mark xiii. 35 enables us to fix the time

as that of the fourth night-watch, or between three and six o'clock of

the morning. It was not till some time afterwards, that even those,

who had so lately been called to His closest fellowship, rose, and,

missing Him, followed. Jesus had prayed in that solitude, and

consecrated it. After such a day, and in prospect of entering on His

second journey through Galilee[2305]2305 - this time in so far

different circumstances - He must prevent the dawn of the morning in

prayer. And by this also would they learn, that He was not merely a

worker of miracles, but that He, Whose Word demons obeyed, lived a

Life, not of outward but of inward power, in fellowship with His

Father, and baptized his work with prayer. But as yet, and, indeed, in

measure all through His Life on earth, it seemed difficult for them in

any measure to realise this. 'All men seek for Thee,' and therefore

they would have had Him return to Capernaum. But this was the very

reason why He had withdrawn ere dawn of day. He had come forth, and

that,[2306]2306 not to attract the crowds, and be proclaimed a King,

but to preach the Kingdom of God. Once more we say it: so speaks not,

nor acts the hero of Jewish legend!

As the three Synoptists accordantly state, Jesus now entered on His

second Galilean journey. There can be little doubt, that the

chronological succession of events is here accurately indicated by the

more circumstantial narrative in St. Mark's Gospel.[2307]2307 The

arrangement of St. Luke appears that of historical grouping, while

that of St. Matthew is determined by the Hebraic plan of his Gospel,

which seems constructed on the model of the Pentateuch,[2308]2308 as

if the establishment of the Kingdom by the Messiah were presented as

the fulfilment of its preparatory planting in Israel. But this second

journey through Galilee, which the three Gospels connect with the stay

at Capernaum, marks a turning-point in the working of the Christ. As

already stated, the occurrences at the 'Unknown Feast,'[2309]2309 in

Jerusalem, formed a new point of departure. Christ had fully presented

His claims to the Sanhedrists, and they had been fully rejected by the

Scribes and the people. Henceforth He separated Himself from that

'untoward generation;' henceforth, also, began His systematic

persecution by the authorities, when His movements were tracked and

watched. Jesus went alone to Jerusalem. This, also, was fitting.

Equally so, that on His return He called His disciples to be His

followers; and that from Capernaum He entered, in their company, on a

new phase in His Work.

Significantly, His Work began where that of the Rabbis, we had almost

said of the Old Testament saints, ended. Whatever remedies, medical,

magical, or sympathetic, Rabbinic writings may indicate for various

kinds of disease, leprosy is not included in the catalogue. They left

aside what even the Old Testament marked as moral death, by enjoining

those so stricken to avoid all contact with the living, and even to

bear the appearance of mourners. As the leper passed by, his clothes

rent, his hair dishevelled,[2310]2310 and the lower part of his face

and his upper lip covered,[2311]2311 it was as one going to death who

reads his own burial-service, while the mournful words, 'Unclean!

Unclean!' which he uttered, proclaimed that his was both living and

moral death. Again, the Old Testament, and even Rabbinism, took, in

the measures prescribed in leprosy, primarily a moral, or rather a

ritual, and only secondarily a sanitary, view of the case. The

isolation already indicated, which banished lepers from all

intercourse except with those similarly stricken,[2312]2312 and

forebade their entering not only the Temple or Jerusalem, but any

walled city,[2313]2313 could not have been merely prompted by the wish

to prevent infection. For all the laws in regard to leprosy are

expressly stated not to have application in the case of heathens,

proselytes before their conversion, and even of Israelites on their

birth.[2314]2314 The same inference must also be drawn from the

circumstance, that the priestly examination and subsequent isolation

of the leper were not to commence during the marriage-week, or on

festive days,[2315]2315 since, evidently, infection would have been

most likely to spread in such circumstances.[2316]2316

It has already been stated, that Rabbinism confessed itself powerless

in presence of this living death. Although, as Michaelis rightly

suggests,[2317]2317 the sacrificial ritual for the cleansed leper

implies, at least, the possibility of a cure, it is in every instance

traced to the direct agency of God.[2318]2318 Hence the mythical

theory, which, to be rational, must show some precedent to account for

the origination of the narrative in the Gospel, here once more breaks

down.[2319]2319 Keim cannot deny the evident authenticity of the

Evangelic narrative, and has no better explanation to offer than that

of the old Rationalists - which Strauss had already so fully

refuted[2320]2320 - that the poor sufferer only asked of Jesus to

declare, not to make, him clean.[2321]2321 In truth, the possibility

of any cure through human agency was never contemplated by the Jews.

Josephus speaks of it as possibly granted to prayer,[2322]2322 but in

a manner betokening a pious phraseology without serious meaning. We

may go further, and say that not only did Rabbinism never suggest the

cure of a leper, but that its treatment of those sufferers presents

the most marked contrast to that of the Saviour. And yet, as if

writing its own condemnation, one of the titles which it gives to the

Messiah is 'the Leprous,' the King Messiah being represented as seated

in the entrance to Rome, surrounded by, and relieving all misery and

disease, in fulfilment of Is. liii. 4.[2323]2323 [2324]2324

We need not here enumerate the various symptoms, by which the Rabbinic

law teaches us to recognise true leprosy.[2325]2325 Any one capable of

it might make the medical inspection, although only a descendant of

Aaron could formally pronounce clean or unclean.[2326]2326 Once

declared leprous, the sufferer was soon made to feel the utter

heartlessness of Rabbinism. To banish him outside walled

towns[2327]2327 may have been a necessity, which, perhaps, required to

be enforced by the threatened penalty of forty stripes save

one.[2328]2328 Similarly, it might be a right, even merciful,

provision, that in the Synagogues lepers were to be the first to enter

and the last to leave, and that they should occupy a separate

compartment (Mechitsah), ten palms high, and six feet wide.[2329]2329

For, from the symbolism and connection between the physical and the

psychical,[2330]2330 the Old Testament, in its rites and institutions,

laid the greatest stress on 'clean and unclean.' To sum it up in

briefest compass, and leaving out of view leprosy of clothes or

houses,[2331]2331 according to the Old Testament, defilement was

conveyed only by the animal body, and attached to no other living body

than that of man, nor could any other living body than that of man

communicate defilement. The Old Testament mentioned eleven principal

kinds of defilement. These, as being capable of communicating further

defilement, were designated Abhoth hattumeoth - 'fathers of

defilements' - the defilement which they produced being either itself

an Abh hattumeah, or else a 'Child,' or a 'Child's Child of

defilement' ({hebrew}). We find in Scripture thirty-two Abhoth

hattumeoth, as they are called. To this Rabbinic tradition added other

twenty-nine. Again, according to Scripture, these 'fathers of

defilements' affected only in two degrees; the direct effect produced

by them being designated 'the beginning,' or 'the first,' and that

further propagated, 'the second' degree. But Rabbinic ordinances added

a third, fourth, and even fifth degree of defilement.[2332]2332 From

this, as well as the equally intricate arrangements about

purification, the Mishnic section about 'clean and unclean' is at the

same time the largest and most intricate in the Rabbinic code, while

its provisions touched and interfered, more than any others, with

every department of life.

In the elaborate code of defilements leprosy was not only one of 'the

fathers of uncleanness,' but, next to defilement from the dead, stood

foremost amongst them. Not merely actual contact with the leper, but

even his entrance defiled a habitation,[2333]2333 and everything in

it, to the beams of the roof.[2334]2334 But beyond this, Rabbinic

harshness or fear carried its provisions to the utmost sequences of an

unbending logic. It is, indeed, true that, as in general so especially

in this instance, Rabbinism loved to trace disease to moral causes.

'No death without sin, and no pain without transgression;'[2335]2335

'the sick is not healed, till all his sins are forgiven

him.'[2336]2336 These are oft-repeated sayings; but, when closely

examined, they are not quite so spiritual as they sound. For, first,

they represent a reaction against the doctrine of original sin, in the

sense that it is not the Fall of man, but one's actual transgression,

to which disease and death are to be traced according to the saying:

'Not the serpent kills, but sin.'[2337]2337 [2338]2338 But their real

unspirituality appears most clearly, when we remember how special

diseases were traced to particular sins. Thus,[2339]2339 childlessness

and leprosy are described as chastisements, which indeed procure for

the sufferer forgiveness of sins, but cannot, like other

chastisements, be regarded as the outcome of love, nor be received in

love.[2340]2340 And even such sentiments in regard to

sufferings[2341]2341 are immediately followed by such cynical

declarations on the part of Rabbis so afflicted, as that they loved

neither the chastisement, nor its reward.[2342]2342 And in regard to

leprosy, tradition had it that, as leprosy attached to the house, the

dress, or the person, these were to be regarded as always heavier

strokes, following as each successive warning had been neglected, and

a reference to this was seen in Prov. xix. 29.[2343]2343 [2344]2344

Eleven sins are mentioned[2345]2345 which bring leprosy, among them

pre-eminently those of which the tongue is the organ.[2346]2346

Still, if such had been the real views of Rabbinism one might have

expected that Divine compassion would have been extended to those, who

bore such heavy burden of their sins. Instead of this, their burdens

were needlessly increased. True, as wrapped in mourner's garb the

leper passed by, his cry 'Unclean!' was to incite others to pray for

him - but also to avoid him.[2347]2347 No one was even to salute him;

his bed was to be low, inclining towards the ground.[2348]2348 If he

even put his head into a place, it became unclean. No less a distance

than four cubits (six feet) must be kept from a leper; or, if the wind

came from that direction, a hundred were scarcely sufficient. Rabbi

Meir would not eat an egg purchased in a street where there was a

leper. Another Rabbi boasted, that he always threw stones at them to

keep them far off, while others hid themselves or ran away.[2349]2349

[2350]2350 To such extent did Rabbinism carry its inhuman logic in

considering the leper as a mourner, that it even forbade him to wash

his face.[2351]2351

We can now in some measure appreciate the contrast between Jesus and

His contemporaries in His bearing towards the leper. Or, conversely,

we can judge by the healing of this leper of the impression which the

Saviour had made upon the people. He would have fled from a Rabbi; he

came in lowliest attitude of entreaty to Jesus. Criticism need not so

anxiously seek for an explanation of his approach. There was no Old

Testament precedent for it: not in the case of Moses, nor even in that

of Elisha, and there was no Jewish expectancy of it. But to have heard

Him teach, to have seen or known Him as healing all manner of disease,

must have carried to the heart the conviction of His absolute power.

And so one can understand this lowly reverence of approach, this cry

which has so often since been wrung from those who have despaired of

all other help: 'If Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.' It is not a

prayer, but the ground-tone of all prayer - faith in His Power, and

absolute committal to Him of our helpless, hopeless need. And Jesus,

touched with compassion, willed it. It almost seems, as if it were in

the very exuberance of power that Jesus, acting in so direct

contravention of Jewish usage, touched the leper. It was fitting that

Elisha should disappoint Naaman's expectancy, that the prophet would

heal his leprosy by the touch of his hand. It was even more fitting

that Jesus should surprise the Jewish leper by touching, ere by His

Word He cleansed him. And so, experience ever finds that in Christ the

real is far beyond the ideal. We can understand, how. from his

standpoint, Strauss should have found it impossible to understand the

healing of leprosy by the touch and Word of Jesus. Its explanation

lies in the fact, that He was the God-Man. And yet, as our inner

tending after God and the voice of conscience indicate that man is

capable of adoption into God's family, so the marked power which in

disease mind has over body points to a higher capability in Man

Perfect, the Ideal Man, the God-Man, of vanquishing disease by His

Will.

It is not quite so easy at first sight to understand, why Christ

should with such intense earnestness, almost vehemence,[2352]2352 have

sent the healed man away - as the term bears, 'cast him

out.'[2353]2353 Certainly not (as Volkmar - fantastically in error on

this, as on so many other points - imagines) because He disapproved of

his worship. Rather do we once more gather, how the God-Man shrank

from the fame connected with miracles - specially with such an one -

which as we have seen, were rather of inward and outward necessity

than of choice in His Mission. Not so - followed by a curious crowd,

or thronged by eager multitudes of sight-seers, or aspirants for

temporal benefits - was the Kingdom of Heaven to be preached and

advanced. It would have been the way of a Jewish Messiah, and have led

up to His royal proclamation by the populace. But as we study the

character of the Christ, no contrast seems more glaring - let us add,

more painful - than that of such a scene. And so we read that, when,

notwithstanding the Saviour's charge to the healed leper to keep

silence, it was nevertheless - nay, as might perhaps have been

expected - all the more made known by him - as, indeed, in some

measure it could scarcely have remained entirely unknown, He could no

more, as before, enter the cities, but remained without in desert

places, whither they came to Him from every quarter. And in that

withdrawal He spoke, and healed, 'and prayed.'

Yet another motive of Christ's conduct may be suggested. His

injunction of silence was combined with that of presenting himself to

the priest and conforming to the ritual requirements of the Mosaic Law

in such cases.[2354]2354 It is scarcely necessary to refute the

notion, that in this Christ was prompted either by the desire to see

the healed man restored to the society of his fellows, or by the wish

to have some officially recognised miracle, to which He might

afterwards appeal. Not to speak of the un-Christlikeness of such a

wish or purpose, as a matter of fact, He did not appeal to it, and the

healed leper wholly disappears from the Gospel-narrative. And yet his

conforming to the Mosaic Ritual was to be 'a testimony unto them.' The

Lord, certainly, did not wish to have the Law of Moses broken - and

broken not superseded, it would have been, if its provisions had been

infringed before His Death, Ascension, and the Coming of the Holy

Ghost had brought their fulfilment.

But there is something else here. The course of this history shows,

that the open rupture between Jesus and the Jewish authorities, which

had commenced at the Unknown Feast at Jerusalem, was to lead to

practical sequences. On the part of the Jewish authorities, it led to

measures of active hostility. The Synagogues of Galilee are no longer

the quiet scenes of His teaching and miracles; His Word and deeds no

longer pass unchallenged. It had never occurred to these Galileans, as

they implicitly surrendered themselves to the power of His words, to

question their orthodoxy. But now, immediately after this occurrence,

we find Him accused of blasphemy.[2355]2355 They had not thought it

breach of God's Law when, on that Sabbath, He had healed in the

Synagogue of Capernaum and in the home of Peter; but after this it

became sinful to extend like mercy on the Sabbath to him whose hand

was withered.[2356]2356 They had never thought of questioning the

condescension of his intercourse with the poor and needy; but now they

sought to sap the commencing allegiance of His disciples by charging

Him with undue intercourse with publicans and sinners,[2357]2357 and

by inciting against Him even the prejudices and doubts of the

half-enlightened followers of His own Forerunner.[2358]2358 All these

new incidents are due to one and the same cause; the presence and

hostile watchfulness of the Scribes and Pharisees, who now for the

first time appear on the scene of His ministry. It is too much then to

infer, that, immediately after that Feast at Jerusalem, the Jewish

authorities sent their familiars into Galilee after Jesus, and that it

was to the presence and influence of this informal deputation that the

opposition to Christ, which now increasingly appeared, was due? If so,

then we see not only an additional motive for Christ's injunction of

silence on those whom He had healed, and for His own withdrawal from

the cities and their throng, but we can understand how, as He

afterwards answered those, whom John had sent to lay before Christ his

doubts, by pointing to His works, so He replied to the sending forth

of the Scribes of Jerusalem to watch, oppose, and arrest Him, by

sending to Jerusalem as His embassy the healed leper, to submit to all

the requirements of the Law. It was His testimony unto them - His, Who

was meek and lowly in heart; and it was in deepest accord with what He

had done, and was doing. Assuredly, He Who brake not the bruised reed,

did not cry nor lift up His Voice in the streets, but brought forth

judgment unto truth. And in Him shall the nations trust!

CHAPTER XVI.

THE RETURN TO CAPERNAUM - CONCERNING THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS - THE

HEALING

OF THE PARALYSED

(St. Matt. ix. 1-8; St. Mark ii. 1-12; St. Luke v. 17-26.)

It is a remarkable instance of the reserve of the Gospel-narratives,

that of the second journey of Jesus in Galilee no other special event

is recorded than the healing of the leper. And it seems also to

indicate, that this one miracle had been so selected for a special

purpose. But if, as we have suggested, after the 'Unknown Feast,' the

activity of Jesus assumed a new and what, for want of a better name,

may be called an anti-Judaic character, we can perceive the reason of

it. The healing of leprosy was recorded as typical. With this agrees

also what immediately follows. For, as Rabbinism stood confessedly

powerless in face of the living death of leprosy, so it had no word of

forgiveness to speak to the conscience burdened with sin, nor yet word

of welcome to the sinner. But this was the inmost meaning of the two

events which the Gospel-history places next to the healing of the

leper: the forgiveness of sins in the case of the paralytic, and the

welcome to the chief of sinners in the call of Levi-Matthew.

We are still mainly following the lead of St. Mark,[2359]2359 alike as

regards the succession of events and their details. And here it is

noteworthy, how the account in St. Mark confirms that by St.

John[2360]2360 of what had occurred at the Unknown Feast. Not that

either Evangelist could have derived it from the other. But if we

establish the trustworthiness of the narrative in St. John v., which

is unconfirmed by any of the Synoptists, we strengthen not only the

evidence in favour of the Fourth Gospel generally, but that in one of

its points of chief difficulty, since such advanced teaching on the

part of Jesus, and such developed hostility from the Jewish

authorities, might scarcely have been looked for at so early a stage.

But when we compare the language of St. Mark with the narrative in the

fifth chapter of St. John's Gospel, at least four points of contact

prominently appear. For, first, the unspoken charge of the

Scribes,[2361]2361 that in forgiving sins Jesus blasphemed by making

Himself equal with God, has its exact counterpart in the similar

charge against Him in St. John v. 18, which kindled in them the wish

to kill Jesus. Secondly, as in that case the final reply of Jesus

pointed to 'the authority' (_xous_a) which the Father had given Him

for Divine administration on earth,[2362]2362 so the healing of the

paralytic was to show the Scribes that He had 'authority'

(_xous_a)[2363]2363 for the dispensation upon earth of the forgiveness

of sins, which the Jews rightly regarded as the Divine prerogative.

Thirdly, the words which Jesus spake to the paralytic: 'Rise, take up

thy bed, and walk,'[2364]2364 are to the very letter the

same[2365]2365 which are recorded[2366]2366 as used by Him when He

healed the impotent man at the Pool of Bethesda. Lastly, alike in the

words which Jesus addressed to the Scribes at the healing of the

paralytic, and in those at the Unknown Feast, He made final appeal to

His works as evidential of His being sent by, and having received of,

the Father 'the authority' to which He laid claim.[2367]2367 It would

be utterly irrational to regard these as coincidences, and not

references. And their evidential force becomes the stronger, as we

remember the entire absence of design on the part of St.

Mark.[2368]2368 But this correspondence not only supports the

trustworthiness of the two independent narratives in St. Mark and in

St. John, but also confirms alike that historical order in which we

have arranged the events, and the suggestion that, after the encounter

at the Unknown Feast, the authorities of Jerusalem had sent

representatives to watch, oppose, and, if possible, entrap Jesus.

In another manner, also, the succession of events, as we have traced

it, seems confirmed by the account of the healing of the paralytic.

The second journey of Jesus through Galilee had commenced in autumn;

the return to Capernaum was 'after days,' which, in common Jewish

phraseology,[2369]2369 meant a considerable interval. As we reckon, it

was winter, which would equally account for Christ's return to

Capernaum, and for His teaching in the house. For, no sooner 'was it

heard that He was in the house,' or, as some have rendered it, 'that

He was at home,' than so many flocked to the dwelling of Peter, which

at that period may have been 'the house' or temporary 'home' of the

Saviour, as to fill its limited space to over flowing, and even to

crowd out to the door and beyond it. The general impression on our

minds is, that this audience was rather in a state of indecision than

of sympathy with Jesus. It included 'Pharisees and doctors of the

Law,' who had come on purpose from the towns of Galilee, from Judæa,

and from Jerusalem. These occupied the 'uppermost rooms,' sitting, no

doubt, near to Jesus. Their influence must have been felt by the

people. Although irresistibly attracted by Jesus, an element of

curiosity, if not of doubt, would mingle with their feelings, as they

looked at their leaders, to whom long habit attached the most

superstitious veneration. If one might so say, it was like the

gathering of Israel on Mount Carmel, to witness the issue as between

Elijah and the priests of Baal.

Although in no wise necessary to the understanding of the event, it is

helpful to try and realise the scene. We can picture to ourselves the

Saviour 'speaking the Word' to that eager, interested crowd, which

would soon become forgetful even of the presence of the watchful

'Scribes.' Though we know a good deal of the structure of Jewish

houses,[2370]2370 we feel it difficult to be sure of the exact place

which the Saviour occupied on this occasion. Meetings for religious

study and discussion were certainly held in the Aliyah or upper

chamber.[2371]2371 But, on many grounds, such a locale seems utterly

unsuited to the requirements of the narrative.[2372]2372 Similar

objections attach to the idea, that it was the front room of one of

those low houses occupied by the poor.[2373]2373 Nor is there any

reason for supposing that the house occupied by Peter was one of those

low buildings, which formed the dwellings of the very poor. It must,

at any rate, have contained, besides a large family room,

accommodation for Peter and his wife, for Peter's mother-in-law, and

for Jesus as the honoured guest. The Mishnah calls a small house one

that is 9 feet long by 12 broad, and a large house one that is 12 feet

long by 15 broad, and adds that a dining-hall is 15 feet square, the

height being always computed at half the length and breadth.[2374]2374

But these notices seem rather to apply to a single room. They are part

of a legal discussion, in which reference is made to a building which

might be erected by a man for his son on his marriage, or as a

dwelling for his widowed daughter. Another source of information is

derived from what we know of the price and rental of houses. We

read[2375]2375 of a house as costing ten (of course, gold) dinars,

which would make the price 250 silver dinars, or between 71. and 81.

of our money. This must, however, have been 'a small house,' since the

rental of such is stated to have been from 7s. to 28s. a

year,[2376]2376 while that of a large house is computed at about 91. a

year,[2377]2377 and that of a courtyard at about 14s. a

year.[2378]2378

All this is so far of present interest as it will help to show, that

the house of Peter could not have been a 'small one.' We regard it as

one of the better dwellings of the middle classes. In that case all

the circumstances fully accord with the narrative in the Gospels.

Jesus is speaking the Word, standing in the covered gallery that ran

round the courtyard of such houses, and opened into the various

apartments. Perhaps He was standing within the entrance of the

guest-chamber, while the Scribes were sitting within that apartment,

or beside Him in the gallery. The court before Him is thronged, out

into the street. All are absorbedly listening to the Master, when of a

sudden those appear who are bearing a paralytic on his pallet. It had

of late become too common a scene to see the sick thus carried to

Jesus to attract special attention. And yet one can scarcely conceive

that, if the crowd had merely filled an apartment and gathered around

its door, it would not have made way for the sick, or that somehow the

bearers could not have come within sight, or been able to attract the

attention of Christ. But with a courtyard crowded out into the street,

all this would be, of course, out of the question. In such

circumstances, what was to be done? Access to Jesus was simply

impossible. Shall they wait till the multitude disperses, or for

another and more convenient season? Only those would have acted thus

who have never felt the preciousness of an opportunity, because they

have never known what real need is. Inmost in the hearts of those who

bore the paralysed was the belief, that Jesus could, and that he

would, heal. They must have heard it from others; they must have

witnessed it themselves in other instances. And inmost in the heart of

the paralytic was, as we infer from the first words of Jesus to him,

not only the same conviction, but with it weighed a terrible fear,

born of Jewish belief, lest his sins might hinder his healing. And

this would make him doubly anxious not to lose the present

opportunity.

And so their resolve was quickly taken. If they cannot approach Jesus

with their burden, they can let it down from above at His feet.

Outside the house, as well as inside, a stair led up to the roof. They

may have ascended it in this wise, or else reached it by what the

Rabbis called 'the road of the roofs,'[2379]2379 passing from roof to

roof, if the house adjoined others in the same street. The roof

itself, which had hard beaten earth or rubble underneath it, was paved

with brick, stone, or any other hard substance, and surrounded by a

balustrade which, according to Jewish Law, was at least three feet

high. It is scarcely possible to imagine, that the bearers of the

paralytic would have attempted to dig through this into a room below,

not to speak of the interruption and inconvenience caused to those

below by such an operation. But no such objection attaches if we

regard it, not as the main roof of the house, but as that of the

covered gallery under which we are supposing the Lord to have stood.

This could, of course, have been readily reached from above. In such

case it would have been comparatively easy to 'unroof' the covering of

'tiles,' and then, 'having dug out' an opening through the lighter

framework which supported the tiles, to let down their burden 'into

the midst before Jesus.' All this, as done by four strong men, would

be but the work of a few minutes. But we can imagine the arresting of

the discourse of Jesus, and the breathless surprise of the crowd as

this opening through the tiles appeared, and slowly a pallet was let

down before them. Busy hands would help to steady it, and bring it

safe to the ground. And on that pallet lay one paralysed - his fevered

face and glistening eyes upturned to Jesus.

It must have been a marvellous sight, even at a time and in

circumstances when the marvellous might be said to have become of

every-day occurrence. This energy and determination of faith exceeded

aught that had been witnessed before. Jesus saw it, and He spake. For,

as yet, the blanched lips of the sufferer had not parted to utter his

petition. He believed, indeed, in the power of Jesus to heal, with all

the certitude that issued, not only in the determination to be laid at

His feet, but at whatever trouble and in any circumstances, however

novel or strange. It needed, indeed, faith to overcome all the

hindrances in the present instance; and still more faith to be so

absorbed and forgetful of all around, as to be let down from the roof

through the broken tiling into the midst of such an assembly. And this

open outburst of faith shone out the more brightly, from its contrast

with the covered darkness and clouds of unbelief within the breast of

those Scribes, who had come to watch and ensnare Jesus.

As yet no one had spoken, for the silence of expectancy had fallen on

them all. Could He, and, if He could, would He help - and what would

He do? But He, Who perceived man's unspoken thoughts, knew that there

was not only faith, but also fear, in the heart of that man. Hence the

first words which the Saviour spake to him were: 'Be of good

cheer.'[2380]2380 He had, indeed, got beyond the coarse Judaic

standpoint, from which suffering seemed an expiation of sin. It was

argued by the Rabbis, that, if the loss of an eye or a tooth liberated

a slave from bondage, much more would the sufferings of the whole body

free the soul from guilt; and, again, that Scripture itself indicated

this by the use of the word 'covenant,'[2381]2381 alike in connection

with the salt which rendered the sacrifices meet for the

altar,[2382]2382 and sufferings,[2383]2383 which did the like for the

soul by cleansing away sin.[2384]2384 We can readily believe, as the

recorded experience of the Rabbis shows,[2385]2385 that such sayings

brought neither relief to the body, nor comfort to the soul of real

sufferers. But this other Jewish idea was even more deeply rooted, had

more of underlying truth, and would, especially in presence of the

felt holiness of Jesus, have a deep influence on the soul, that

recovery would not be granted to the sick unless his sins had first

been forgiven him.[2386]2386 It was this deepest, though, perhaps, as

yet only partially conscious, want of the sufferer before Him, which

Jesus met when, in words of tenderest kindness, He spoke forgiveness

to his soul, and that not as something to come, but as an act already

past: 'Child, thy sins have been forgiven.'[2387]2387 We should almost

say, that He needed first to speak these words, before He gave

healing: needed, in the psychological order of things; needed, also,

if the inward sickness was to be healed, and because the inward

stroke, or paralysis, in the consciousness of guilt, must be removed,

before the outward could be taken away.

In another sense, also, there was a higher 'need be' for the word

which brought forgiveness, before that which gave healing. Although it

is not for a moment to be supposed, that, in what Jesus did, He had

primary intention in regard to the Scribes, yet here also, as in all

Divine acts, the undesigned adaptation and the undesigned sequences

are as fitting as what we call the designed. For, with God there is

neither past nor future; neither immediate nor mediate; but all is

one, the eternally and God-pervaded Present. Let us recall, that Jesus

was in the presence of those in whom the Scribes would feign have

wrought disbelief, not of His power to cure disease - which was patent

to all - but in His Person and authority; that, perhaps, such doubts

had already been excited. And here it deserves special notice, that,

by first speaking forgiveness, Christ not only presented the deeper

moral aspect of His miracles, as against their ascription to magic or

Satanic agency, but also established that very claim, as regarded His

Person and authority, which it was sought to invalidate. In this

forgiveness of sins He presented His Person and authority as Divine,

and He proved it such by the miracle of healing which immediately

followed. Had the two been inverted, there would have been evidence,

indeed, of His power, but not of His Divine Personality, nor of His

having authority to forgive sins; and this, not the doing of miracles,

was the object of His Teaching and Mission, of which the miracles were

only secondary evidence.

Thus the inward reasoning of the Scribes,[2388]2388 which was open and

known to Him Who readeth all thoughts,[2389]2389 issued in quite the

opposite of what they could have expected. Most unwarranted, indeed,

was the feeling of contempt which we trace in their unspoken words,

whether we read them: 'Why doth this one thus speak blasphemies?' or,

according to a more correct transcript of them: 'Why doth this one

speak thus? He blasphemeth!' Yet from their point of view they were

right, for God alone can forgive sins; nor has that power ever been

given or delegated to man. But was He a mere man, like even the most

honoured of God's servants? Man, indeed; but 'the Son of

Man'[2390]2390 in the emphatic and well-understood sense of being the

Representative Man, who was to bring a new life to humanity; the

Second Adam, the Lord from Heaven. It seemed easy to say: 'Thy sins

have been forgiven.' But to Him, Who had 'authority' to do so on

earth, it was neither more easy nor more difficult than to say: 'Rise,

take up thy bed, and walk.' Yet this latter, assuredly, proved the

former, and gave it in the sight of all men unquestioned reality. And

so it was the thoughts of these Scribes, which, as applied to Christ,

were 'evil' - since they imputed to Him blasphemy - that gave occasion

for offering real evidence of what they would have impugned and

denied. In no other manner could the object alike of miracles and of

this special miracle have been so attained as by the 'evil thoughts'

of these Scribes, when, miraculously brought to light, they spoke out

the inmost possible doubt, and pointed to the highest of all questions

concerning the Christ. And so it was once more the wrath of man which

praised Him!

'And the remainder of wrath did he restrain.' As the healed man slowly

rose, and, still silent, rolled up his pallet, a way was made for him

between this multitude which followed him with wondering eyes. Then,

as first mingled wonderment and fear fell on Israel on Mount Carmel,

when the fire had leaped from heaven, devoured the sacrifice, licked

up the water in the trench, and even consumed the stones of the altar,

and then all fell prostrate, and the shout rose to heaven: 'Jehovah,

He is the Elohim!' so now, in view of this manifestation of the Divine

Presence among them. The amazement of fear fell on them in this

Presence, and they glorified God, and they said: 'We have never seen

it on this wise!'

CHAPTER XVII.

THE CALL OF MATTHEW - THE SAVIOUR'S WELCOME TO SINNERS - RABBINIC

THEOLOGY

AS REGARDS THE DOCTRINE OF FORGIVENESS IN CONTRAST TO THE GOSPEL

OF CHRIST -

THE CALL OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.

(St. Matt. ix. 9-13; St. Mark ii. 13-17; St. Luke v. 27-32; St. Matt.

x. 2-4;St. Mark iii. 13-19; St. Luke vi. 12-19.)

In two things chiefly does the fundamental difference appear between

Christianity and all other religious systems, notably Rabbinism. And

in these two things, therefore, lies the main characteristic of

Christ's work; or, taking a wider view, the fundamental idea of all

religions. Subjectively, they concern sin and the sinner; or, to put

it objectively, the forgiveness of sin and the welcome to the sinner.

But Rabbinism, and every other system down to modern humanitarianism -

if it rises so high in its idea of God as to reach that of sin, which

is its shadow - can only generally point to God for the forgiveness of

sin. What here is merely an abstraction, has become a concrete reality

in Christ. He speaks forgiveness on earth, because He is its

embodiment. As regards the second idea, that of the sinner, all other

systems know of no welcome to him till, by some means (inward or

outward), he have ceased to be a sinner and become a penitent. They

would first make him a penitent, and then bid him welcome to God;

Christ first welcomes him to God, and so makes him a penitent. The one

demands, the other imparts life. And so Christ is the Physician Whom

they that are in health need not, but they that are sick. And so

Christ came not to call the righteous but sinners - not to repentance,

as our common text erroneously puts it in St. Matthew ix. 13, and St.

Mark ii. 17,[2391]2391 but to Himself, to the Kingdom; and this is the

beginning of repentance.

Thus it is that Jesus, when His teaching becomes distinctive from that

of Judaism, puts these two points in the foreground: the one at the

cure of the paralytic, the other in the call of Levi-Matthew. And

this, also, further explains His miracles of healing as for the higher

presentation of Himself as the Great Physician, while it gives some

insight into the nexus of these two events, and explains their

chronological succession.[2392]2392 It was fitting that at the very

outset, when Rabbinism followed and challenged Jesus with hostile

intent, these two spiritual facts should be brought out, and that, not

in a controversial, but in a positive and practical manner. For, as

these two questions of sin and of the possible relation of the sinner

to God are the great burden of the soul in its upward striving after

God, so the answer to them forms the substance of all religions.

Indeed, all the cumbrous observances of Rabbinism - its whole law -

were only an attempted answer to the question: How can a man be just

with God?

But, as Rabbinism stood self-confessedly silent and powerless as

regarded the forgiveness of sins, so it had emphatically no word of

welcome or help for the sinner. The very term 'Pharisee,' or

'separated one,' implied the exclusion of sinners. With this the whole

character of Pharisaism accorded; perhaps, we should have said, that

of Rabbinism, since the Sadducean would here agree with the Pharisaic

Rabbi. The contempt and avoidance of the unlearned, which was so

characteristic of the system, arose not from mere pride of knowledge,

but from the thought that, as 'the Law' was the glory and privilege of

Israel - indeed, the object for which the world was created and

preserved - ignorance of it was culpable. Thus, the unlearned

blasphemed his Creator, and missed or perverted his own destiny. It

was a principle, that 'the ignorant cannot be pious.' On the

principles of Rabbinism, there was logic in all this, and reason also,

though sadly perverted. The yoke of 'the Kingdom of God' was the high

destiny of every true Israelite. Only, to them it lay in external, not

internal conformity to the Law of God: 'in meat and drink,' not 'in

righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.' True, they also

perceived, that 'sins of thought' and purpose, though uncommitted,

were 'more grievous than even sins of outward deed;'[2393]2393 but

only in this sense, that each outward sin was traceable to inward

dereliction or denial of the Law - 'no man sinneth, unless the spirit

of error has first entered into him.'[2394]2394 On this ground the

punishment of infidelity or apostasy in the next world was endless,

while that of actual transgressions was limited in duration.[2395]2395

[2396]2396

As 'righteousness came by the Law,' so also return to it on the part

of the sinner. Hence, although Rabbinism had no welcome to the sinner,

it was unceasing in its call to repentance and in extolling its

merits. All the prophets had prophesied only of repentance.[2397]2397

The last pages of the Tractate on the Day of Atonement are full of

praises of repentance. It not only averted punishment and prolonged

life, but brought good, even the final redemption to Israel and the

world at large. It surpassed the observance of all the commandments,

and was as meritorious as if one had restored the Temple and Altar,

and offered all sacrifices.[2398]2398 One hour of penitence and good

works outweighed the whole world to come. These are only a few of the

extravagant statements by which Rabbinism extolled repentance. But,

when more closely examined, we find that this repentance, as preceding

the free welcome of invitation to the sinner, was only another form of

work-righteousness. This is, at any rate, one meaning[2399]2399 of the

saying which conjoined the Law and repentance, and represented them as

preceding the Creation.[2400]2400 Another would seem derived from a

kind of Manichaean view of sin. According to it, God Himself was

really the author of the Yetser haRa, or evil impulse[2401]2401 ('the

law in our members'), for which, indeed, there was an absolute

necessity, if the world was to continue.[2402]2402 [2403]2403 Hence,

'the penitent' was really 'the great one,' since his strong nature had

more in it of the 'evil impulse,' and the conquest of it by the

penitent was really of greater merit than abstinence from

sin.[2404]2404 Thus it came, that the true penitent really occupied a

higher place, 'stood where the perfectly righteous could not

stand.'[2405]2405 There is then both work and merit in penitence; and

we can understand, how 'the gate of penitence is open, even when that

of prayer is shut,'[2406]2406 and that these two sentences are not

only consistent, but almost cover each other - that the Messianic

deliverance would come, if all Israel did righteousness,[2407]2407

and, again, if all Israel repented for only one day;[2408]2408 or, to

put it otherwise - if Israel were all saints, or all

sinners.[2409]2409

We have already touched the point where, as regards repentance, as

formerly in regard to forgiveness, the teaching of Christ is in

absolute and fundamental contrariety to that of the Rabbis. According

to Jesus Christ, when we have done all, we are to feel that we are but

unprofitable servants.[2410]2410 According to the Rabbis, as St. Paul

puts it, 'righteousness cometh by the Law;' and, when it is lost, the

Law alone can restore life;[2411]2411 while, according to Christian

teaching, it only bringeth death. Thus there was, at the very

foundation of religious life, absolute contrariety between Jesus and

His contemporaries. Whence, if not from heaven, came a doctrine so

novel as that which Jesus made the basis of His Kingdom?

In one respect, indeed, the Rabbinic view was in some measure derived

from the Old Testament, though by an external and, therefore, false

interpretation of its teaching. In the Old Testament, also,

'repentance' was Teshubhah ({hebrew}), 'return;' while, in the New

Testament, it is 'change of mind' (metanoia). It would not be fair

here to argue, that the common expression for repenting was 'to do

penitence' ({hebrew}), since by its side we frequently meet that

other: 'to return in penitence' ({hebrew}). Indeed, other terms for

repentance also occur. Thus Tohu ({hebrew}) means repentance in the

sense of regret; Charatah, perhaps, more in that of a change of mind;

while Teyubha or Teshubhah is the return of repentance. Yet, according

to the very common Rabbinic expression, there is a 'gate of

repentance' ({hebrew}) through which a man must enter, and, even if

Charatah be the sorrowing change of mind, it is at most only that

gate. Thus, after all, there is more in the 'doing of penitence' than

appears at first sight. In point of fact, the full meaning of

repentance as Teshubhah, or 'return,' is only realised, when a man has

returned from dereliction to observance of the Law. Then, sins of

purpose are looked upon as if they had been unintentional - nay, they

become even virtuous actions.[2412]2412

We are not now speaking of the forgiveness of sins. In truth,

Rabbinism knew nothing of a forgiveness of sin, free and

unconditional, unless in the case of those who had not the power of

doing anything for their atonement. Even in the passage which extols

most the freeness and the benefits of repentance (the last pages of

the Tractate on the Day of Atonement), there is the most painful

discussion about sins great and small, about repentance from fear or

from love, about sins against commands or against prohibitions; and,

in what cases repentance averted, or else only deferred, judgment,

leaving final expiation to be wrought by other means. These were:

personal sufferings,[2413]2413 death,[2414]2414 or the Day of

Atonement.[2415]2415 Besides these, there were always the 'merits of

the fathers;'[2416]2416 or, perhaps, some one good work

done;[2417]2417 or, at any rate, the brief period of purgatorial pain,

which might open the gate of mercy. These are the so-called

'advocates' (Peraqlitin, {hebrew}) of the penitent sinner. In a

classical passage on the subject,[2418]2418 repentance is viewed in

its bearing on four different spiritual[2419]2419 conditions, which

are supposed to be respectively referred to in Jer. iii. 22; Lev. xvi.

30; Is. xxii. 14; and Ps. lxxxix. 32. The first of these refers to a

breach of a command, with immediate and persistent cry for

forgiveness, which is at once granted. The second is that of a breach

of a prohibition, when, besides repentance, the Day of Atonement is

required. The third is that of purposed sin, on which death or cutting

off had been threatened, when, besides repentance and the Day of

Atonement, sufferings are required; while in open profanation of the

Name of God, only death can make final atonement.[2420]2420

But the nature of repentance has yet to be more fully explained. Its

gate is sorrow and shame.[2421]2421 In that sense repentance may be

the work of a moment, 'as in the twinkling of an eye,'[2422]2422 and a

life's sins may obtain mercy by the tears and prayers of a few

minutes' repentance.[2423]2423 [2424]2424 To this also refers the

beautiful saying, that all which rendered a sacrifice unfit for the

altar, such as that it was broken, fitted the penitent for acceptance,

since 'the sacrifices of God were a broken and contrite

heart.'[2425]2425 By the side of what may be called contrition, Jewish

theology places confession (Viddui, {hebrew}). This was deemed so

integral a part of repentance, that those about to be

executed,[2426]2426 or to die,[2427]2427 were admonished to it. Achan

of old had thus obtained pardon.[2428]2428 But in the case of the

living all this could only be regarded as repentance in the sense of

being its preparation or beginning. Even if it were Charatah, or

regret at the past, it would not yet be Teshubhah, or return to God;

and even if it changed purposed into unintentional sin, arrested

judgment, and stayed or banished its Angel, it would still leave a man

without those works which are not only his real destiny and merit

heaven, but constitute true repentance. For, as sin is ultimately

dereliction of the Law, beginning within, so repentance is ultimately

return to the Law. In this sense there is a higher and meritorious

confession, which not only owns sin but God, and is therefore an

inward return to Him. So Adam, when he saw the penitence of Cain,

burst into this Psalm,[2429]2429 'It is a good thing to

confess[2430]2430 unto the Lord.'[2431]2431 [2432]2432 Manasseh, when

in trouble, called upon God and was heard,[2433]2433 although it is

added, that this was only done in order to prove that the door of

repentance was open to all. Indeed, the Angels had closed the windows

of Heaven against his prayers, but God opened a place for their

entrance beneath His throne of glory.[2434]2434 Similarly, even

Pharaoh, who, according to Jewish tradition, made in the Red Sea

confession of God,[2435]2435 was preserved, became king of Nineveh,

and so brought the Ninevites to true repentance, which verily

consisted not merely in sackcloth and fasting, but in restitution, so

that every one who had stolen a beam pulled down his whole palace to

restore it.[2436]2436

But, after all, inward repentance only arrested the decrees of

justice.[2437]2437 That which really put the penitent into right

relationship with God was good deeds. The term must here be taken in

its widest sense. Fasting is meritorious in a threefold sense: as the

expression of humiliation,[2438]2438 as an offering to God, similar

to, but better than the fat of sacrifices on the altar,[2439]2439 and

as preventing further sins by chastening and keeping under the

body.[2440]2440 A similar view must be taken of self-inflicted

penances.[2441]2441 [2442]2442 On the other hand, there was

restitution to those who had been wronged - as a woman once put it to

her husband, to the surrender of one's 'girdle.'[2443]2443 [2444]2444

Nay, it must be of even more than was due in strict law.[2445]2445 To

this must be added public acknowledgment of public sins. If a person

had sinned in one direction, he must not only avoid it for the

future,[2446]2446 but aim at doing all the more in the opposite

direction, or of overcoming sin in the same circumstances of

temptation.[2447]2447 Beyond all this were the really good works,

whether occupation with the Law[2448]2448 or outward deeds, which

constituted perfect repentance. Thus we read,[2449]2449 that every

time Israel gave alms or did any kindness, they made in this world

great peace, and procured great Paracletes between Israel and their

Father in Heaven. Still farther, we are told[2450]2450 what a sinner

must do who would be pardoned. If he had been accustomed daily to read

one column in the Bible, let him read two; if to learn one chapter in

the Mishnah, let him learn two. But if he be not learned enough to do

either, let him become an administrator for the congregation, or a

public distributor of alms. Nay, so far was the doctrine of external

merit carried, that to be buried in the land of Israel was supposed to

ensure forgiveness of sins.[2451]2451 This may, finally, be

illustrated by an instance, which also throws some light on the

parable of Dives in Hades. Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish had in early life

been the associate of two robbers. But he repented, 'returned to his

God with all his heart, with fasting and prayer, was early and late

before God, and busied himself with the Torah (Law) and the

commandments.' Then both he and his former companions died, when they

saw him in glory, while themselves were in the lowest hell. And when

they reminded God, that with Him there was no regard of persons, He

pointed to the Rabbi's penitence and their own impenitence. On this

they asked for respite, that they might 'do great penitence,' when

they were told that there was no space for repentance after death.

This is farther enforced by a parable to the effect, that a man, who

is going into the wilderness, must provide himself with bread and

water while in the inhabited country, if he would not perish in the

desert.

Thus, in one and another respect, Rabbinic teaching about the need of

repentance runs close to that of the Bible. But the vital difference

between Rabbinism and the Gospel lies in this: that whereas Jesus

Christ freely invited all sinners, whatever their past, assuring them

of welcome and grace, the last word of Rabbinism is only despair, and

a kind of Pessimism. For, it is expressly and repeatedly declared in

the case of certain sins, and, characteristically, of heresy, that,

even if a man genuinely and truly repented, he must expect immediately

to die - indeed, his death would be the evidence that his repentance

was genuine, since, though such a sinner might turn from his evil, it

would be impossible for him, if he lived, to lay hold on the good, and

to do it.[2452]2452

It is in the light of what we have just learned concerning the

Rabbinic views of forgiveness and repentance that the call of

Levi-Matthew must be read, if we would perceive its full meaning.

There is no need to suppose that it took place immediately on the cure

of the paralytic. On the contrary, the more circumstantial account of

St. Mark implies, that some time had intervened.[2453]2453 If our

suggestion be correct, that it was winter when the paralytic was

healed at Capernaum, we may suppose it to have been the early

spring-time of that favoured district, when Jesus 'went forth again by

the seaside.' And with this, as we shall see, best agrees the

succession of afterevents.

Few, if any, could have enjoyed better opportunities for hearing, and

quietly thinking over the teaching of the Prophet of Nazareth, than

Levi-Matthew. There is no occasion for speculating which was his

original, or whether the second name was added after his conversion,

since in Galilee it was common to have two names - one the strictly

Jewish, the other the Galilean.[2454]2454 Nor do we wonder, that in

the sequel the first or purely Jewish name of Levi was dropped, and

only that of Matthew (Matti, Mattai, Matteya, Mattithyah), retained.

The latter which is the equivalent of Nathanael, or of the Greek

Theodore (gift of God), seems to have been frequent. We read that it

was that of a former Temple-official,[2455]2455 and of several

Rabbis.[2456]2456 It is perhaps of more interest, that the

Talmud[2457]2457 names five as the disciples of Jesus, and among them

these two whom we can clearly identify: Matthew[2458]2458 and

Thaddæus.[2459]2459

Sitting before[2460]2460 his custom-house, as on that day when Jesus

called him, Matthew must have frequently heard Him as He taught by the

sea-shore. For this would be the best, and therefore often chosen,

place for the purpose. Thither not only the multitude from Capernaum

could easily follow; but here was the landing-place for the many ships

which traversed the Lake, or coasted from town to town. And this not

only for them who had business in Capernaum or that neighbourhood, but

also for those who would then strike the great road of Eastern

commerce, which led from Damascus to the harbours of the West.

Touching the Lake in that very neighbourhood, it turned thence,

northwards and westwards, to join what was termed the Upper Galilean

road.

We know much, and yet, as regards details, perhaps too little about

those 'tolls, dues, and customs,' which made the Roman administration

such sore and vexatious exaction to all 'Provincials,' and which in

Judæa loaded the very name of publican with contempt and hatred. They

who cherished the gravest religious doubts as to the lawfulness of

paying any tribute to Cæsar, as involving in principle recognition of

a bondage to which they would fain have closed their eyes, and the

substitution of heathen kingship for that of Jehovah, must have looked

on the publican as the very embodiment of antinationalism. But perhaps

men do not always act under the constant consciousness of such

abstract principles. Yet the endless vexatious interferences, the

unjust and cruel exactions, the petty tyranny, and the extortionate

avarice, from which there was neither defense nor appeal, would make

it always well-nigh unbearable. It is to this that the Rabbis so often

refer. If 'publicans' were disqualified from being judges or

witnesses, it was, at least so far as regarded witness-bearing,

because 'they exacted more than was due.'[2461]2461 Hence also it was

said, that repentance was specially difficult for tax-gatherers and

custom-house officers.[2462]2462 [2463]2463

It is of importance to notice, that the Talmud distinguishes two

classes of 'publicans:' the tax-gatherer in general (Gabbai), and the

Mokhes, or Mokhsa, who was specially the douanier or custom-house

official.[2464]2464 Although both classes fall under the Rabbinic ban,

the douanier - such as Matthew was - is the object of chief

execration. And this, because his exactions were more vexatious, and

gave more scope to rapacity. The Gabbai, or tax-gatherer, collected

the regular dues, which consisted of ground-, income-, and poll-tax.

The ground-tax amounted to one-tenth of all grain and one-fifth of the

wine and fruit grown; partly paid in kind, and partly commuted into

money. The income-tax amounted to 1 per cent.; while the head-money,

or poll-tax, was levied on all persons, bond and free, in the case of

men from the age of fourteen, in that of women from the age of twelve,

up to that of sixty-five.

If this offered many opportunities for vexatious exactions and

rapacious injustice, the Mokhes might inflict much greater hardship

upon the poor people. There was tax and duty upon all imports and

exports; on all that was bought and sold; bridge-money, road-money,

harbour-dues, town-dues, &c. The classical reader knows the ingenuity

which could invent a tax, and find a name for every kind of exaction,

such as on axles, wheels, pack-animals, pedestrians, roads, highways;

on admission to markets; on carriers, bridges, ships, and quays; on

crossing rivers, on dams, on licences, in short, on such a variety of

objects, that even the research of modern scholars has not been able

to identify all the names. On goods the ad valorem duty amounted to

from 2½ to 5, and on articles of luxury to even 12½ per cent. But even

this was as nothing, compared to the vexation of being constantly

stopped on the journey, having to unload all one's pack-animals, when

every bale and package was opened, and the contents tumbled about,

private letters opened, and the Mokhes ruled supreme in his insolence

and rapacity.

The very word Mokhes seems, in its root-meaning, associated with the

idea of oppression and injustice. He was literally, as really, an

oppressor. The Talmud charges them with gross partiality, remitting in

the case of those to whom they wished to show favour, and exacting

from those who were not their favourites. They were a criminal race,

to which Lev. xx. 5 applied. It was said, that there never was a

family which numbered a Mokhes, in which all did not become such.

Still, cases are recorded when a religious publican would extend

favour to Rabbis, or give them timely notice to go into hiding. If one

belonging to the sacred association (a Chabher) became either a Gabbai

or a Mokhes, he was at once expelled, although he might be restored on

repentance.[2465]2465 That there was ground for such rigour, appears

from such an occurrence,[2466]2466 as when a Mokhes took from a

defenseless person his ass, giving him another, and very inferior,

animal for it. Against such unscrupulous oppressors every kind of

deception was allowed; goods might be declared to be votive

offerings,[2467]2467 or a person pass his slave as his son.[2468]2468

The Mokhes was called 'great'[2469]2469 if he employed substitutes,

and 'small' if he stood himself at the receipt of custom. Till the

time of Cæsar the taxes were farmed in Rome, at the highest bidding,

mostly by a joint-stock company of the knightly order, which employed

publicans under them. But by a decree of Cæsar, the taxes of Judæa

were no longer farmed, but levied by publicans in Judæa, and paid

directly to the Government, the officials being appointed by the

provincials themselves.[2470]2470 [2471]2471 This was, indeed, a great

alleviation, although it perhaps made the tax-gatherers only more

unpopular, as being the direct officials of the heathen power. This

also explains how, if the Mishnah forbids[2472]2472 even the changing

of money from the guilt-laden chest of a Mokhes, or douanier, the

Gemara[2473]2473 adds, that such applied to custom-house officers who

either did not keep to the tax appointed by the Government, or indeed

to any fixed tax, and to those who appointed themselves to such office

- that is, as we take it, who would volunteer for the service, in the

hope of making profit on their own account. An instance is, however,

related of a Gabbai, or tax-gatherer, becoming a celebrated Rabbi,

though the taint of his former calling deterred the more rigid of his

colleagues from intercourse with him.[2474]2474 On heathen feast days

toll was remitted to those who came to the festival.[2475]2475

Sometimes this was also done from kindness.[2476]2476 The following

story may serve as a final illustration of the popular notions, alike

about publicans and about the merit of good works. The son of a Mokhes

and that of a very pious man had died. The former received from his

townsmen all honour at his burial, while the latter was carried

unmourned to the grave. This anomaly was Divinely explained by the

circumstance, that the pious man had committed one transgression, and

the publican had done one good deed. But a few days afterwards a

further vision and dream was vouchsafed to the survivors, when the

pious was seen walking in gardens beside water-brooks, while the

publican was described stretching out his tongue towards the river to

quench his thirst, but unable to reach the refreshing

stream.[2477]2477

What has been described in such detail, will cast a peculiar light on

the call of Matthew by the Saviour of sinners. For, we remember that

Levi-Matthew was not only a 'publican,' but of the worst kind: a

'Mokhes' or douanier; a 'little Mokhes,' who himself stood at his

custom-house; one of the class to whom, as we are told, repentance

offered special difficulties. And, of all such officials, those who

had to take toll from ships were perhaps the worst, if we are to judge

by the proverb: 'Woe to the ship which sails without having paid the

dues.'[2478]2478 And yet, after all, Matthew may have been only one of

that numerous class to whom religion is merely a matter quite outside

of, and in another region from life, and who, having first gone astray

through ignorance, feel themselves ever farther repelled, or rather

shut out, by the narrow, harsh uncharitableness of those whom they

look upon as the religious and pious.

But now quite another day had dawned on him. The Prophet of Nazareth

was not like those other great Rabbis, or their pietist,

self-righteous imitators. There was that about Him which not only

aroused the conscience, but drew the heart - compelling, not

repelling. What He said opened a new world. His very appearance

bespoke Him not harsh, self-righteous, far away, but the Helper, if

not even the Friend, of sinners. There was not between Him and one

like Matthew, the great, almost impassable gap of repentance. He had

seen and heard Him in the Synagogue - and who that had heard His

Words, or witnessed His power, could ever forget, or lose the

impression? The people, the rulers, even the evil spirits, had owned

His authority. But in the Synagogue Jesus was still the Great One,

far-away from him; and he, Levi-Matthew, the 'little Mokhes' of

Capernaum, to whom, as the Rabbis told him, repentance was next to

impossible. But out there, in the open, by the seashore, it was

otherwise. All unobserved by others, he observed all, and could yield

himself, without reserve, to the impression. Now, it was an eager

multitude that came from Capernaum; then, a long train bearing

sufferers, to whom gracious, full, immediate relief was granted -

whether they were Rabbinic saints, or sinners. And still more gracious

than His deeds were His Words.

And so Matthew sat before his custom-house, and hearkened and hoped.

Those white-sailed ships would bring crowds of listeners; the busy

caravan on that highway would stop, and its wayfarers turn aside to

join the eager multitude - to hear the Word or see the Word. Surely,

it was not 'a time for buying and selling,' and Levi would have little

work, and less heart for it at his custom-house. Perhaps he may have

witnessed the call of the first Apostles; he certainly must have known

the fishermen and shipowners of Capernaum. And now it appeared, as if

Jesus had been brought still nearer to Matthew. For, the great ones of

Israel, 'the Scribes of the Pharisees,'[2479]2479 and their pietest

followers, had combined against Him, and would exclude Him, not on

account of sin, but on account of the sinners. And so, we take it,

long before that eventful day which for ever decided his life, Matthew

had, in heart, become the disciple of Jesus. Only he dared not, could

not, have hoped for personal recognition - far less for call to

discipleship. But when it came, and Jesus fixed on him that look of

love which searched the inmost deep of the soul, and made Him the true

Fisher of men, it needed not a moment's thought or consideration. When

he spake it, 'Follow Me,' the past seemed all swallowed up in the

present heaven of bliss. He said not a word, for his soul was in the

speechless surprise of unexpected love and grace; but he rose up, left

the custom-house, and followed Him. That was a gain that day, not of

Matthew alone, but of all the poor and needy in Israel - nay, of all

sinners from among men, to whom the door of heaven was opened. And,

verily, by the side of Peter, as the stone, we place Levi-Matthew, as

typical of those rafters laid on the great foundation, and on which is

placed the flooring of that habitation of the Lord, which is His

Church.

It could not have been long after this - probably almost immediately -

that the memorable gathering took place in the house of Matthew, which

gave occasion to that cavil of the Pharisaic Scribes, which served

further to bring out the meaning of Levi's call. For, opposition ever

brings into clearer light positive truth, just as judgment comes never

alone, but always conjoined with display of higher mercy. It was

natural that all the publicans around should, after the call of

Matthew, have come to his house to meet Jesus. Even from the lowest

point of view, the event would give them a new standing in the Jewish

world, in relation to the Prophet of Nazareth. And it was

characteristic that Jesus should improve such opportunity. When we

read of 'sinners' as in company with these publicans, it is not

necessary to think of gross or open offenders, though such may have

been included. For, we know what such a term may have included in the

Pharisaic vocabulary. Equally characteristic was it, that the

Rabbinists should have addressed their objection as to fellowship with

such, not to the Master, but to the disciples. Perhaps, it was not

only, nor chiefly, from moral cowardice, though they must have known

what the reply of Jesus would have been. On the other hand, there was

wisdom, or rather cunning, in putting it to the disciples. They were

but initial learners - and the question was one not so much of

principle, as of acknowledged Jewish propriety. Had they been able to

lodge this cavil in their minds, it would have fatally shaken the

confidence of the disciples in the Master; and, if they could have

been turned aside, the cause of the new Christ would have been

grievously injured, if not destroyed. It was with the same object,

that they shortly afterwards enlisted the aid of the well-meaning, but

only partially-instructed disciples of John on the question of

fasting,[2480]2480 which presented a still stronger consensus of

Jewish opinion as against Christ, all the more telling, that here the

practice of John seemed to clash with that of Jesus.

But then John was at the time in prison, and passing through the

temporary darkness of a thick cloud towards the fuller light. But

Jesus could not leave His disciples to answer for themselves. What,

indeed, could or would they have had to say? And He ever speaks for

us, when we cannot answer for ourselves. From their own standpoint and

contention - nay, also in their own form of speech - He answered the

Pharisees. And He not only silenced their gain-saying, but further

opened up the meaning of His acting - nay, His very purpose and

Mission. 'No need have they who are strong and in health[2481]2481 of

a physician, but they who are ill.' It was the very principle of

Pharisaism which He thus set forth, alike as regarded their

self-exclusion from Him and His consorting with the diseased. And, as

the more Hebraic St. Matthew adds, applying the very Rabbinic formula,

so often used when superficial speciousness of knowledge is directed

to further thought and information: 'Go and learn!'[2482]2482 Learn

what? What their own Scriptures meant; what was implied in the further

prophetic teaching, as correction of a one-sided literalism and

externalism that misinterpreted the doctrine of sacrifices - learn

that fundamental principle of the spiritual meaning of the Law as

explanatory of its mere letter, 'I will have mercy, and not

sacrifice.' They knew no mercy that was not sacrifice[2483]2483 - with

merit attaching; He no sacrifice, real and acceptable to God, that was

not mercy. And this also is a fundamental principle of the Old

Testament, as spiritually understood; and, being such a fundamental

principle, He afterwards again applied this saying of the

prophet[2484]2484 to His own mode of viewing and treating the

Sabbath-question.[2485]2485

This was one aspect of it, as Jesus opened up anew the Old Testament,

of which their key of knowledge had only locked the door. There was

yet another and higher, quite explaining and applying alike this

saying and the whole Old Testament, and thus His Own Mission. And this

was the fullest unfolding and highest vindication of it: 'For, I am

not come to call righteous men, but sinners.'[2486]2486 The

introduction of the words 'to repentance' in some manuscripts of St.

Matthew and St. Mark shows, how early the full meaning of Christ's

words was misinterpreted by prosaic apologetic attempts, that failed

to fathom their depth. For, Christ called sinners to better and higher

than repentance, even to Himself and His Kingdom; and to 'emendate'

the original record by introducing these words from another

Gospel[2487]2487 marks a purpose, indicative of retrogression. And

this saying of Christ concerning the purpose of His Incarnation and

Work: 'to call not righteous men, but sinners,' also marks the

standpoint of the Christ, and the relation which each of us, according

to his view of self, of righteousness, and of sin - personally,

voluntarily, and deliberately - occupies towards the Kingdom and the

Christ.

The history of the call of St. Matthew has also another, to some

extent subordinate, historical interest, for it was no doubt speedily

followed by the calling of the other Apostles.[2488]2488 This is the

chronological succession in the Synoptic narratives. It also affords

some insight into the history of those, whom the Lord chose as bearers

of His Gospel. The difficulties connected with tracing the family

descent or possible relationship between the Apostles are so great,

that we must forego all hope of arriving at any certain conclusion.

Without, therefore, entering on details about the genealogy of the

Apostles, and the varied arrangement of their names in the Gospels,

which, with whatever uncertainty remaining in the end, may be learned

from any work on the subject, some points at least seem clear. First,

it appears that only the calling of those to the Apostolate is

related, which in some sense is typical, viz. that of Peter and

Andrew, of James and John, of Philip and Bartholomew (or Bar Telamyon,

or Temalyon,[2489]2489 generally supposed the same as Nathanael), and

of Matthew the publican. Yet, secondly, there is something which

attaches to each of the others. Thomas, who is called Didymus (which

means 'twin'), is closely connected with Matthew, both in St. Luke's

Gospel and in that of St. Matthew himself. James is expressly named as

the son of Alphæus or Clopas.[2490]2490 [2491]2491 This we know to

have been also the name of Matthew-Levi's father. But, as the name was

a common one, no inference can be drawn from it, and it does not seem

likely that the father of Matthew was also that of James, Judas, and

Simon, for these three seem to have been brothers. Judas is designated

by St. Matthew as Lebbaeus, from the Hebrew lebh, a heart, and is also

named, both by him and by St. Mark, Thaddæus - a term which, however,

we would not derive, as is commonly done, from thad, the 'female

breast,' but following the analogy of the Jewish name Thodah, from

'praise.'[2492]2492 In that case both Lebbæus and Thaddæus would point

to the heartiness and the Thanksgiving of the Apostle, and hence to

his character. St. Luke simply designates him Judas of James, which

means that he was the brother (less probably, the son) of

James.[2493]2493 Thus his real name would have been Judas Lebbæus, and

his surname Thaddæus. Closely connected with these two we have in all

the Gospels, Simon, surnamed Zelotes or Cananæan (not Canaanite), both

terms indicating his original connection with the Galilean Zealot

party, the 'Zealots for the Law.'[2494]2494 His position in the

Apostolic Catalogue, and the testimony of Hegesippus,[2495]2495 seem

to point him out as the son of Clopas, and brother of James, and of

Judas Lebbæus. These three were, in a sense, cousins of Christ, since,

according to Hegesippus, Clopas was the brother of Joseph, while the

sons of Zebedee were real cousins, their mother Salome being a sister

of the Virgin.[2496]2496 Lastly, we have Judas Iscariot, or Ish

Kerioth, 'a man of Kerioth,' a town in Judah.[2497]2497 Thus the

betrayer alone would be of Judæan origin, the others all of Galilean;

and this may throw light on not a little in his after-history.

No further reference than this briefest sketch seems necessary,

although on comparison it is clear that the Apostolic Catalogues in

the Gospels are ranged in three groups, each of them beginning with

respectively the same name (Simon, Philip, and James the son of

Alphaeus). This, however, we may remark - how narrow, after all, was

the Apostolic circle, and how closely connected most of its members.

And yet, as we remember the history of their calling, or those notices

attached to their names which afford a glimpse into their history, it

was a circle, thoroughly representative of those who would gather

around the Christ. Most marked and most solemn of all, it was after a

night of solitary prayer on the mountain-side, that Jesus at early

dawn 'called His disciples, and of them He chose twelve, whom also He

named Apostles,' 'that they should be with Him, and that He might send

them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sickness and to cast

out devils.'[2498]2498

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT - THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST AND RABBINIC

TEACHING.[2499]2499

(St. Matt. v.-vii.)

It was probably on one of those mountain-ranges, which stretch to the

north of Capernaum, that Jesus had spent the night of lonely prayer,

which preceded the designation of the twelve to the Apostolate. As the

soft spring morning broke, He called up those who had learned to

follow Him, and from among them chose the twelve, who were to be His

Ambassadors and Representatives.[2500]2500 [2501]2501 But already the

early light had guided the eager multitude which, from all parts, had

come to the broad level plateau beneath to bring to Him their need of

soul or body. To them He now descended with words of comfort and power

of healing. But better yet had He to say, and to do for them, and for

us all. As they pressed around Him for that touch which brought virtue

of healing to all, He retired again to the mountain-height,[2502]2502

and through the clear air of the bright spring day spake, what has

ever since been known as the 'Sermon on the Mount,' from the place

where He sat, or as that 'in the plain' (St. Luke vi. 17), from the

place where He had first met the multitude, and which so many must

have continued to occupy while He taught.

The first and most obvious, perhaps, also, most superficial thought,

is that which brings this teaching of Christ into comparison, we shall

not say with that of His contemporaries - since scarcely any who lived

in the time of Jesus said aught that can be compared with it - but

with the best of the wisdom and piety of the Jewish sages, as

preserved in Rabbinic writings. Its essential difference, or rather

contrariety, in spirit and substance, not only when viewed as a whole,

but in almost each of its individual parts, will be briefly shown in

the sequel. For the present we only express this as deepest

conviction, that it were difficult to say which brings greater

astonishment (though of opposite kind): a first reading of the 'Sermon

on the Mount,' or that of any section of the Talmud. The general

reader is here at a double disadvantage. From his upbringing in an

atmosphere which Christ's Words have filled with heaven's music, he

knows not, and cannot know, the nameless feeling which steals over a

receptive soul when, in the silence of our moral wilderness, those

voices first break on the ear, that had never before been wakened to

them. How they hold the soul entranced, calling up echoes of inmost

yet unrealised aspiration, itself the outcome of the God-born and

God-tending within us, and which renders us capable of new birth into

the Kingdom; call up, also, visions and longings of that world of

heavenly song, so far away and yet so near us; and fill the soul with

subduedness, expectancy, and ecstasy! So the travel-stained wanderer

flings him down on the nearest height, to feast his eyes with the

first sight of home in the still valley beneath; so the far-of exile

sees in his dreams visions of his child-life, all transfigured; so the

weary prodigal leans his head in silent musing of mingled longing and

rest on a mother's knee. So, and much more; for, it is the Voice of

God Which speaks to us in the cool of the evening, amidst the trees of

the lost Garden; to us who, in very shame and sorrow, hide, and yet

even so hear, not words of judgment but of mercy, not concerning an

irrevocable, and impossible past, but concerning a real and to us

possible future, which is that past, only better, nearer, dearer -

for, that it is not the human which has now to rise to the Divine, but

the Divine which has come down to the human.

Or else, turn from this to a first reading of the wisdom of the Jewish

Fathers in their Talmud. It little matters, what part be chosen for

the purpose. Here, also, the reader is at disadvantage, since his

instructors present to him too frequently broken sentences, extracts

torn from their connection, words often mistranslated as regards their

real meaning, or misapplied as regards their bearing and spirit; at

best, only isolated sentences. Take these in their connection and real

meaning, and what a terrible awakening! Who, that has read

half-a-dozen pages successively of any part of the Talmud, can feel

otherwise than by turns shocked, pained, amused, or astounded? There

is here wit and logic, quickness and readiness, earnestness and zeal,

but by the side of it terrible profanity, uncleanness, superstition

and folly. Taken as a whole, it is not only utterly unspiritual, but

anti-spiritual. Not that the Talmud is worse than might be expected of

such writings in such times and circumstances, perhaps in many

respects much better - always bearing in mind the particular

standpoint of narrow nationalism, without which Talmudism itself could

not have existed, and which therefore is not an accretion, but an

essential part of it. But, taken not in abrupt sentences and

quotations, but as a whole, it is so utterly and immeasurably unlike

the New Testament, that it is not easy to determine which, as the case

may be, is greater, the ignorance or the presumption of those who put

them side by side. Even where spiritual life pulsates, it seems

propelled through valves that are diseased, and to send the life-blood

gurgling back upon the heart, or along ossified arteries that quiver

not with life at its touch. And to the reader of such disjointed

Rabbinic quotations there is this further source of misunderstanding,

that the form and sound of words is so often the same as that of the

sayings of Jesus, however different their spirit. For, necessarily,

the wine - be it new or old - made in Judæa, comes to us in

Palistinian vessels. The new teaching, to be historically true, must

have employed the old forms and spoken the old language. But the ideas

underlying terms equally employed by Jesus and the teachers of Israel

are, in everything that concerns the relation of souls to God, so

absolutely different as not to bear comparison. Whence otherwise the

enmity and opposition to Jesus from the first, and not only after His

Divine claim had been pronounced? These two, starting from principles

alien and hostile, follow opposite directions, and lead to other

goals. He who has thirsted and quenched his thirst at the living fount

of Christ's Teaching, can never again stoop to seek drink at the

broken cisterns of Rabbinism.

We take here our standpoint on St. Matthew's account of the 'Sermon on

the Mount,' to which we can scarcely doubt that by St. Luke[2503]2503

is parallel. Not that it is easy, or perhaps even possible to

determine, whether all that is now grouped in the 'Sermon on the

Mount' was really spoken by Jesus on this one occasion. From the plan

and structure of St. Matthew's Gospel, the presumption seems rather to

the contrary. For, isolated parts of it are introduced by St. Luke in

other connections, yet quite fitly.[2504]2504 On the other hand, even

in accordance with the traditional characterisation of St. Matthew's

narrative, we expect in it the fullest account of our Lord's

Discourses,[2505]2505 while we also notice that His Galilean Ministry

forms the main subject of the First Gospel.[2506]2506 And there is one

characteristic of the 'Sermon on the Mount' which, indeed, throws

light on the plan of St. Matthew's work in its apparent chronological

inversion of events, such as in its placing the 'Sermon on the Mount'

before the calling of the Apostles. We will not designate the 'Sermon

on the Mount' as the promulgation of the New Law, since that would be

a far too narrow, if not erroneous, view of it. But it certainly seems

to correspond to the Divine Revelation in the 'Ten Words' from Mount

Sinai. Accordingly, it seems appropriate that the Genesis-part of St.

Matthew's Gospel should be immediately followed by the Exodus-part, in

which the new Revelation is placed in the forefront, to the seeming

breach of historical order, leaving it afterwards to be followed by an

appropriate grouping of miracles and events, which we know to have

really preceded the 'Sermon on the Mount.'

Very many-sided is that 'Sermon on the Mount,' so that different

writers, each viewing it from his standpoint, have differently

sketched its general outline, and yet carried to our minds the feeling

that thus far they had correctly understood it. We also might attempt

humble contribution towards the same end. Viewing it in the light of

the time, we might mark in it alike advancement on the Old Testament

(or rather, unfolding of its inmost, yet hidden meaning), and contrast

to contemporary Jewish teaching. And here we would regard it as

presenting the full delineation of the ideal man of God, of prayer,

and of righteousness - in short, of the inward and outward

manifestation of discipleship. Or else, keeping before us the

different standpoint of His hearers, we might in this 'Sermon' follow

up this contrast to its underlying ideas as regards: First, the right

relationship between man and God, or true righteousness - what inward

graces characterise and what prospects attach to it, in opposition to

Jewish views of merit and of reward. Secondly, we would mark the same

contrast as regards sin (hamartology), temptation, &c. Thirdly, we

would note it, as regards salvation (soteriology); and, lastly, as

regards what may be termed moral theology: personal feelings, married

and other relations, discipleship, and the like. And in this great

contrast two points would prominently stand out: New Testament

humility, as opposed to Jewish (the latter being really pride, as only

the consciousness of failure, or rather, of inadequate perfectness,

while New Testament humility is really despair of self); and again,

Jewish as opposed to New Testament perfectness (the former being an

attempt by means external or internal to strive up to God: the latter

a new life, springing from God, and in God). Or, lastly, we might view

it as upward teaching in regard to God: the King; inward teaching in

regard to man: the subjects of the King; and outward teaching in

regard to the Church and the world: the boundaries of the Kingdom.

This brings us to what alone we can here attempt: a general outline of

the 'Sermon on the Mount.' Its great subject is neither righteousness,

nor yet the New Law (if such designation be proper in regard to what

in no real sense is a Law), but that which was innermost and uppermost

in the Mind of Christ - the Kingdom of God. Notably, the Sermon on the

Mount contains not any detailed or systematic doctrinal,[2507]2507 nor

any ritual teaching, nor yet does it prescribe the form of any outward

observances. This marks, at least negatively, a difference in

principle from all other teaching. Christ came to found a Kingdom, not

a School; to institute a fellowship, not to propound a system. To the

first disciples all doctrinal teaching sprang out of fellowship with

Him. They saw Him, and therefore believed; they believed, and

therefore learned the truths connected with Him, and springing out of

Him. So to speak, the seed of truth which fell on their hearts was

carried thither from the flower of His Person and Life.

Again, as from this point of view the Sermon on the Mount differs from

all contemporary Jewish teaching, so also is it impossible to compare

it with any other system of morality. The difference here is one not

of degree, nor even of kind, but of standpoint. It is indeed true,

that the Words of Jesus, properly understood, marks the utmost limit

of all possible moral conception. But this point does not come in

question. Every moral system is a road by which, through self-denial,

discipline, and effort, men seek to reach the goal. Christ begins with

this goal, and places His disciples at once in the position to which

all other teachers point as the end. They work up to the goal of

becoming the 'children of the Kingdom;' He makes men such, freely, and

of His grace: and this is the Kingdom. What the others labour for, He

gives. They begin by demanding, He by bestowing: because he brings

good tidings of forgiveness and mercy. Accordingly, in the real sense,

there is neither new law nor moral system here, but entrance into a

new life: 'Be ye therefore perfect, as your Father Which is in heaven

is perfect.'

But if the Sermon on the Mount contains not a new, nor, indeed, any

system of morality, and addresses itself to a new condition of things,

it follows that the promises attaching, for example, to the so-called

'Beatitudes' must not be regarded as the reward of the spiritual state

with which they are respectively connected, nor yet as their result.

It is not because a man is poor in spirit that his is the Kingdom of

Heaven, in the sense that the one state will grow into the other, or

be its result; still less is the one the reward of the

other.[2508]2508 The connecting link - so to speak, the theological

copula between the 'state' and the promise - is in each case Christ

Himself: because He stands between our present and our future, and

'has opened the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers.' Thus the promise

represents the gift of grace by Christ in the new Kingdom, as adapted

to each case.

It is Christ, then, as the King, Who is here flinging open the gates

of His Kingdom. To study it more closely: in the three chapters, under

which the Sermon on the Mount is grouped in the first

Gospel,[2509]2509 the Kingdom of God is presented successively,

progressively, and extensively. Let us trace this with the help of the

text itself.

In the first part of the Sermon on the Mount[2510]2510 the Kingdom of

God is delineated generally, first positively, and then negatively,

marking especially how its righteousness goes deeper than the mere

letter of even the Old Testament Law. It opens with ten Beatitudes,

which are the New Testament counterpart to the Ten Commandments. These

present to us, not the observance of the Law written on stone, but the

realisation of that Law which, by the Spirit, is written on the

fleshly tables of the heart.[2511]2511

These Ten Commandments in the Old Covenant were preceded by a

Prologue.[2512]2512 The ten Beatitudes have, characteristically, not a

Prologue but an Epilogue,[2513]2513 which corresponds to the Old

Testament Prologue. This closes the first section, of which the object

was to present the Kingdom of God in its characteristic features. But

here it was necessary, in order to mark the real continuity of the New

Testament with the Old, to show the relation of the one to the other.

And this is the object of verses 17 to 20, the last-mentioned verse

forming at the same time a grand climax and transition to the

criticism of the Old Testament-Law in its merely literal application,

such as the Scribes and Pharisees made.[2514]2514 For, taking even the

letter of the Law, there is not only progression, but almost contrast,

between the righteousness of the Kingdom and that set forth by the

teachers of Israel. Accordingly, a detailed criticism of the Law now

follows - and that not as interpreted and applied by 'tradition,' but

in its barely literal meaning. In this part of the 'Sermon on the

Mount' the careful reader will mark an analogy to Exod. xxi. and xxii.

This closes the first part of the 'Sermon on the Mount.' The second

part is contained in St. Matt. vi. In this the criticism of the Law is

carried deeper. The question now is not as concerns the Law in its

literality, but as to what constituted more than a mere observance of

the outward commandments: piety, spirituality, sanctity. Three points

here stood out specially - nay, stand out still, and in all ages.

Hence this criticism was not only of special application to the Jews,

but is universal, we might almost say, prophetic. These three high

points are alms, prayer, and fasting - or, to put the latter more

generally, the relation of the physical to the spiritual. These three

are successively presented, negatively and positively.[2515]2515 But

even so, this would have been but the external aspect of them. The

Kingdom of God carries all back to the grand underlying ideas. What

were this or that mode of giving alms, unless the right idea be

apprehended, of what constitutes riches, and where they should be

sought? This is indicated in verses 19 to 21. Again, as to prayer:

what matters it if we avoid the externalism of the Pharisees, or even

catch the right form as set forth in the 'Lord's Prayer,' unless we

realise what underlies prayer? It is to lay our inner man wholly open

to the light of God in genuine, earnest simplicity, to be quite shone

through by Him.[2516]2516 It is, moreover, absolute and undivided

self-dedication to God.[2517]2517 And in this lies its connection,

alike with the spirit that prompts almsgiving, and with that which

prompts real fasting. That which underlies all such fasting is a right

view of the relation in which the body with its wants stands to God -

the temporal to the spiritual.[2518]2518 It is the spirit of prayer

which must rule alike alms and fasting, and pervade them: the upward

look and self-dedication to God, the seeking first after the Kingdom

of God and His Righteousness, that man, and self, and life may be

baptized in it. Such are the real alms, the real prayers, the real

fasts of the Kingdom of God.

If we have rightly apprehended the meaning of the two first parts of

the 'Sermon on the Mount,' we cannot be at a loss to understand its

third part, as set forth in the seventh chapter of St. Matthew's

Gospel. Briefly, it is this, as addressed to His contemporaries, nay,

with wider application to the men of all times: First, the Kingdom of

God cannot be circumscribed, as you would do it.[2519]2519 Secondly,

it cannot be extended, as you would do it, by external

means,[2520]2520 but cometh to us from God,[2521]2521 and is entered

by personal determination and separation.[2522]2522 Thirdly, it is not

preached, as too often is attempted, when thoughts of it are merely of

the external.[2523]2523 Lastly, it is not manifested in life in the

manner too common among religionists, but is very real, and true, and

good in its effects.[2524]2524 And this Kingdom, as received by each

of us, is like a solid house on a solid foundation, which nothing from

without can shake or destroy.[2525]2525

The infinite contrast, just set forth, between the Kingdom as

presented by the Christ and Jewish contemporary teaching is the more

striking, that it was expressed in a form, and clothed in words with

which all His hearers were familiar; indeed, in modes of expression

current at the time. It is this which has misled so many in their

quotations of Rabbinic parallels to the 'Sermon on the Mount.' They

perceive outward similarity, and they straightway set it down to

identity of spirit, not understanding that often those things are most

unlike in the spirit of them, which are most like in their form. No

part of the New Testament has had a larger array of Rabbinic parallels

adduced than the 'Sermon on the Mount;' and this, as we might expect,

because, in teaching addressed to His contemporaries, Jesus would

naturally use the forms with which they were familiar. Many of these

Rabbinic quotations are, however, entirely inapt, the similarity lying

in an expression or turn of words.[2526]2526 Occasionally, the

misleading error goes even further, and that is quoted in illustration

of Jesus' sayings which, either by itself or in the context, implies

quite the opposite. A detailed analysis would lead too far, but a few

specimens will sufficiently illustrate our meaning.

To begin with the first Beatitude, to the poor in spirit, since theirs

is the Kingdom of Heaven, this early Jewish saying[2527]2527 is its

very counterpart, marking not the optimism, but the pessimism of life:

'Ever be more and more lowly in spirit, since the expectancy of man is

to become the food of worms.' Another contrast to Christ's promise of

grace to the 'poor in spirit' is presented in this utterance of

self-righteousness[2528]2528 on the part of Rabbi Joshua, who compares

the reward ({hebrew}) formerly given to him who brought one or another

offering to the Temple with that of him who is of a lowly mind

({hebrew}), to whom it is reckoned as if he had brought all the

sacrifices. To this the saying of the great Hillel[2529]2529 seems

exactly parallel: 'My humility is my greatness, and my greatness my

humility,' which, be it observed, is elicited by a Rabbinic

accommodation of Ps. cxiii., 5, 6: 'Who is exalted to sit, who

humbleth himself to behold.' It is the omission on the part of modern

writers of this explanatory addition, which has given the saying of

Hillel even the faintest likeness to the first Beatitude.

But even so, what of the promise of 'the Kingdom of Heaven?' What is

the meaning which Rabbinism attaches to that phrase, and would it have

entered the mind of a Rabbi to promise what he understood as the Kingdom to all men,

Gentiles as well as Jews, who were poor in spirit?

We recall here the fate of the Gentiles in Messianic days, and, to

prevent misstatements, summarise the opening pages of the Talmudic

tractate on Idolatry.[2530]2530 At the beginning of the coming era of

the Kingdom, God is represented as opening the Torah, and inviting all

who had busied themselves with it to come for their reward. On this,

nation by nation appears - first, the Romans, insisting that all the

great things they had done were only done for the sake of Israel, in

order that they might the better busy themselves with the Torah. Being

harshly repulsed, the Persians next come forward with similar claims,

encouraged by the fact that, unlike the Romans, they had not destroyed

the Temple. But they also are in turn repelled. Then all the Gentile

nations urge that the Law had not been offered to them, which is

proved to be a vain contention, since God had actually offered it to

them, but only Israel had accepted it. On this the nations reply by a

peculiar Rabbinic explanation of Exod. xix. 17, according to which God

is actually represented as having lifted Mount Sinai like a cask, and

threatened to put it over Israel unless they accepted the Law.

Israel's obedience, therefore, was not willing, but enforced. On this

the Almighty proposes to judge the Gentiles by the Noachic

commandments, although it is added, that, even had they observed them,

these would have carried no reward. And, although it is a principle

that even a heathen, if he studied the Law, was to be esteemed like

the High-Priest, yet it is argued, with the most perverse logic, that

the reward of heathens who observed the Law must be less than that of

those who did so because the Law was given them, since the former

acted from impulse, and not from obedience!

Even thus far the contrast to the teaching of Jesus is tremendous. A

few further extracts will finally point the difference between the

largeness of Christ's World-Kingdom, and the narrowness of Judaism.

Most painful as the exhibition of profanity and national conceit is,

it is needful in order to refute what we must call the daring

assertion, that the teaching of Jesus, or the Sermon on the Mount, had

been derived from Jewish sources. At the same time it must carry to

the mind, with almost irresistible force, the question whence, if not

from God, Jesus had derived His teaching, or how else it came so to

differ, not in detail, but in principle and direction, from that of

all His contemporaries.

In the Talmudic passages from which quotation has already been made,

we further read that the Gentiles would enter into controversy with

the Almighty about Israel. They would urge, that Israel had not

observed the Law. On this the Almighty would propose Himself to bear

witness for them. But the Gentiles would object, that a father could

not give testimony for his son. Similarly, they would object to the

proposed testimony of heaven and earth, since self-interest might

compel them to be partial. For, according to Ps. 1xxvi. 8, 'the earth

was afraid,' because, if Israel had not accepted the Law, it would

have been destroyed, but it 'became still' when at Sinai they

consented to it. On this the heathen would be silenced out of the

mouth of their own witnesses, such as Nimrod, Laban, Potiphar,

Nebuchadnezzar, &c. They would then ask, that the Law might be given

them, and promise to observe it. Although this was now impossible, yet

God would, in His mercy, try them by giving them the Feast of

Tabernacles, as perhaps the easiest of all observances. But as they

were in their tabernacles, God would cause the sun to shine forth in

his strength, when they would forsake their tabernacles in great

indignation, according to Ps. ii. 3. And it is in this manner that

Rabbinism looked for the fulfilment of those words in Ps. ii. 4: 'He

that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh, the Lord shall have them in

derision,' this being the only occasion on which God laughed! And if

it were urged, that at the time of the Messiah all nations would

become Jews, this was indeed true; but although they would adopt

Jewish practices, they would apostatise in the war of Gog and Magog,

when again Ps. ii. 4 would be realised: 'The Lord shall laugh at

them.' And this is the teaching which some writers would compare with

that of Christ! In view of such statements, we can only ask with

astonishment: What fellowship of spirit can there be between Jewish

teaching and the first Beatitude?

It is the same sad self-righteousness and utter carnalness of view

which underlies the other Rabbinic parallels to the Beatitudes,

pointing to contrast rather than likeness. Thus the Rabbinic

blessedness of mourning consists in this, that much misery here makes

up for punishment hereafter.[2531]2531 We scarcely wonder that no

Rabbinic parallel can be found to the third Beatitude, unless we

recall the contrast which assigns in Messianic days the possession of

earth to Israel as a nation. Nor could we expect any parallel to the

fourth Beatitude, to those who hunger and thirst after righteousness.

Rabbinism would have quite a different idea of 'righteousness,'

considered as 'good works,' and chiefly as almsgiving (designated as

Tsedaqah, or righteousness). To such the most special reward is

promised, and that ex opere operato.[2532]2532 Similarly, Rabbinism

speaks of the perfectly righteous ({hebrew}) and the perfectly

unrighteous, or else of the righteous and unrighteous (according as

the good or the evil might weigh heaviest in the scale); and, besides

these, of a kind of middle state. But such a conception as that of

'hunger' and 'thirst' after righteousness would have no place in the

system. And, that no doubt may obtain, this sentence may be quoted:

'He that says, I give this "Sela" as alms, in order that ({hebrew}) my

sons may live, and that I may merit the world to come, behold, this is

the perfectly righteous.'[2533]2533 Along with such assertions of

work-righteousness we have this principle often repeated, that all

such merit attaches only to Israel, while the good works and mercy of

the Gentiles are actually reckoned to them as sin,[2534]2534 though it

is only fair to add that one voice (that of Jochanan ben Zakkai) is

raised in contradiction of such horrible teaching.

It seems almost needless to prosecute this subject; yet it may be well

to remark, that the same self-righteousness attaches to the quality of

mercy, so highly prized among the Jews, and which is supposed not only

to bring reward,[2535]2535 but to atone for sins.[2536]2536 [2537]2537

With regard to purity of heart, there is, indeed, a discussion between

the school of Shammai and that of Hillel - the former teaching that

guilty thoughts constitute sin, while the latter expressly confines it

to guilty deeds.[2538]2538 The Beatitude attaching to peace-making has

many analogies in Rabbinism; but the latter would never have connected

the designation of 'children of God' with any but Israel.[2539]2539 A

similar remark applies to the use of the expression 'Kingdom of

Heaven' in the next Beatitude.

A more full comparison than has been made would almost require a

separate treatise. One by one, as we place the sayings of the Rabbis

by the side of those of Jesus in this Sermon on the Mount, we mark the

same essential contrariety of spirit, whether as regards

righteousness, sin, repentance, faith, the Kingdom, alms, prayer, or

fasting. Only two points may be specially selected, because they are

so frequently brought forward by writers as proof, that the sayings of

Jesus did not rise above those of the chief Talmudic authorities. The

first of these refers to the well-known words of our Lord:[2540]2540

'Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you,

do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.' This is

compared with the following Rabbinic parallel,[2541]2541 in which the

gentleness of Hillel is contrasted with the opposite disposition of

Shammai. The latter is said to have harshly repelled an intending

proselyte, who wished to be taught the whole Law while standing on one

foot, while Hillel received him with this saying: 'What is hateful to

thee, do not to another. This is the whole Law, all else is only its

explanation.' But it will be noticed that the words in which the Law

is thus summed up are really only a quotation from Tob. iv. 15,

although their presentation as the substance of the Law is, of course,

original. But apart from this, the merest beginner in logic must

perceive, that there is a vast difference between this negative

injunction, or the prohibition to do to others what is hateful to

ourselves, and the positive direction to do unto others as we would

have them do unto us.[2542]2542 The one does not rise above the

standpoint of the Law, being as yet far from that love which would

lavish on others, the good we ourselves desire, while the Christian

saying embodies the nearest approach to absolute love of which human

nature is capable, making that the test of our conduct to others which

we ourselves desire to possess. And, be it observed, the Lord does not

put self-love as the principle of our conduct, but only as its ready

test. Besides, the further explanation in St. Luke vi. 38 should here

be kept in view, as also what may be regarded as the explanatory

additions in St. Matt. v. 42-48.

The second instance, to which it seems desirable to advert, is the

supposed similarity between petitions in the Lord's Prayer[2543]2543

and Rabbinic prayers. Here, we may remark, at the outset, that both

the spirit and the manner of prayer are presented by the Rabbis so

externally, and with such details, as to make it quite different from

prayer as our Lord taught His disciples. This appears from the

Talmudic tractate specially devoted to that subject,[2544]2544 where

the exact position, the degree of inclination, and other trivialities,

never referred to by Christ, are dwelt upon at length as of primary

importance.[2545]2545 Most painful, for example, is it[2546]2546 to

find this interpretation of Hezekiah's prayer,[2547]2547 when the King

is represented as appealing to the merit of his fathers, detailing

their greatness in contrast to Rahab or the Shunammite, who yet had

received a reward, and closing with this: 'Lord of the world, I have

searched the 248 members which Thou hast given me, and not found that

I have provoked Thee to anger with any one of them, how much more then

shouldest Thou on account of these prolong my life?' After this, it is

scarcely necessary to point to the self-righteousness which, in this

as in other respects, is the most painful characteristic of Rabbinism.

That the warning against prayers at the corner of streets was taken

from life, appears from the well-known anecdote[2548]2548 concerning

one, Rabbi Jannai, who was observed saying his prayers in the public

streets of Sepphoris, and then advancing four cubits to make the

so-called supplementary prayer. Again, a perusal of some of the

recorded prayers of the Rabbis[2549]2549 will show, how vastly

different many of them were from the petitions which our Lord taught.

Without insisting on this, nor on the circumstance that all recorded

Talmudic prayers are of much later date than the time of Jesus, it

may, at the same time, be freely admitted that here also the form, and

sometimes even the spirit, approached closely to the words of our

Lord. On the other hand, it would be folly to deny that the Lord's

Prayer, in its sublime spirit, tendency, combination, and succession

of petitions, is unique; and that such expressions in it as 'Our

Father,' 'the Kingdom,' 'forgiveness,' 'temptation,' and others,

represent in Rabbinism something entirely different from that which

our Lord had in view. But, even so, such petitions as 'forgive us our

debts,' could, as has been shown in a previous chapter, have no true

parallel in Jewish theology.[2550]2550

Further details would lead beyond our present scope. It must suffice

to indicate that such sayings as St. Matt. v. 6, 15, 17, 25, 29, 31,

46, 47; vi. 8, 12, 18, 22, 24, 32; vii. 8, 9, 10, 15, 17-19, 22, 23,

have no parallel, in any real sense, in Jewish writings, whose

teaching, indeed, often embodies opposite ideas. Here it may be

interesting, by one instance, to show what kind of Messianic teaching

would have interested a Rabbi. In a passage[2551]2551 which describes

the great danger of intercourse with Jewish Christians, as leading to

heresy, a Rabbi is introduced, who, at Sepphoris, had met one of

Jesus' disciples, named Jacob, a 'man of Kefr Sekanya,' reputed as

working miraculous cures in the name of his Master.[2552]2552 It is

said, that at a later period the Rabbi suffered grievous persecution,

in punishment for the delight he had taken in a comment on a certain

passage of Scripture, which Jacob attributed to his Master. It need

scarcely be said, that the whole story is a fabrication; indeed, the

supposed Christian interpretation is not even fit to be reproduced;

and we only mention the circumstance as indicating the contrast

between what Talmudism would have delighted in hearing from its

Messiah, and what Jesus spoke.

But there are points of view which may be gained from Rabbinic

writings, helpful to the understanding of the 'Sermon on the Mount,'

although not of its spirit. Some of these may here be mentioned. Thus,

when[2553]2553 we read that not one jot or title shall pass from the

Law, it is painfully interesting to find in the Talmud the following

quotation and mistranslation of St. Matt. v. 17: 'I have come not to

diminish from the Law of Moses, nor yet have I come to add to the Law

of Moses.'[2554]2554 [2555]2555 But the Talmud here significantly

omits the addition made by Christ, on which all depends: 'till all be

fulfilled.' Jewish tradition mentions this very letter Yod as

irremovable,[2556]2556 adding, that if all men in the world were

gathered together to abolish the least letter in the Law, they would

not succeed.[2557]2557 Not a letter could be removed from the

Law[2558]2558 - a saying illustrated by this curious conceit, that the

Yod which was taken by God out of the name of Sarah (Sarai), was added

to that of Hoshea, making him Joshua (Jehoshua).[2559]2559

Similarly,[2560]2560 the guilt of changing those little hooks

('titles') which make the distinction between such Hebrew letters as

{hebrew} and {hebrew}, {hebrew} and {hebrew}, {hebrew} and {hebrew},

is declared so great, that, if such were done, the world would be

destroyed.[2561]2561 Again the thought about the danger of those who

broke the least commandment is so frequently expressed in Jewish

writings, as scarcely to need special quotation. Only, there it is put

on the ground, that we know not what reward may attach to one or

another commandment. The expression 'they of old,'[2562]2562 quite

corresponds to the Rabbinic appeal to those that had preceded, the

Zeqenim or Rishonim. In regard to St. Matt. v. 22, we remember that

the term 'brother' applied only to Jews, while the Rabbis used to

designate the ignorant[2563]2563 - or those who did not believe such

exaggerations, as that in the future God would build up the gates of

Jerusalem with gems thirty cubits high and broad - as Reyqa,[2564]2564

with this additional remark, that on one such occasion the look of a

Rabbi had immediately turned the unbeliever into a heap of bones!

Again, the opprobrious term 'fool' was by no means of uncommon

occurrence among the sages;[2565]2565 and yet they themselves state,

that to give an opprobrious by-name, or to put another openly to

shame, was one of the three things which deserved Gehenna.[2566]2566

To verse 26 the following is an instructive parallel: 'To one who had

defrauded the custom-house, it was said: "Pay the duty." He said to

them: "Take all that I have with me." But the tax-gatherer answered

him, "Thinkest thou, we ask only this one payment of duty? Nay,

rather, that duty be paid for all the times in which according to thy

wont, thou hast defrauded the custom-house."'[2567]2567 The mode of

swearing mentioned in verse 35 was very frequently adopted, in order

to avoid pronouncing the Divine Name. Accordingly, they swore by the

Covenant, by the Service of the Temple, or by the Temple. But perhaps

the usual mode of swearing, which is attributed even to the Almighty,

is 'By thy life' ({hebrew}). Lastly, as regards our Lord's admonition,

it is mentioned[2568]2568 as characteristic of the pious, that their

'yea is yea,' and their 'nay nay.'

Passing to St. Matt. vi., we remember, in regard to verse 2, that the

boxes for charitable contributions in the Temple were trumpet-shaped,

and we can understand the figurative allusion of Christ to

demonstrative piety.[2569]2569 The parallelisms in the language of the

Lord's Prayer - at least so far as the wording, not the spirit, is

concerned - have been frequently shown. If the closing doxology,

'Thine is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory,'[2570]2570 were

genuine, it would correspond to the common Jewish ascription, from

which, in all probability, it has been derived. In regard to verses 14

and 15, although there are many Jewish parallels concerning the need

of forgiving those that have offended us, or else asking forgiveness,

we know what meaning Rabbinism attached to the forgiveness of sins.

Similarly, it is scarcely necessary to discuss the Jewish views

concerning fasting. In regard to verses 25 and 34, we may remark this

exact parallel:[2571]2571 'Every one who has a loaf in his basket, and

says, What shall I eat to-morrow? is one of little faith.' But

Christianity goes further than this. While the Rabbinic saying only

forbids care when there is bread in the basket, our Lord would banish

anxious care even if there were no bread in the basket. The expression

in verse 34 seems to be a Rabbinic proverb. Thus,[2572]2572 we read:

'Care not for the morrow, for ye know not what a day may bring forth.

Perhaps he may not be on the morrow, and so have cared for a world

that does not exist for him.' Only here, also, we mark that Christ

significantly says not as the Rabbis, but, 'the morrow shall take

thought for the things of itself.'

In chapter vii., verse 2, the saying about having it measured to us

with the same measure that we mete, occurs in precisely the same

manner in the Talmud,[2573]2573 and, indeed, seems to have been a

proverbial expression. The illustration in verses 3 and 4, about the

mote and the beam, appears thus in Rabbinic literature:[2574]2574 'I

wonder if there is any one in this generation who would take reproof.

If one said, Take the mote out of thine eye, he would answer, Take the

beam from out thine own eye.' On which the additional question is

raised, whether any one in that generation were capable of reproving.

As it also occurs with only trifling variations in other

passages,[2575]2575 we conclude that this also was a proverbial

expression. The same may be said of gathering 'grapes of

thorns.'[2576]2576 Similarly, the designation of 'pearls' (verse 6)

for the valuable sayings of sages is common. To verse 11 there is a

realistic parallel,[2577]2577 when it is related, that at a certain

fast, on account of drought, a Rabbi admonished the people to good

deeds, on which a man gave money to the woman from whom he had been

divorced, because she was in want. This deed was made a plea in prayer

by the Rabbi, that if such a man cared for his wife who no more

belonged to him, how much more should the Almighty care for the

descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Upon this, it is added, the

rain descended plentifully. If difference, and even contrast of

spirit, together with similarity of form, were to be further pointed

out, we should find it in connection with verse 14, which speaks of

the fewness of those saved, and also verse 26, which refers to the

absolute need of doing, as evidence of sonship. We compare with this

what the Talmud[2578]2578 says of Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai, whose

worthiness was so great, that during his whole lifetime no rainbow was

needed to ensure immunity from a flood, and whose power was such that

he could say to a valley: Be filled with gold dinars. The same Rabbi

was wont to say: 'I have seen the children of the world to come, and

they are few. If there are three, I and my son are of their number; if

they are two, I and my son are they.' After such expression of

boastful self-righteousness, so opposed to the passage in the Sermon

on the Mount, of which it is supposed to be the parallel, we scarcely

wonder to read that, if Abraham had redeemed all generations to that

of Rabbi Simon, the latter claimed to redeem by his own merits all

that followed to the end of the world, nay, that if Abraham were

reluctant, he (Simon) would take Ahijah the Shilonite with him, and

reconcile the whole world![2579]2579 Yet we are asked by some to see

in such Rabbinic passages parallels to the sublime teaching of Christ!

The 'Sermon on the Mount' closes with a parabolic illustration, which

in similar form occurs in Rabbinic writings. Thus,[2580]2580 the man

whose wisdom exceeds his works is compared to a tree whose branches

are many, but its roots few, and which is thus easily upturned by the

wind; while he whose works exceed his wisdom is likened to a tree,

whose branches are few, and its roots many, against which all the

winds in the world would strive in vain. A sill more close parallel is

that[2581]2581 in which the man who has good works, and learns much in

the Law, is likened to one, who in building his house lays stones

first, and on them bricks, so that when the flood cometh the house is

not destroyed; while he who has not good work, yet busies himself much

with the Law, is like one who puts bricks below, and stones above

which are swept away by the waters. Or else the former is like one who

puts mortar between the bricks, fastening them one to the other; and

the other to one who merely puts mortar outside, which the rain

dissolves and washes away.

The above comparisons of Rabbinic sayings with those of our Lord lay

no claim to completeness. They will, however, suffice to explain and

amply to vindicate the account of the impression left on the hearers

of Jesus. But what, even more than all else, must have filled them

with wonderment and awe was, that He Who so taught also claimed to be

the God-appointed final Judge of all, whose fate would be decided not

merely by professed discipleship, but by their real relation to Him

(St. Matt. vii. 21-23). And so we can understand it, that, alike in

regard to what He taught and what He claimed, 'The people were

astonished at His doctrine: for He taught them as One having authority

- and not as the Scribes.'[2582]2582

CHAPTER XIX.

THE RETURN TO CAPERNAUM - HEALING OF THE CENTURION'S SERVANT.

(St. Matt. viii. 1, 5-15; St. Mark iii. 20, 21; St. Luke vii. 1-10.)

We are once again in Capernaum. It is remarkable how much, connected

not only with the Ministry of Jesus, but with His innermost Life,

gathers around that little fishing town. In all probability its

prosperity was chiefly due to the neighbouring Tiberias, which Herod

Antipas[2583]2583 had built, about ten years previously. Noteworthy is

it also, how many of the most attractive characters and incidents in

the Gospel-history are connected with that Capernaum, which, as a

city, rejected its own real glory, and, like Israel, and for the same

reason, at last incurred a prophetic doom commensurate to its former

privileges.[2584]2584

But as yet Capernaum was still 'exalted up to heaven.' Here was the

home of that believing Court-official, whose child Jesus had

healed.[2585]2585 Here also was the household of Peter; and here the

paralytic had found, together with forgiveness of his sins, health of

body. Its streets, with their outlook on the deep blue Lake, had been

thronged by eager multitudes in search of life to body and soul. Here

Matthew-Levi had heard and followed the call of Jesus; and here the

good Centurion had in stillness learned to love Israel, and serve

Israel's King, and built with no niggard hand that Synagogue, most

splendid of those yet exhumed in Galilee, which had been consecrated

by the Presence and Teaching of Jesus, and by prayers, of which the

conversion of Jairus, its chief ruler, seems the blessed answer. And

now, from the Mount of Beatitudes, it was again to His temporary home

at Capernaum that Jesus retired.[2586]2586 Yet not either to solitude

or to rest. For, of that multitude which had hung entranced on His

Words many followed Him, and there was now such constant pressure

around Him, that, in the zeal of their attendance upon the wants and

demands of those who hungered after the Bread of Life, alike Master

and disciples found not leisure so much as for the necessary

sustenance of the body.

The circumstances, the incessant work, and the all-consuming zeal

which even 'His friends' could but ill understand, led to the

apprehension - the like of which is so often entertained by

well-meaning persons in all ages, in their practical ignorance of the

all-engrossing but also sustaining character of engagements about the

Kingdom - that the balance of judgment might be overweighted, and high

reason brought into bondage to the poverty of our earthly frame. In

its briefness, the account of what these 'friends,' or rather 'those

from Him' - His home - said and did, is most pictorial. On tidings

reaching them,[2587]2587 with reiterated, growing, and perhaps

Orientally exaggerating details, they hastened out of their house in a

neighbouring street[2588]2588 to take possession of Him, as if He had

needed their charge. It is not necessary to include the Mother of

Jesus in the number of those who actually went. Indeed, the later

express mention of His 'Mother and brethren'[2589]2589 seems rather

opposed to the supposition. Still less does the objection deserve

serious refutation,[2590]2590 that any such procedure, assumedly, on

the part of the Virgin-Mother, would be incompatible with the history

of Jesus' Nativity. For, all must have felt, that 'the zeal' of God's

House was, literally, 'consuming' Him, and the other view of it, that

it was setting on fire, not the physical, but the psychical framework

of His humiliation, seems in no way inconsistent with what loftiest,

though as yet dim, thought had come to the Virgin about her Divine

Son. On the other hand, this idea, that He was 'beside Himself,'

afforded the only explanation of what otherwise would have been to

them well-nigh inexplicable. To the Eastern mind especially this want

of self-possession, the being 'beside' oneself, would point to

possession by another - God or Devil. It was on the ground of such

supposition that the charge was so constantly raised by the Scribes,

and unthinkingly taken up by the people, that Jesus was mad, and had a

devil: not a demoniacal possession, be it marked, but possession by

the Devil, in the absence of self-possessedness. And hence our Lord

characterised this charge as really blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

And this also explains how, while unable to deny the reality of His

Works, they could still resist their evidential force.

However that incident may for the present have ended, it could have

caused but brief interruption to His Work. Presently there came the

summons of the heathen Centurion and the healing of His servant, which

both St. Matthew and St. Luke record, as specially bearing on the

progressive unfolding of Christ's Mission. Notably - these two

Evangelists; and notably - with variations due to the peculiar

standpoint of their narratives. No really serious difficulties will be

encountered in trying to harmonise the details of these two

narratives; that is, if any one should attach importance to such

precise harmony. At any rate, we cannot fail to perceive the reason of

these variations. Meyer regards the account of St. Luke as the

original, Keim that of St. Matthew - both on subjective rather than

historical grounds.[2591]2591 But we may as well note, that the

circumstance, that the event is passed over by St. Mark, militates

against the favourite modern theory of the Gospels being derived from

an original tradition (what is called the 'original Mark,'

Ur-Marcus).[2592]2592

If we keep in view the historical object of St. Matthew, as primarily

addressing himself to Jewish, while St. Luke wrote more especially for

Gentile readers, we arrive, at least, at one remarkable outcome of the

variations in their narratives. Strange to say, the Judæan Gospel

gives the pro-Gentile, the Gentile narrative the pro-Jewish,

presentation of the event. Thus, in St. Matthew the history is

throughout sketched as personal and direct dealing with the heathen

Centurion on the part of Christ, while in the Gentile narrative of St.

Luke the dealing with the heathen is throughout indirect, by the

intervention of Jews, and on the ground of the Centurion's spiritual

sympathy with Israel. Again, St. Matthew quotes the saying of the Lord

which holds out to the faith of Gentiles a blessed equality with

Israel in the great hope of the future, while it puts aside the mere

claim of Israel after the flesh, and dooms Israel to certain judgment.

On the other hand, St. Luke omits all this. A strange inversion it

might seem, that the Judæan Gospel should contain what the Gentile

account omits, except for this, that St. Matthew argues with his

countrymen the real standing of the Gentiles, while St. Luke pleads

with the Gentiles for sympathy and love with Jewish modes of thinking.

The one is not only an exposition, but a justification, of the event

as against Israel; the other an Eirenicon, as well as a touching

representation of the plea of the younger with his elder brother at

the door of the Father's House.

But the fundamental truth in both accounts is the same; nor is it just

to say that in the narrative the Gentiles are preferred before Israel.

So far from this, their faith is only put on an equality with that of

believing Israel. It is not Israel, but Israel's fleshly claims and

unbelief, that are rejected; and Gentile faith occupies, not a new

position outside Israel, but shares with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob the

fulfilment of the promise made to their faith. Thus we have here the

widest Jewish universalism, the true interpretation of Israel's hope;

and this, even by the admission of our opponents,[2593]2593 not as a

later addition, but as forming part of Christ's original teaching. But

if so, it revives, only in accentuated manner, the question: Whence

this essential difference between the teaching of Christ on this

subject, and that of contemporary Rabbinism.

Yet another point may be gained from the admissions of negative

criticism, at least on the part of its more thoughtful

representatives. Keim is obliged to acknowledge the authenticity of

the narrative. It is immaterial here which 'recension' of it may be

regarded as the original. The Christ did say what the Gospels

represent! But Strauss has shown, that in such case any natural or

semi-natural explanation of the healing is impossible. Accordingly,

the 'Trilemma' left is: either Christ was really what the Gospels

represent Him, or He was a daring enthusiast, or (saddest of all) He

must be regarded as a conscious impostor. If either of the two last

alternatives were adopted, it would, in the first instance, be

necessary to point out some ground for the claim of such power on the

part of Jesus. What could have prompted Him to do so? Old Testament

precedent there was none; certainly not in the cure of Naaman by

Elisha.[2594]2594 And Rabbinic parallelism there was none. For,

although a sudden cure, and at a distance, is related in connection

with a Rabbi,[2595]2595 all the circumstances are absolutely

different. In the Jewish story recourse was, indeed, had to a Rabbi;

but for prayer that the sick might be healed of God, not for actual

healing by the Rabbi. Having prayed, the Rabbi informed the messengers

who had come to implore his help, that the fever had left the sick.

But when asked by them whether he claimed to be a prophet, he

expressly repudiated any prophetic knowledge, far more any

supernatural power of healing, and explained that liberty in prayer

always indicated to him that his prayer had been answered. All analogy

thus failing, the only explanation left to negative criticism, in view

of the admitted authenticity of the narrative, is, that the cure was

the result of the psychical influence of the Centurion's faith and of

that of his servant. But what, in that case, of the words which Jesus

admittedly spoke? Can we, as some would have it, rationally account

for their use by the circumstance that Jesus had had experience of

such psychical influences on disease? or that Christ's words were, so

to speak, only an affirmation of the Centurion's faith - something

between a 'benedictory wish' and an act? Surely, suggestions like

these carry their own refutation.

Apart, then, from explanations which have been shown untenable, what

is the impression left on our minds of an event, the record of which

is admitted to be authentic? The heathen Centurion is a real

historical personage. He was captain of the troop quartered in

Capernaum, and in the service of Herod Antipas. We know that such

troops were chiefly recruited from Samaritans and Gentiles of

Cæsarea.[2596]2596 Nor is there the slightest evidence that this

Centurion was a 'proselyte of righteousness.' The accounts both in St.

Matthew and in St. Luke are incompatible with this idea. A 'proselyte

of righteousness' could have had no reason for not approaching Christ

directly, nor would he have spoken of himself as 'unfit' that Christ

should come under his roof. But such language quite accorded with

Jewish notions of a Gentile, since the houses of Gentiles were

considered as defiled, and as defiling those who entered

them.[2597]2597 On the other hand, the 'proselytes of righteousness'

were in all respects equal to Jews, so that the words of Christ

concerning Jews and Gentiles, as reported by St. Matthew, would not

have been applicable to them. The Centurion was simply one who had

learned to love Israel and to reverence Israel's God; one who, not

only in his official position, but from love and reverence, had built

that Synagogue, of which, strangely enough, now after eighteen

centuries, the remains,[2598]2598 in their rich and elaborate carvings

of cornices and entablatures, of capitals and niches, show with what

liberal hand he had dealt his votive offerings.

We know too little of the history of the man, to judge what earlier

impulses had led him to such reverence for Israel's God. There might

have been something to incline him towards it in his early upbringing,

perhaps in Cæsarea; or in his family relationships; perhaps in that

very servant (possibly a Jew) whose implicit obedience to his master

seems in part to have led him up to faith in analogous submission of

all things to the behests of Christ.[2599]2599 The circumstances, the

times, the place, the very position of the man, make such suppositions

rational, event suggested them. In that case, his whole bearing would

be consistent with itself, and with what we know of the views and

feelings of the time. In the place where the son of his fellow

official at the Court of Herod had been healed by the Word of Jesus,

spoken at a distance,[2600]2600 in the Capernaum which was the home of

Jesus and the scene of so many miracles, it was only what we might

expect, that in such case he should turn to Jesus and ask His help.

Quiet consistent with his character is the straightforwardness of his

expectancy, characteristically illustrated by his military experience

- what Bengel designates as the wisdom of his faith beautifully

shining out in the bluffness of the soldier. When he had learned to

own Israel's God, and to believe in the absolute unlimited power of

Jesus, no such difficulties would come to him, nor, assuredly, such

cavils rise, as in the minds of the Scribes, or even of the Jewish

laity. Nor is it even necessary to suppose that, in his unlimited

faith in Jesus, the Centurion had distinct apprehension of His

essential Divinity. In general, it holds true, that, throughout the

Evangelic history, belief in the Divinity of our Lord was the outcome

of experience of His Person and Work, not the condition and postulate

of it, as is the case since the Pentecostal descent of the Holy Ghost

and His indwelling in the Church.

In view of these facts, the question with the Centurion would be: not,

Could Jesus heal his servant, but, Would He do so? And again, this

other specifically: Since, so far as he knew, no application from any

in Israel, be it even publican or sinner, had been doomed to

disappointment, would he, as a Gentile, be barred from share in this

blessing? was he 'unworthy,' or, rather, 'unfit' for it? Thus this

history presents a crucial question, not only as regarded the

character of Christ's work, but the relation to it of the Gentile

world. Quiet consist with this - nay, its necessary outcome - were the

scruples of the Centurion to make direct, personal application to

Jesus. In measure as he reverenced Jesus, would these scruples, from

his own standpoint, increase. As the houses of Gentiles were

'unclean,'[2601]2601 entrance into them, and still more familiar

fellowship, would 'defile.' The Centurion must have known this; and

the higher he placed Jesus on the pinnacle of Judaism, the more

natural was it for him to communicate with Christ through the elders

of the Jews, and not to expect the Personal Presence of the Master,

even if the application to him were attended with success. And here it

is important (for the criticism of this history) to mark that, alike

in the view of the Centurion, and even in that of the Jewish elders

who under-took his commission, Jesus as yet occupied the purely Jewish

stand-point.

Closely considered, whatever verbal differences, there is not any real

discrepancy in this respect between the Judæan presentation of the

event in St. Matthew and the fuller Gentile account of it by St. Luke.

From both narratives we are led to infer that the house of the

Centurion was not in Capernaum itself, but in its immediate

neighbourhood, probably on the road to Tiberias. And so in St. Matt.

viii. 7, we read the words of our Saviour when consenting: 'I, having

come, will heal him;' just as in St. Luke's narrative a space of time

intervenes, in which intimation is conveyed to the Centurion, when he

sends 'friends' to arrest Christ's actual coming into his

house.[2602]2602 Nor does St. Matthew speak of any actual request on

the part of the Centurion, even though at first sight his narrative

seems to imply a personal appearance.[2603]2603 The general statement

'beseeching Him' - although it is not added in what manner, with what

words, nor for what special thing - must be explained by more detailed

narrative of the embassy of Jewish Elders.[2604]2604 There is another

marked agreement in the seeming difference of the two accounts. In St.

Luke's narrative, the second message of the Centurion embodies two

different expressions, which our Authorised Version unfortunately

renders by the same word. It should read: 'Trouble not Thyself, for I

am not fit (Levitically speaking) that Thou shouldest enter under my

roof;' Levitically, or Judaistically speaking, my house is not a fit

place for Thy entrance; 'Wherefore neither did I judge myself worthy

(spiritually, morally, religiously) [_x_wsa, Pondus habens, ejusdem

ponderis cum aliqo, pretio aequans] to come unto Thee.' Now, markedly,

in St. Matthew's presentation of the same event to the Jews, this

latter 'worthiness' is omitted, and we only have St. Luke's first

term, 'fit' (_kan_v): 'I am not fit that thou shouldest come under my

roof,' my house is unfitting Thine entrance. This seems to bear out

the reasons previously indicated for the characteristic peculiarities

of the two narratives.

But in their grand leading features the two narratives entirely agree.

There is earnest supplication for his sick, seemingly dying

servant.[2605]2605 Again, the Centurion in the fullest sense believes

in the power of Jesus to heal, in the same manner as he knows his own

commands as an officer would be implicitly obeyed; for, surely, no

thoughtful reader would seriously entertain the suggestion, that the

military language of the Centurion only meant, that he regarded

disease as caused by evil demons or noxious power who obeyed Jesus, as

soldiers or servants do their officer or master. Such might have been

the underlying Jewish view of the times; but the fact, that in this

very thing Jesus contrasted the faith of the Gentile with that of

Israel, indicates that the language in question must be taken in its

obvious sense. But in his self-acknowledged 'unfitness' lay the real

'fitness' of this good soldier for membership with the true Israel;

and his deep-felt 'unworthiness' the real 'worthiness' (the ejusdem

ponderis) for 'the Kingdom' and its blessings. It was this utter

disclaimer of all claim, outward or inward, which prompted that

absoluteness of trust which deemed all things possible with Jesus, and

marked the real faith of the true Israel. Here was one, who was in the

state described in the first clauses of the 'Beatitudes,' and to whom

came the promise of the second clauses; because Christ is the

connecting link between the two, and because He consciously was such

to the Centurion, and, indeed, the only possible connecting link

between them.

And so we mark it, in what must be regarded as the high-point in this

history, so far as its teaching to us all, and therefore the reason of

its record in the New Testament, is concerned: that participation in

the blessedness of the kingdom is not connected with any outward

relationship towards it, nor belongs to our inward consciousness in

regard to it; but is granted by the King to that faith which in

deepest simplicity realises, and holds fast by Him. And yet, although

discarding every Jewish claim to them - or, it may be, in our days,

everything that is merely outwardly Christian - these blessings are

not outside, still less beyond, what was the hope of the Old

Testament, nor in our days the expectancy of the Church, but are

literally its fulfilment; the sitting down 'with Abraham, and Isaac,

and Jacob in the Kingdom of Heaven.' Higher than, and beyond this not

even Christ's provision can take us.

But for the fuller understanding of the words of Christ, the Jewish

modes of thought, which He used in illustration, required to be

briefly explained. It was common belief, that in the day of the

Messiah redeemed Israel would be gathered to a great feast, together

with the patriarchs and heroes of the Jewish faith. This notion, which

was but a coarsely literal application of such prophetic figures as in

Is. xxv. 6, had perhaps yet another and deeper meaning. As each weekly

Sabbath was to be honoured by a feast, in which the best which the

family could procure was to be placed on the board, so would the

world's great Sabbath be marked by a feast in which the Great

Householder, Israel's King, would entertain His household and Guests.

Into the painfully, and, from the notions of the times, grossly

realistic description of this feast,[2606]2606 it is needless here to

enter. One thing, however, was clear: Gentiles could have no part in

that feast. In fact, the shame and anger of 'these' foes on seeing the

'table spread' for this Jewish feast was among the points specially

noticed as fulfilling the predictions of Ps. xxiii. 5.[2607]2607 On

this point, then, the words of Jesus in reference to the believing

Centurion formed the most marked contrast to Jewish teaching.

In another respect also we mark similar contrariety. When our Lord

consigned the unbelieving to 'outer darkness, where there is weeping

and gnashing of teeth,' he once more used Jewish language, only with

opposite application of it. Gehinnom - of which the entrance, marked

by ever ascending smoke,[2608]2608 was in the valley of Hinnom,

between two palm trees - lay beyond 'the mountains of

darkness.'[2609]2609 It was a place of darkness,[2610]2610 to which in

the day of the Lord,[2611]2611 the Gentiles would be

consigned.[2612]2612 On the other hand, the merit of circumcision

would in the day of the Messiah deliver Jewish sinners from

Gehinnom.[2613]2613 It seems a moot question, whether the expression

'outer darkness'[2614]2614 [2615]2615 may not have been intended to

designate - besides the darkness outside the lighted house of the

Father, and even beyond the darkness of Gehinnom - a place of

hopeless, endless night. Associated with it is 'weeping[2616]2616 and

the gnashing of teeth.' In Rabbinic thought the former was connected

with sorrow,[2617]2617 the latter almost always anger[2618]2618 - not,

as generally supposed, with anguish.

To complete our apprehension of the contrast between the views of the

Jews and the teaching of Jesus, we must bear in mind that, as the

Gentiles could not possibly share in the feast of the Messiah, so

Israel had claim and title to it. To use Rabbinic terms, the former

were 'children of Gehinnom,' but Israel 'children of the

Kingdom,'[2619]2619 or, in strictly Rabbinic language, 'royal

children,'[2620]2620 'children of God,' 'of heaven,'[2621]2621

'children of the upper chamber' (the Aliyah)[2622]2622 and 'of the

world to come.'[2623]2623 In fact, in their view, God had first sat

down on His throne as King, when the hymn of deliverance (Ex. xv. 1)

was raised by Israel - the people which took upon itself that yoke of

the Law which all other nations of the world had rejected.[2624]2624

Never, surely, could the Judaism of His hearers have received more

rude shock than by this inversion of all their cherished beliefs.

There was a feast of Messianic fellowship, a recognition on the part

of the King of all His faithful subjects, a joyous festive gathering

with the fathers of the faith. But this fellowship was not of outward,

but of spiritual kinship. There were 'children of the Kingdom,' and

there was an 'outer darkness' with its anguish and despair. But this

childship was of the Kingdom, such as He had opened it to all

believers; and that outer darkness theirs, who had only outward claims

to present. And so this history of the believing Centurion is at the

same time an application of the 'Sermon on the Mount' - in this also

aptly following the order of its record - and a further carrying out

of its teaching. Negatively, it differentiated the Kingdom from

Israel; while, positively, it placed the hope of Israel, and

fellowship with its promises, within reach of all faith, whether of

Jew or Gentile. He Who taught such new and strange truth could never

be called a mere reformer of Judaism. There cannot be 'reform,' where

all the fundamental principles are different. Surely He was the Son of

God, the Messiah of men, Who, in such surrounding, could so speak to

Jew and Gentile of God and His Kingdom. And surely also, He, Who could

so bring spiritual life to the dead, could have no difficulty by the

same word, 'in the self-same hour,' to restore life and health to the

servant of him, whose faith had inherited the Kingdom. The first

grafted tree of heathendom that had so blossomed could not shake off

unripe fruit. If the teaching of Christ was new and was true, so must

His work have been. And in this lies the highest vindication of this

miracle - that He is the Miracle.

CHAPTER XX.

THE RAISING OF THE YOUNG MAN OF NAIN - THE MEETING OF LIFE AND DEATH.

(St. Luke vii. 11-17.)

THAT early spring-tide in Galilee was surely the truest realisation of

the picture in the Song of Solomon, when earth clad herself in

garments of beauty, and the air was melodious with songs of new

life.[2625]2625 It seemed as if each day marked a widening circle of

deepest sympathy and largest power on the part of Jesus; as if each

day also brought fresh surprise, new gladness; opened hitherto

unthought-of possibilities, and pointed Israel far beyond the horizon

of their narrow expectancy. Yesterday it was the sorrow of the heathen

Centurion which woke an echo in the heart of the Supreme Commander of

life and death; faith called out, owned, and placed on the high

platform of Israel's worthies. To-day it is the same sorrow of a

Jewish mother, which touches the heart of the Son of Mary, and appeals

to where denial is unthinkable. In that Presence grief and death

cannot continue. As the defilement of a heathen house could not attach

to Him, Whose contact changed the Gentile stranger into a true

Israelite, so could the touch of death not render unclean Him, Whose

Presence vanquished and changed it into life. Jesus could not enter

Nain, and its people pass Him to carry one dead to the burying.

For our present purpose it matters little, whether it was the very

'day after' the healing of the Centurion's servant, or 'shortly

afterwards,'[2626]2626 that Jesus left Capernaum for Nain. Probably it

was the morrow of that miracle, and the fact that 'much people,' or

rather 'a great multitude,' followed Him, seems confirmatory of it.

The way was long - as we reckon, more than twenty-five miles; but,

even if it was all taken on foot, there could be no difficulty in

reaching Nain ere the evening, when so often funerals took place.

Various roads lead to, and from Nain;[2627]2627 that which stretches

to the Lake of Galilee and up to Capernaum is quite distinctly marked.

It is difficult to understand, how most of those who have visited the

spot could imagine the place, where Christ met the funeral procession,

to have been the rock-hewn tombs to the west of Nain and towards

Nazareth.[2628]2628 For, from Capernaum the Lord would not have come

that way, but approach it from the north-east by Endor. Hence there

can be little doubt, that Canon Tristram correctly identifies the now

unfenced burying-ground, about ten minutes' walk to the east of Nain,

as that whither, on that spring afternoon, they were carrying the

widow's son.[2629]2629 On the path leading to it the Lord of Life for

the first time burst open the gates of death.

It is all desolate now. A few houses of mud and stone with low

doorways, scattered among heaps of stones and traces of walls, is all

that remains of what even these ruins show to have been once a city,

with walls and gates.[2630]2630 The rich gardens are no more, the

fruit trees cut down, 'and there is a painful sense of desolation'

about the place, as if the breath of judgment had swept over it. And

yet even so we can understand its ancient name of Nain, 'the

pleasant,'[2631]2631 which the Rabbis regarded as fulfilling that part

of the promise to Issachar: 'he saw the land that it was

pleasant.'[2632]2632 From the elevation on which the city stood we

look northwards, across the wide plain, to wooded Tabor, and in the

far distance to snow-capped Hermon. On the left (in the west) rise the

hills beyond which Nazareth lies embosomed; to the right is Endor;

southwards Shunem, and beyond it the Plain of Jezreel. By this path,

from Endor, comes Jesus with His disciples and the great following

multitude. Here, near by the city gate, on the road that leads

eastwards to the old burying-ground, has this procession of the 'great

multitude,' which accompanied the Prince of Life, met that other

'great multitude' that followed the dead to his burying. Which of the

two shall give way to the other? We know what ancient Jewish usage

would have demanded. For, of all the duties enjoined, none more

strictly enforced by every consideration of humanity and piety, even

by the example of God Himself, than that of comforting the mourners

and showing respect to the dead by accompanying him to the

burying.[2633]2633 [2634]2634 The popular idea, that the spirit of the

dead hovered about the unburied remains, must have given intensity to

such feelings.

Putting aside later superstitions, so little has changed in the Jewish

rites and observances about the dead,[2635]2635 that from Talmudic and

even earlier sources,[2636]2636 we can form a vivid conception of what

had taken place in Nain. The watchful anxiety; the vain use of such

means as were known, or within reach of the widow; the deepening care,

the passionate longing of the mother to retain her one treasure, her

sole earthly hope and stay; then the gradual fading out of the light,

the farewell, the terrible burst of sorrow: all these would be common

features in any such picture. But here we have, besides, the Jewish

thoughts of death and after death; knowledge just sufficient to make

afraid, but not to give firm consolation, which would make even the

most pious Rabbi uncertain of his future;[2637]2637 and then the

desolate thoughts connected in the Jewish mind with childlessness. We

can realise it all: how Jewish ingenuity and wisdom would resort to

remedies real or magical; how the neighbours would come in with

reverent step, feeling as if the very Shekhinah were unseen at the

head of the pallet in that humble home;[2638]2638 how they would

whisper sayings about submission, which, when realisation of God's

love is wanting, seem only to stir the heart to rebellion against

absolute power; and how they would resort to the prayers of those who

were deemed pious in Nain.[2639]2639

But all was in vain. And now the well-known blast of the horn has

carried tidings, that once more the Angel of Death has done his dire

behest.[2640]2640 In passionate grief the mother has rent her upper

garment.[2641]2641 The last sad offices have been rendered to the

dead. The body has been laid on the ground; hair and nails have been

cut,[2642]2642 and the body washed, anointed, and wrapped in the best

the widow could procure; for, the ordinance which directed that the

dead should be buried in 'wrappings' (Takhrikhin), or as they

significantly called it, the 'provision for the journey'

(Zevadatha),[2643]2643 of the most inexpensive, linen, is of later

date than our period. It is impossible to say, whether the later

practice already prevailed, of covering the body with metal, glass, or

salt, and laying it either upon earth or salt.[2644]2644

And now the mother was left Oneneth (moaning, lamenting) - a term

which distinguished the mourning before from that after

burial.[2645]2645 She would sit on the floor, neither eat meat, nor

drink wine. What scanty meal she would take, must be without prayer,

in the house of a neighbour, or in another room, or at least with her

back to the dead.[2646]2646 Pious friends would render neighbourly

offices, or busy themselves about the near funeral. If it was deemed

duty for the poorest Jew, on the death of his wife, to provide at

least two flutes and one mourning woman,[2647]2647 we may feel sure

that the widowed mother had not neglected what, however incongruous or

difficult to procure, might be regarded as the last tokens of

affection. In all likelihood the custom obtained even then, though in

modified form, to have funeral orations at the grave. For, even if

charity provided for an unknown wayfarer the simplest funeral,

mourning-women would be hired to chaunt in weird strains the lament:

'Alas, the lion! alas. the hero!' or similar words,[2648]2648 while

great Rabbis were 'wont to bespeak for themselves a warm funeral

oration' (Hesped, or Hespeda).[2649]2649 For, from the funeral

oration a man's fate in the other world might be inferred;[2650]2650

and, indeed, 'the honour of a sage was in his funeral

oration.'[2651]2651 and in this sense the Talmud answers the question,

whether a funeral oration is intended to honour the survivors or the

dead.[2652]2652

But in all this painful pageantry there was nothing for the heart of

the widow, bereft of her only child. We can follow in spirit the

mournful procession, as it started from the desolate home. As it

issued, chairs and couches were reversed, and laid low. Outside, the

funeral orator, if such was employed, preceded the bier, proclaiming

the good deeds of the dead.[2653]2653 Immediately before the dead came

the women, this being peculiar to Galilee,[2654]2654 the Midrash

giving this reason of it, that woman had introduced death into the

world.[2655]2655 The body was not, as afterwards in

preference,[2656]2656 carried in an ordinary coffin of wood (Aron), if

possible, cedarwood - on one occassion, at least, made with holes

beneath;[2657]2657 but laid on a bier, or in an open coffin (Mittah).

In former times a distinction had been made in these biers between

rich and poor. The former were carried on the so-called Dargash - as

it were, in state - while the poor were conveyed in a receptacle made

of wickerwork (Kelibha or Kelikhah), having sometimes at the foot what

was termed 'a horn,' to which the body was made fast.[2658]2658 But

this distinction between rich and poor was abolished by Rabbinic

ordinance, and both alike, if carried on a bier, were laid in that

made of wickerwork.[2659]2659 Commonly, though not in later practice,

the face of the dead body was uncovered.[2660]2660 The body lay with

its face turned up, and his hands folded on the breast. We may add,

that when a person had died unmarried or childless, it was customary

to put into the coffin something distinctive of them, such as pen and

ink, or a key. Over the coffins of bride or bridegroom a baldachino

was carried. Sometimes the coffin was garlanded with myrtle.[2661]2661

In exceptional cases we read of the use of incense,[2662]2662 and even

of a kind of libation.[2663]2663

We cannot, then, be mistaken in supposing that the body of the widow's

son was laid on the 'bed' (Mittah), or in the 'willow basket,' already

described (Kelibha, from Kelubh).[2664]2664 Nor can we doubt that the

ends of handles were borne by friends and neighbours, different

parties of bearers, all of them unshod, at frequent intervals

relieving each other, so that as many as possible might share in the

good work.[2665]2665 During these pauses there was loud lamentation;

but this custom was not observed in the burial of women. Behind the

bier walked the relatives, friends, and then the sympathising

'multitude.' For it was deemed like mocking one's Creator not to

follow the dead to his last resting-place, and to all such want of

reverence Prov. xvii. 5 was applied.[2666]2666 If one were absolutely

prevented from joining the procession, although for its sake all work,

even study, should be interrupted, reverence should at least be shown

by rising up before the dead.[2667]2667 And so they would go on to

what the Hebrews beautifully designated as the 'house of assembly' or

'meeting,' the 'hostelry,' the 'place of rest,' or 'of freedom,' the

'field of weepers,' the 'house of eternity,' or 'of life.'

We can now transport ourselves into that scene. Up from the city close

by came this 'great multitude' that followed the dead, with

lamentations, wild chaunts of mourning women,[2668]2668 accompanied by

flutes and the melancholy tinkle of cymbals, perhaps by

trumpets,[2669]2669 [2670]2670 amidst expressions of general sympathy.

Along the road from Endor streamed the great multitude which followed

the 'Prince of Life.' Here they met: Life and Death. The connecting

link between them was the deep sorrow of the widowed mother. He

recognised her as she went before the bier, leading him to the grave

whom she had brought into life. He recognised her, but she recognised

Him not, had not even seen Him. She was still weeping; even after He

had hastened a step or two in advance of His followers, quite close to

her, she did not heed Him, and was still weeping. But, 'beholding

her,' the Lord[2671]2671 'had compassion on her.' Those bitter, silent

tears which blinded her eyes were strongest language of despair and

utmost need, which never in vain appeals to His heart, Who has borne

our sorrows. We remember, by way of contrast, the common formula used

at funerals in Palestine, 'Weep with them, all ye who are bitter of

heart!'[2672]2672 It was not so that Jesus spoke to those around, nor

to her, but characteristically: 'Be not weeping.'[2673]2673 And what

He said, that He wrought. He touched the bier - perhaps the very

wicker basket in which the dead youth lay. He dreaded not the greatest

of all defilements - that of contact with the dead,[2674]2674 which

Rabbinism, in its elaboration of the letter of the Law, had surrounded

with endless terrors. His was other separation than of the Pharisees:

not that of submission to ordinances, but of conquest of what made

them necessary.

And as He touched the bier, they who bore it stood still. They could

not have anticipated what would follow. But the awe of the coming

wonder - as it were, the shadow of the opening gates of life, had

fallen on them. One word of sovereign command, 'and he that was dead

sat up, and began to speak.' Not of that world of which he had had

brief glimpse. For, as one who suddenly passes from dream-vision to

waking, in the abruptness of the transition, loses what he had seen,

so he, who from that dazzling brightness was hurried back to the dim

light to which his vision had been accustomed. It must have seemed to

him, as if he woke from long sleep. Where was he now? who those around

him? what this strange assemblage? and Who He, Whose Light and Life

seemed to fall upon him?

And still was Jesus the link between the mother and the son, who had

again found each other. And so, in the truest sense, 'He gave

him[2675]2675 to his mother.' Can any one doubt that mother and son

henceforth owned, loved, and trusted Him as the true Messiah? If there

was no moral motive for this miracle, outside Christ's sympathy with

intense suffering and the bereavement of death, was there no moral

result as the outcome of it? If mother and son had not called upon Him

before the miracle, would they not henceforth and for ever call upon

Him? And if there was, so to speak, inward necessity, that Life

Incarnate should conquer death - symbolic and typic necessity of it

also - was not everything here congruous to the central fact in this

history? The simplicity and absence of all extravagant details; the

Divine calmness and majesty on the part of the Christ, so different

from the manner in which legend would have coloured the scene, even

from the intense agitation which characterised the conduct of an

Elijah, an Elisha, or a Peter, in somewhat similar circumstances; and,

lastly, the beauteous harmony where all is in accord, from the first

touch of compassion till when, forgetful of the bystanders, heedless

of 'effect,' He gives the son back to his mother - are not all these

worthy of the event, and evidential of the truth of the narrative?

But, after all, may we regard this history as real - and, if so, what

are its lessons?[2676]2676 On one point, at least, all serious critics

are now agreed. It is impossible to ascribe it to exaggeration, or to

explain it on natural grounds. The only alternative is to regard it

either as true, or as designedly false. Be it, moreover, remembered,

that not only one Gospel, but all, relate some story of raising the

dead - whether that of this youth, of Jairus' daughter, or of Lazarus.

They also all relate the Resurrection of the Christ, which really

underlies those other miracles. But if this history of the raising of

the young man is false, what motive can be suggested for its

invention, for motive there must have been for it? Assuredly, it was

no part of Jewish expectancy concerning the Messiah, that He would

perform such a miracle. And negative criticism has admitted,[2677]2677

that the differences between this history and the raising of the dead

by Elijajh or Elisha are so numerous and great, that these narratives

cannot be regarded as suggesting that of the raising of the young man

of Nain. We ask again: Whence, then, this history, if it was not true?

It is an ingenious historical suggestion - rather an admission by

negative criticism[2678]2678 - that so insignificant, and otherwise

unknown, a place as Nain would not have been fixed upon as the site of

this miracle, if some great event had not occurred there which made

lasting impression on the mind of the Church. What was that event, and

does not the reading of this record carry conviction of its truth?

Legends have not been so written. Once more, the miracle is described

as having taken place, not in the seclusion of a chamber, nor before a

few interested witnesses, but in sight of the great multitude which

had followed Jesus, and of that other great multitude which came from

Cana. In this twofold great multitude was there none, from whom the

enemies of Christianity could have wrung contradiction, if the

narrative was false? Still further, the history is told with such

circumstantiality of details, as to be inconsistent with the theory of

a later invention. Lastly, no one will question, that belief in the

reality of such 'raising from the dead' was a primal article in the

faith of the primitive Church, for which - as a fact, not a

possibility - all were ready to offer up their lives. Nor should we

forget that, in one of the earliest apologies addressed to the Roman

Emperor, Quadratus appealed to the fact, that, of those who had been

healed or raised from the dead by Christ, some were still alive, and

all were well known.[2679]2679 On the other hand, the only real ground

for rejecting this narrative is disbelief in the Miraculous,

including, of course, rejection of the Christ as the Miracle of

Miracles. But is it not vicious reasoning in a circle, as well as

begging the question, to reject the Miraculous because we discredit

the Miraculous? and does not such rejection involve much more of the

incredible than faith itself?

And so, with all Christendom, we gladly take it, in simplicity of

faith, as a true record by true men - all the more, that they who told

it knew it to be so incredible, as not only to provoke

scorn,[2680]2680 but to expose them to the charge of cunningly

devising fables.[2681]2681 But they who believe, see in this history,

how the Divine Conqueror, in His accidental meeting with Death, with

mighty arm rolled back the tide, and how through the portals of heaven

which He opened stole in upon our world the first beam of the new day.

Yet another - in some sense lower, in another, practically higher -

lesson do we learn. For, this meeting of the two processions outside

the gate of Nain was accidental, yet not in the conventional sense.

Neither the arrival of Jesus at that place and time, nor that of the

funeral procession from Nain, nor their meeting, was either designed

or else miraculous. Both happened in the natural course of natural

events, but their concurrence[2682]2682 (sugkur_a) was designed, and

directly God-caused. In this God-caused, designed concurrence of

events, in themselves ordinary and natural, lies the mystery of

special Providences, which, to whomsoever they happen, he may and

should regard them as miracles and answer to prayer. And this

principle extends much farther: to the prayer for, and provision of,

daily bread, nay, to mostly all things, so that, to those who have

ears to hear, all things around speak in parables of the kingdom of

Heaven.

But on those who saw this miracle at Nain fell the fear[2683]2683 of

the felt Divine Presence, and over their souls swept the hymn of

Divine praise: fear, because[2684]2684 God had visited[2685]2685 His

people. And further and wider spread the wave - over Judæa, and beyond

it, until it washed, and broke in faint murmur against the

prison-walls, within which the Baptist awaited his martyrdom. Was He

then the 'Coming One?' and, if so, why did, or how could, those walls

keep His messenger within grasp of the tyrant?[2686]2686

CHAPTER XXI.

THE WOMAN WHICH WAS A SINNER

(St. Luke vii. 36-50.)

The precise date and place of the next recorded event in this Galilean

journey of the Christ are left undetermined. It can scarcely have

occurred in the quiet little town of Nain, indeed, is scarcely

congruous with the scene which had been there enacted. And yet it must

have followed almost immediately upon it. We infer this, not only from

the silence of St. Matthew, which in this instance might have been

due, not to the temporary detention of that Evangelist in Capernaum,

while the others had followed Christ to Nain, but to what may be

called the sparingness of detail in the Gospel-narratives, each

Evangelist relating mostly only one in a group of kindred

events.[2687]2687 But other indications determine our inference. The

embassy of the Baptist's disciples (which will be described in another

connection)[2688]2688 undoubtedly followed on the raising of the young

man of Nain. This embassy would scarcely have come to Jesus in Nain.

It probably reached Him on His farther Missionary journey, to which

there seems some reference in the passage in the First

Gospel[2689]2689 which succeeds the account of that embassy. The

actual words there recorded can, indeed, scarcely have been spoken at

that time. They belong to a later period on that Mission-journey, and

mark more fully developed opposition and rejection of the Christ than

in those early days. Chronologically, they are in their proper place

in St. Luke's Gospel,[2690]2690 where they follow in connection with

that Mission of the Seventy, which, in part at least, was prompted by

the growing enmity to the Person of Jesus. On the other hand, this

Mission of the Seventy, is not recorded by St. Matthew. Accordingly,

he inserts those prophetic denunciations which, according to the plan

of his Gospel, could not have been omitted, at the beginning of this

Missionary journey, because it marks the beginning of that systematic

opposition,[2691]2691 the full development of which, as already

stated, prompted the Mission of the Seventy.

Yet, even so, the impression left upon us by St. Matt. xi. 20-30

(which follows on the account of the Baptist's embassy) is, that Jesus

was on a journey, and it may well be that those precious words of

encouragement and invitation, spoken to the burdened and wearily

labouring,[2692]2692 formed part, perhaps the substance, of His

preaching on that journey. Truly these were 'good tidings,' and not

only to those borne down by weight of conscious sinfulness or deep

sorrow, who wearily toiled towards the light of far-off peace, or

those dreamt-of heights where some comprehensive view might be gained

of life with its labours and pangs. 'Good news,' also, to them who

would fain have 'learned' according to their capacity, but whose

teachers had weighted 'the yoke of the Kingdom'[2693]2693 to a heavy

burden, and made the Will of God to them labour, weary and

unaccomplishable. But, whether or not spoken at that special time, we

cannot fail to recognise their special suitableness to the 'forgiven

sinner' in the Pharisee's house,[2694]2694 and their inward, even if

not outward, connection with her history.

Another point requires notice. It is how, in the unfolding of His

Mission to Man, the Christ progressively placed Himself in antagonism

to the Jewish religious thought of His time, from out of which He had

historically sprung. In this part of His earthly course the antagonism

appeared, indeed, so to speak, in a positive rather than negative

form, that is, rather in what He affirmed than in what He combated,

because the opposition to Him was not yet fully developed; whereas in

the second part of His course it was, for a similar reason, rather

negative than positive. From the first this antagonism was there in

what He taught and did; and it appeared with increasing distinctness

in proportion as He taught. We find it in the whole spirit and bearing

of what he did and said - in the house at Capernaum, in the

Synagogues, with the Gentile Centurion, at the gate of Nain, and

especially here, in the history of the much forgiven woman who had

much sinned. A Jewish Rabbi could not have so acted and spoken; he

would not even have understood Jesus; nay, a Rabbi, however gentle and

pitiful, would in word and deed have taken precisely the opposite

direction from that of the Christ.

As St. Gregory expresses it, this is perhaps a history more fit to be

wept over than commented upon. For comments seem so often to interpose

between the simple force of a narrative and our hearts, and few events

in the Gospel-history have been so blunted and turned aside as this

history, through verbal controversies and dogmatic wrangling.

The first impression on our minds is, that the history itself is but a

fragment. We must try to learn from its structure, where and how it

was broken off. We understand the infinite delicacy that left her

unnamed, the record of whose 'much forgiveness' and great love had to

be joined to that of her much sin. And we mark, in contrast, the

coarse clumsiness which, without any reason for the assertion, to meet

the cravings of morbid curiosity, or for saint-worship, has associated

her history with the name of Mary Magdalene.[2695]2695 Another, and

perhaps even more painful, mistake is the attempt of certain critics

to identify this history with the much later anointing of Christ at

Bethany,[2696]2696 and to determine which of the two is the simpler,

and which the more ornate - which the truer of the accounts, and

whence, or why each case there was a 'Simon' - perhaps the commonest

of Jewish names; a woman who anointed; and that Christ, and those who

were present, spoke and acted in accordance with other passages in the

Gospel-history:[2697]2697 that is, true to their respective histories.

But, such twofold anointing - the first, at the beginning of His works

of mercy, of the Feet by a forgiven, loving sinner on whom the Sun had

just risen; the second, of His Head, by a loving disciple, when the

full-orbed Sun was setting in blood, at the close of His Ministry -

is, as in the twofold purgation of the Temple at the beginning and

close of His Work, only like the completing of the circle of His Life.

The invitation of Simon the Pharisee to his table does not necessarily

indicate, that he had been impressed by the teaching of Jesus, any

more than the supposed application to his case of what is called the

'parable' of the much and the little forgiven debtor implies, that he

had received from the Saviour spiritual benefit, great or small. If

Jesus had taught in the 'city,' and, as always, irresistibly drawn to

Him the multitude, it would be only in accordance with the manners of

the time if the leading Pharisee invited the distinguished 'Teacher'

to his table. As such he undoubtedly treated Him.[2698]2698 The

question in Simon's mind was, whether He was more than 'Teacher' -

even 'Prophet;' and that such question rose within him indicates, not

only that Christ openly claimed a position different from that of

Rabbi, and that His followers regarded Him at least as a prophet, but

also, within the breast of Simon, a struggle in which strong Jewish

prejudice was bearing down the mighty impression of Christ's Presence.

They were all sitting, or rather 'lying'[2699]2699 - the Mishnah

sometimes also calls it 'sitting down and leaning' - around the table,

the body resting on the couch, the feet turned away from the table in

the direction of the wall, while the left elbow rested on the table.

And now, from the open courtyard, up the verandah-step, perhaps

through an antechamber,[2700]2700 and by the open door, passed the

figure of a woman into the festive reception-room and dining-hall -

the Teraglin (triclinium) of the Rabbis.[2701]2701 How did she obtain

access? Had she mingled with the servants, or was access free to all -

or had she, perhaps, known the house and its owner?[2702]2702 It

little matters - as little as whether she 'had been,' or 'was' up to

that day, 'a sinner,'[2703]2703 in the terrible acceptation of the

term. But we must bear in mind the greatness of Jewish prejudice

against any conversation with woman, however lofty her character,

fully to realise the absolute incongruity on the part of such a woman

in seeking access to the Rabbi, Whom so many regarded as the God-sent

Prophet.

But this, also, is evidential, that here we are far beyond the Jewish

standpoint. To this woman it was not incongruous, because to her Jesus

had, indeed, been the Prophet sent from God. We have said before that

this story is a fragment; and here, also, as in the invitation of

Simon to Jesus, we have evidence of it. She had, no doubt, heard His

words that day. What He had said would be, in substance, if not in

words: 'Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I

will give you rest . . . . Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in

heart. . . . . Ye shall find rest unto your souls. . . . .' This was

to her the Prophet sent from God with the good news that opened even

to her the Kingdom of Heaven, and laid its yoke upon her, not bearing

her down to very hell, but easy of wear and light of burden. She knew

that it was all as He said, in regard to the heavy load of her past;

and, as she listened to those Words, and looked on that Presence, she

learned to believe that it was all as He had promised to the heavy

burdened. And she had watched, and followed Him afar off to the

Pharisee's house. Or, perhaps, if it be thought that she had not that

day heard for herself, still, the sound of that message must have

reached her, and wakened the echoes of her heart. And still it was:

Come to Me; learn of Me; I will give rest. What mattered all else to

her in the hunger of her soul, which had just tasted of that Heavenly

Bread?

The shadow of her form must have fallen on all who sat at meat. But

none spake; nor did she heed any but One. Like heaven's own music, as

Angels' songs that guide the wanderer home, it still sounded in her

ears. There are times when we forget all else in one absorbing

thought; when men's opinions - nay, our own feelings of shame - are

effaced by that one Presence; when the 'Come to Me; learn of Me; I

will give you rest,' are the all in all to us. Then it is, that the

fountains of the Great Deep within are broken open by the

wonder-working rod, with which God's Messenger to us - the better

Moses - has struck our hearts. She had come that day to 'learn' and to

'find rest.' What mattered it to her who was there, or what they

thought? There was only One Whose Presence she dared not encounter -

not from fear of Him, but from knowledge of herself. It was He to Whom

she had come. And so she 'stood behind at His Feet.' She had brought

with her an alabastron (phial, or flask, commonly of alabaster) of

perfume.[2704]2704 It is a coarse suggestion, that this had originally

been bought for a far different purpose. We know that perfumes were

much sought after, and very largely in use. Some, such as true balsam,

were worth double their weight in silver; others, like the spikenard

(whether as juice or unguent, along with other ingredients), though

not equally costly, were also 'precious.' We have evidence that

perfumed oils - notably oil of rose,[2705]2705 and of the iris plant,

but chiefly the mixture known in antiquity as foliatum, were largely

manufactured and used in Palestine.[2706]2706 A flask with this

perfume was worn by women round the neck, and hung down below the

breast (the Tselochith shel Palyeton).[2707]2707 So common was its use

as to be allowed even on the Sabbath.[2708]2708 This 'flask' (possibly

the Chumarta de Philon of Gitt. 69 b) - not always of glass, but of

silver or gold, probably often also of alabaster - containing

'palyeton' (evidently, the foliatum of Pliny) was used both to sweeten

the breath and perfume the person. Hence it seems at least not

unlikely, that the alabastron which she brought, who loved so much,

was none other than the 'flask of foliatum,' so common among Jewish

woman.[2709]2709

As she stood behind Him at His Feet, reverently bending, a shower of

tears, like sudden, quick summer-rain, that refreshes air and earth,

'bedewed'[2710]2710 His Feet. As if surprised, or else afraid to

awaken His attention, or defile Him by her tears, she

quickly[2711]2711 wiped them away with the long tresses of her hair

that had fallen down and touched Him,[2712]2712 as she bent over His

Feet. Nay, not to wash them in such impure waters had she come, but to

show such loving gratefulness and reverence as in her poverty she

could, and in her humility she might offer. And, now that her faith

had grown bold in His Presence, she is continuing[2713]2713 to kiss

those Feet which had brought to her the 'good tidings of peace,' and

to anoint them out of the alabastron round her neck. And still she

spake not, nor yet He. For, as on her part silence seemed most fitting

utterance, so on His, that He suffered it in silence was best and most

fitting answer to her.

Another there was whose thoughts, far other than hers or the Christ's,

were also unuttered. A more painful contrast than that of 'the

Pharisee' in this scene, can scarcely be imagined. We do not insist

that the designation 'this Man,'[2714]2714 given to Christ in his

spoken thoughts, or the manner in which afterwards he replied to the

Saviour's question by a supercilious 'I suppose,' or

'presume,'[2715]2715 necessarily imply contempt. But they certainly

indicate the mood of his spirit. One thing, at least, seems now clear

to this Pharisee: If 'this Man,' this strange, wandering, popular

idol, with His strange, novel ways and words, Whom in politeness he

must call 'Teacher,'[2716]2716 Rabbi, were a Prophet, He would have

known who the woman was, and, if He had known who she was, then would

He never have allowed such approach. So do we, also, often argue as to

what He would do, if He knew. But He does know; and it is just because

He knoweth that He doeth what, from our lower standpoint, we cannot

understand. Had He been a Rabbi, He would certainly, and had he been

merely a Prophet, He would probably, have repelled such approach. The

former, if not from self-righteousness, yet from ignorance of sin and

forgiveness; the latter, because such homage was more than man's

due.[2717]2717 But, He was more than a prophet - the Saviour of

sinners; and so she might quietly weep over His Feet, and then quickly

wipe away the 'dew' of the 'better morning,' and then continue to Kiss

His Feet and to anoint them.

And yet Prophet He also was, and in far fuller sense than Simon could

have imagined. For, He had read Simon's unspoken thoughts. Presently

He would show it to him; yet not, as we might, by open reproof, that

would have put him to shame before his guests, but with infinite

delicacy towards His host, and still in manner that he could not

mistake. What follows is not, as generally supposed, a parable but an

illustration. Accordingly, it must in no way be pressed. With this

explanation vanish all the supposed difficulties about the Pharisees

being 'little forgiven,' and hence 'loving little.' To convince Simon

of the error of his conclusion, that, if the life of that woman had

been known, the prophet must have forbidden her touch of love, Jesus

entered into the Pharisee's own modes of reasoning. Of two debtors,

one of whom owned ten times as much as the other,[2718]2718 who would

best love the creditor[2719]2719 who had freely[2720]2720 forgiven

them?[2721]2721 Though to both the debt might have been equally

impossible of discharge, and both might love equally, yet a Rabbi

would, according to his Jewish notions, say, that he would love most

to whom most had been forgiven. If this was the undoubted outcome of

Jewish theology - the so much for so much - let it be applied to the

present case. If there were much benefit, there would be much love; if

little benefit, little love. And conversely: in such case much love

would argue much benefit; little love, small benefit. Let him then

apply the reasoning by marking this woman, and contrasting her conduct

with his own. To wash the feet of a guest, to give him the kiss of

welcome, and especially to anoint him,[2722]2722 were not, indeed,

necessary attentions at a feast. All the more did they indicate

special care, affection, and respect.[2723]2723 None of these tokens

of deep regard had marked the merely polite reception of Him by the

Pharisee. But, in a twofold climax of which the intensity can only be

indicated,[2724]2724 the Saviour now proceeds to show, how different

it had been with her, to whom, for the first time, He now turned! On

Simon's own reasoning, then, he must have received but little, she

much benefit. Or, to apply the former illustration, and now to

reality: 'Forgiven have been her sins, the many'[2725]2725 - not in

ignorance, but with knowledge of their being 'many.' This, by Simon's

former admission, would explain and account for her much love, as the

effect of much forgiveness. On the other hand - though in delicacy the

Lord does not actually express it - this other inference would also

hold true, that Simon's little love showed that 'little is being

forgiven.'[2726]2726

What has been explained will dispose of another controversy which,

with little judgment and less taste, has been connected with this

marvellous history. It must not be made a question as between Romanist

and Protestant, nor as between rival dogmatists, whether love had any

meritorious part in her forgiveness, or whether, as afterwards stated,

her 'faith' had 'saved' her. Undoubtedly, her faith had saved her.

What she had heard from His lips, what she knew of Him, she had

believed. She had believed in 'the good tidings of peace' which He had

brought, in the love of God, and His Fatherhood of pity to the most

sunken and needy; in Christ, as the Messenger of Reconciliation and

Peace with God; in the Kingdom of Heaven which He had so suddenly and

unexpectedly opened to her, from out of whose unfolded golden gates

Heaven's light had fallen upon her, Heaven's voices had come to her.

She had believed it all: the Father, the Son - Revealer, the Holy

Ghost - Revealing. And it had saved her. When she came to that feast,

and stood behind with humbled, loving gratefulness and reverence of

heart-service, she was already saved. She needed not to be forgiven:

she had been forgiven. And it was because she was forgiven that she

bedewed His Feet with the summer-shower of her heart, and, quickly

wiping away the flood with her tresses, continued kissing and

anointing them. All this was the impulse of her heart, who, having

come in heart, still came to Him, and learned of Him, and found rest

to her soul. In that early springtide of her new-born life, it seemed

that, as on Aaron's rod, leaf, bud, and flower were all together in

tangled confusion of rich forthbursting. She had not yet reached order

and clearness; perhaps, in the fulness of her feelings, knew not how

great were her blessings, and felt not yet that conscious rest which

grows out of faith in the forgiveness which it obtains.

And this was now the final gift of Jesus to her. As formerly for the

first time He had turned so now for the first time He spoke to her -

and once more with tenderest delicacy. 'Thy sins have been

forgiven'[2727]2727 - not, are forgiven, and not now - 'the many.' Nor

does He now heed the murmuring thoughts of those around, who cannot

understand Who this is that forgiveth sins also. But to her, and

truly, though not literally, to them also, and to us, He said in

explanation and application of it all: 'Thy faith has saved thee: go

into peace.'[2728]2728 Our logical dogmatics would have had it: 'go in

peace;' more truly He, 'into peace.'[2729]2729 And so she, the first

who had come to Him for spiritual healing the, first of an unnumbered

host, went out into the better light, into peace of heart, peace of

faith, peace of rest, and into the eternal peace of the Kingdom of

Heaven, and of the Heaven of the kingdom hereafter and for ever.

CHAPTER XXII.

THE MINISTRY OF LOVE, THE BLASPHEMY OF HATRED, AND THE MISTAKES OF

EARTHLY

AFFECTION - THE RETURN TO CAPERNAUM - HEALING OF THE DEMONISED

DUMB -

PHARISAIC CHARGE AGAINST CHRIST - THE VISIT OF CHRIST'S MOTHER AND

BRETHREN

(St. Luke viii. 1-3; St. Matt. ix. 32-35; St. Mark iii. 22, &c.; St.

Matt. xii. 46-50 and parallels.)

HOWEVER interesting and important to follow the steps of our Lord on

His journey through Galilee, and to group in their order the notices

of it in the Gospels, the task seems almost hopeless. In truth, since

none of the Evangelists attempted - should we not say, ventured - to

write a 'Life' of the Christ, any strictly historical arrangement lay

outside their purpose. Their point of view was that of the internal,

rather than the external development of this history. And so events,

kindred in purpose, discourses bearing on the same subject, or

parables pointing to the same stretch of truth, were grouped together;

or, as in the present instance, the unfolding teaching of Christ and

the growing opposition of His enemies exhibited by joining together

notices which, perhaps, belong to different periods. And the lesson to

us is, that, just as the Old Testament gives neither the national

history of Israel, nor the biography of its heroes, but a history of

the Kingdom of God in its progressive development, so the Gospels

present not a 'Life of Christ,' but the history of the Kingdom of God

in its progressive manifestation.

Yet, although there are difficulties connected with details, we can

trace in outline the general succession of events. We conclude, that

Christ was now returning to Capernaum from that Missionary

journey[2730]2730 of which Nain had been the southernmost point. On

this journey He was attended, not only by the Twelve, but by loving

grateful women, who ministered to Him of their substance. Among them

three are specially named. 'Mary, called Magdalene,' had received from

Him special benefit of healing to body and soul.[2731]2731 Her

designation as Magdalene was probably derived from her native city,

Magdala,[2732]2732 just as several Rabbis are spoken of in the Talmud

as 'Magdalene' (Magdelaah, or Magdelaya[2733]2733). Magdala, which was

a Sabbath-day's journey from Tiberias,[2734]2734 was celebrated for

its dyeworks,[2735]2735 and its manufactories of fine woolen textures,

of which eighty are mentioned.[2736]2736 Indeed, all that district

seems to have been engaged in this industry.[2737]2737 It was also

reputed for its traffic in turtle-doves and pigeons for purifications

- tradition, with its usual exaggeration of numbers, mentioning three

hundred such shops.[2738]2738 Accordingly, its wealth was very great,

and it is named among the three cities whose contributions were so

large as to be sent in a wagon to Jerusalem.[2739]2739 But its moral

corruption was also great, and to this the Rabbis attributed its final

destruction.[2740]2740 Magdala had a Synagogue.[2741]2741 [2742]2742

Its name was probably derived from a strong tower which defended its

approaches, or served for outlook. This suggestion is supported by the

circumstance, that what seems to have formed part, or a suburb of

Magdala,[2743]2743 bore the names of 'Fish-tower' and 'Tower of the

Dyers.' One at least, if not both these towers, would be near the

landing-place, by the Lake of Galilee, and overlook its waters. The

necessity for such places of outlook and defence, making the town a

Magdala, would be increased by the proximity of the magnificent plain

of Gennesaret, of which Josephus speaks in such rapturous

terms.[2744]2744 Moreover, only twenty minutes to the north of Magdala

descended the so-called 'Valley of Doves' (the Wady Hamâm), through

which passed the ancient caravan-road that led over Nazareth to

Damascus. The name 'valley of doves' illustrates the substantial

accuracy of the Rabbinic descriptions of ancient Magdala. Modern

travelers (such as Dean Stanley, Professor Robinson, Farrar, and

others) have noticed the strange designation 'Valley of Doves' without

being able to suggest the explanation of it, which the knowledge of

its traffic in doves for purposes of purification at once supplies. Of

the many towns and villages that dotted the shores of the Lake of

Galilee, all have passed away except Magdala, which is still

represented by the collection of mud hovels that bears the name of

Mejdel. The ancient watch-tower which gave the place its name is still

there, probably standing on the same site as that which looked down on

Jesus and the Magdalene. To this day Magdala is celebrated for its

springs and rivulets, which render it specially suitable for dyeworks;

while the shell-fish with which these waters and the Lake are said to

abound,[2745]2745 might supply some of the dye.[2746]2746

Such details may help us more clearly to realise the home, and with

it, perhaps, also the upbringing and circumstances of her who not only

ministered to Jesus in His Life, but, with eager avarice of love,

watched 'afar off' His dying moments,[2747]2747 and then sat over

against the new tomb of Joseph in which His Body was laid.[2748]2748

And the terrible time which followed she spent with her like-minded

friends, who in Galilee had ministered to Christ,[2749]2749 in

preparing those 'spices and ointments'[2750]2750 which the Risen

Saviour would never require. For, on that Easter-morning the empty

tomb of Jesus was only guarded by Angel-messengers, who announced to

the Magdalene and Joanna, as well as the other women,[2751]2751 the

gladsome tidings that His foretold Resurrection had become a reality.

But however difficult the circumstances may have been, in which the

Magdalene came to profess her faith in Jesus, those of Joanna (the

Hebrew Yochani[2752]2752) must have been even more trying. She was the

wife of Chuza, Herod's Steward[2753]2753 - possibly, though not

likely, the Court-official whose son Jesus had healed by the word

spoken in Cana.[2754]2754 The absence of any reference to the event

seems rather opposed to this supposition. Indeed, it seems doubtful,

whether Chuza was a Jewish name. In Jewish writings[2755]2755 the

designation ({hebrew})[2756]2756 seems rather used as a by-name

('little pitcher') for a small, insignificant person, than as a proper

name.[2757]2757 Only one other of those who ministered to Jesus is

mentioned by name. It is Susanna, the 'lily.' The names of the other

loving women are not written on the page of earth's history, but only

on that of the 'Lamb's Book of Life.' And they 'ministered to Him of

their substance.' So early did eternal riches appear in the grab of

poverty; so soon did love to Christ find its treasure in consecrating

it to His Ministry. And ever since has this been the law of His

Kingdom, to our great humiliation and yet greater exaltation in

fellowship with Him.

It was on this return-journey to Capernaum, probably not far from the

latter place, that the two blind men had their sight

restored.[2758]2758 It was then, also, that the healing of the

demonised dumb took place, which is recorded in St. Matt. ix. 32-35,

and alluded to in St. Mark iii. 22-30. This narrative must, of course,

not be confounded with the somewhat similar event told in St. Matt.

xii. 22-32, and in St. Luke xi. 14-26. The latter occurred at a much

later period in our Lord's life, when, as the whole context shows, the

opposition of the Pharisaic party had assumed much larger proportions,

and the language of Jesus was more fully denunciatory of the character

and guilt of His enemies. That charge of the Pharisees, therefore,

that Jesus cast out the demons through the Prince of the

demons,[2759]2759 as well as His reply to it, will best be considered

when it shall appear in its fullest development. This all the more,

that we believe at least the greater part of our Lord's answer to

their blasphemous accusation, as given in St. Mark's Gospel,[2760]2760

to have been spoken at that later period.[2761]2761

It was on this return-journey to Capernaum from the uttermost borders

of Galilee, when for the first time He was not only followed by His

twelve Apostles, but attended by the loving service of those who owed

their all to His Ministry, that the demonized dumb was restored by the

casting our of the demon. Even these circumstances show that a new

stage in the Messianic course had begun. It is characterised by fuller

unfolding of Christ's teaching and working, and pari passu, by more

fully developed opposition of the Pharisaic party. For the two went

together, nor can they be distinguished as cause or effect. That new

stage, as repeatedly noted, had opened on His return from the 'Unknown

Feast' in Jerusalem, whence He seems to have been followed by the

Pharisaic party. We have marked it so early as the call of the four

disciples by the Lake of Galilee. But it first actively appeared at

the healing of the paralytic in Capernaum, when, for the first time,

we noticed the presence and murmuring of the Scribes, and, for the

first time also, the distinct declaration about the forgiveness of

sins on the part of Jesus. The same twofold element appeared in the

call of the publican Matthew, and the cavil of the Pharisees at

Christ's subsequent eating and drinking with 'sinners.' It was in

further development of this separation from the old and now hostile

element, that the twelve Apostles were next appointed, and that

distinctive teaching of Jesus addressed to the people in the 'Sermon

on the Mount,' which was alike a vindication and an appeal. On the

journey through Galilee, which now followed, the hostile party does

not seem to have actually attended Jesus; but their growing, and now

outspoken opposition is heard in the discourse of Christ about John

the Baptist after the dismissal of his disciples,[2762]2762 while its

influence appears in the unspoken thoughts of Simon the Pharisee.

But even before these two events, that had happened which would induce

the Pharisaic party to increased measures against Jesus. It has

already been suggested, that the party, as such, did not attend Jesus

on His Galilean journey. But we are emphatically told, that tidings of

the raising of the dead at Nain had gone forth into Judæa.[2763]2763

No doubt they reached the leaders at Jerusalem. There seems just

sufficient time between this and the healing of the demonised dumb on

the return-journey to Capernaum, to account for the presence there of

those Pharisees,[2764]2764 who are expressly described by St.

Mark[2765]2765 as 'the Scribes which came down from Jerusalem.'

Other circumstances, also, are thus explained. Whatever view the

leaders at Jerusalem may have taken of the raising at Nain, it could

no longer be denied that miracles were wrought by Jesus. At least,

what to us seem miracles, yet not to them, since, as we have seen,

'miraculous' cures and the expelling of demons lay within the sphere

of their 'extraordinary ordinary' - were not miracles in our sense,

since they were, or professed to be, done by their 'own children.' The

mere fact, therefore, of such cures, would present no difficulty to

them. To us a single well-ascertained miracle would form irrefragable

evidence of the claims of Christ; to them it would not. They could

believe in the 'miracles,' and yet not in the Christ. To them the

question would not be, as to us, whether they were miracles - but, By

what power, or in what Name, He did these deeds? From our standpoint,

their opposition to the Christ would - in view of His Miracles - seem

not only wicked. but rationally inexplicable. But ours was not their

point of view. And here, again, we perceive that it was enmity of the

Person and Teaching of Jesus which led to the denial of His claims.

The inquiry: By what Power Jesus did these works? they met by the

assertion, that it was through that of Satan, or the Chief of the

Demons. They regarded Jesus, as not only temporarily, but permanently,

possessed by a demon, that is, as the constant vehicle of Satanic

influence. And this demon was, according to them, none other than

Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.[2766]2766 Thus, in their view, it

was really Satan who acted in and through Him; and Jesus, instead of

being recognised as the Son of God, was regarded as an incarnation of

Satan; instead of being owned as the Messiah, was denounced and

treated as the representative of the Kingdom of Darkness. All this,

because the Kingdom which He came to open, and which He preached, was

precisely the opposite of what they regarded as the Kingdom of God.

Thus it was the essential contrariety of Rabbinism to the Gospel of

the Christ that lay at the foundation of their conduct towards the

Person of Christ. We venture to assert, that this accounts for the

whole after-history up to the Cross.

Thus viewed, the history of Pharisaic opposition appears not only

consistent, but is, so to speak, morally accounted for. Their guilt

lay in treating that as Satanic agency which was of the Holy Ghost;

and this, because they were of their father the Devil, and knew not,

nor understood, nor yet loved the Light, their deeds being evil. They

were not children of the light, but of that darkness which

comprehended Him not Who was the Light. And now we can also understand

the growth of active opposition to Christ. Once arrived at the

conclusion, that the miracles which Christ did were due to the power

of Satan, and that He was the representative of the Evil One, their

course was rationally and morally chosen. To regard every fresh

manifestation of Christ's Power as only a fuller development of the

power of Satan, and to oppose it with increasing determination and

hostility, even to the Cross: such was henceforth the natural progress

of this history. On the other hand, such a course once fully settled

upon, there would, and could, be no further reasoning with, or against

it on the part of Jesus. Henceforth His Discourses and attitude to

such Judaism must be chiefly denunciatory, while still seeking - as,

from the inward necessity of His Nature and the outward necessity of

His Mission, He must - to save the elect remnant from this 'untoward

generation,' and to lay broad and wide the foundations of the future

Church. But the old hostile Judaism must henceforth be left to the

judgment of condemnation, except in those tears of Divine pity which

the Jew-King and Jewish Messiah wept over the Jerusalem that knew not

the day of its visitation.

But all this, when the now beginning movement shall have reached its

full proportions.[2767]2767 For the present, we mark only its first

appearance. The charge of Satanic agency was, indeed, not quite new.

It had been suggested, that John the Baptist had been under demoniacal

influence, and this cunning pretext for resistance to his message had

been eminently successful with the people.[2768]2768 The same charge,

only in much fuller form, was not raised against Jesus. As 'the

multitude marvelled, saying, it was never so seen in Israel,' the

Pharisees, without denying the facts, had this explanation of them, to

be presently developed to all its terrible consequences: that, both as

regarded the casting out of the demon from the dumb man and all

similar works, Jesus wrought it 'through the Ruler of the

Demons.'[2769]2769 [2770]2770

And so the edge of this manifestation of the Christ was blunted and

broken. But their besetment of the Christ did not cease. It is to this

that we attribute the visit of 'the mother and brethren' of Jesus,

which is recorded in the three Synoptic Gospels.[2771]2771 Even this

circumstance shows its decisive importance. It forms a parallel to the

former attempts of the Pharisees to influence the disciples of

Jesus,[2772]2772 and then to stir up the hostility of the disciples of

John,[2773]2773 both of which are recorded by the three Evangelists.

It also brought to light another distinctive characteristic of the

Mission of Jesus. We place this visit of the 'mother and brethren' of

Jesus immediately after His return to Capernaum, and we attribute it

to Pharisaic opposition, which either filled those relatives of Jesus

with fear for His safety, or made them sincerely concerned about His

proceedings. Only if it meant some kind of interference with His

Mission, whether prompted by fear or affection, would Jesus have so

disowned their relationship.

But it meant more than this. As always, the positive went side by side

with the negative. Without going so far, as with some of the Fathers,

to see pride or ostentation in this, that the Virgin--Mother summoned

Jesus to her outside the house, since the opposite might as well have

been her motive, we cannot but regard the words of Christ as the

sternest prophetic rebuke of all Mariolatry, prayer for the Virgin's

intercession, and, still more, of the strange doctrines about her

freedom from actual and original sin, up to their prurient sequence in

the dogma of the 'Immaculate Conception.'

On the other hand, we also remember the deep reverence among the Jews

for parents, which found even exaggerated expression in the

Talmud.[2774]2774 [2775]2775 And we feel that, of all in Israel, He,

Who was their King, could not have spoken nor done what might even

seem disrespectful to a mother. There must have been higher meaning in

His words. That meaning would be better understood after His

Resurrection. But even before that it was needful, in presence of

interference or hindrance by earthly relationships, even the nearest

and tenderest, and perhaps all the more in their case, to point to the

higher and stronger spiritual relationship. And beyond this, to still

higher truth. For, had He not entered into earthly kinship solely for

the sake of the higher spiritual relationship which He was about to

found; and was it not, then, in the most literal sense, that not those

in nearest earthly relationship, but they who sat 'about Him, nay,

whoever shall do the will of God,' were really in closest kinship with

Him? Thus, it was not that Christ set lightly by His Mother, but that

He confounded not the means with the end, nor yet surrendered the

spirit for the letter of the Law of Love, when, refusing to be

arrested or turned aside from His Mission, even for a

moment,[2776]2776 He elected to do the Will of His Father rather than

neglect it by attending to the wishes of the Virgin-Mother. As Bengel

aptly puts it: He contemns not the Mother, but He places the Father

first.[2777]2777 And this is ever the right relationship in the

Kingdom of Heaven!

THE ASCENT: FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF

TRANSFIGURATION

CHAPTER XXIII.

NEW TEACHING 'IN PARABLES' - THE PARABLES TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LAKE

GALILEE, AND THOSE TO THE DISCIPLES IN CAPERNAUM

(St. Matt. xiii. 1-52; St. Mark iv. 1-34; St. Luke viii. 4-18.)

We are once more with Jesus and His disciples by the Lake of Galilee.

We love to think that it was in the early morning, when the light laid

its golden shadows on the still waters, and the fresh air, untainted

by man, was fragrant of earth's morning sacrifice, when no voice of

human discord marred the restfulness of holy silence, nor broke the

Psalm of Nature's praise. It was a spring morning too, and of such

spring-time as only the East, and chiefly the Galilean Lake, knows -

nor of mingled sunshine and showers, of warmth and storm, clouds and

brightness, when life seems to return slowly and feebly to the palsied

limbs of our northern climes, but when at the warm touch it bounds and

throbs with the vigour of youth. The imagery of the 'Sermon on the

Mount' indicates that winter's rain and storms were just

past.[2778]2778 Under that sky Nature seems to meet the coming of

spring by arraying herself in a garb more glorious than Solomon's

royal pomp. Almost suddenly the blood-red anemones, the gay tulips,

the spotless narcissus, and the golden ranunculus[2779]2779 deck with

wondrous richness the grass of the fields - alas! so soon to

wither[2780]2780 - while all trees put forth their fragrant promise of

fruit.[2781]2781 As the imagery employed in the Sermon on the Mount

confirmed the inference, otherwise derived, that it was spoken during

the brief period after the winter rains, when the 'lilies' decked the

fresh grass, so the scene depicted in the Parables spoken by the Lake

of Galilee indicates a more advanced season, when the fields gave

first promise of a harvest to be gathered in due time. And as we know

that the barley-harvest commenced with the Passover, we cannot be

mistaken in supposing that the scene is laid a few weeks before that

Feast.

Other evidence of this is not wanting. From the opening

verses[2782]2782 we infer, that Jesus had gone forth from 'the house'

with His disciples only, and that, as He sat by the seaside, the

gathering multitude had obliged Him to enter a ship, whence He spake

unto them many things in Parables. That this parabolic teaching did

not follow, far less, was caused by, the fully developed enmity of the

Pharisees,[2783]2783 [2784]2784 will appear more clearly in the

sequel. Meantime it should be noticed, that the first series of

Parables (those spoken by the Lake of Galilee) bear no distinct

reference to it. In this respect we mark an ascending scale in the

three series of Parables, spoken respectively at three different

periods in the History of Christ, and with reference to three

different stages of Pharisaic opposition and popular feeling. The

first series is that,[2785]2785 when Pharisaic opposition had just

devised the explanation that His works were of demoniac agency, and

when misled affection would have converted the ties of earthly

relationship into bonds to hold the Christ. To this there was only one

reply, when the Christ stretched out His Hand over those who had

learned, by following Him, to do the Will of His Heavenly Father, and

so become His nearest of kin. This was the real answer to the attempt

of His mother and brethren; that to the Pharisaic charge of Satanic

agency. And it was in this connection that, first to the multitude,

then to His disciples, the first series of Parables was spoken, which

exhibits the elementary truths concerning the planting of the Kingdom

of God, its development, reality, value, and final vindication.

In the second series of Parables we mark a different stage. The

fifteen Parables of which it consists[2786]2786 were spoken after the

Transfiguration, on the descent into the Valley of Humiliation. They

also concern the Kingdom of God, but, although the prevailing

characteristic is still parenetic,[2787]2787 or, rather, Evangelic,

they have a controversial aspect also, as against some vital, active

opposition to the Kingdom, chiefly on the part of the Pharisees.

Accordingly, they appear among 'the Discourses' of Christ,[2788]2788

and are connected with the climax of Pharisaic opposition as presented

in the charge, in its most fully developed form, that Jesus was, so to

speak, the Incarnation of Satan, the constant medium and vehicle of

his activity.[2789]2789 This was the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

All the Parables spoken at that period bear more or less direct

reference to it, though, as already stated, as yet in positive rather

than negative form, the Evangelic element in them bing primary, and

the judicial only secondary.

This order is reversed in the third series, consisting of eight

Parables.[2790]2790 Here the controversial has not only the

ascendency over the Evangelic element, but the tone has become

judicial, and the Evangelic element appears chiefly in the form of

certain predictions connected with the coming end. The Kingdom of God

is presented in its final stage of ingathering, separation, reward and

loss, as, indeed, we might expect in the teaching of the Lord

immediately before His final rejection by Israel and betrayal into the

hands of the Gentiles.

This internal connection between the Parables and the History of

Christ best explains their meaning. Their artificial grouping (as by

mostly all modern critics[2791]2791) is too ingenious to be true. One

thing, however, is common to all the Parables, and forms a point of

connection between them. They are all occasioned by some

unreceptiveness on the part of the hearers, and that, even when the

hearers are professing disciples. This seems indicated in the reason

assigned by Christ to the disciples for His use of parabolic teaching:

that unto them it was 'given to know the mystery of the Kingdom of

God, but unto them it was that are without, all these things are done

in parables.'[2792]2792 And this may lead up to such general remarks

on the Parables as are necessary for their understanding.

Little information is to be gained from discussing the etymology of

the word Parable.[2793]2793 The verb from which it is derived means to

project; and the term itself, the placing of one thing by the side of

another. Perhaps no other mode of teaching was so common among the

Jews[2794]2794 as that by Parables. Only in their case, they were

almost entirely illustrations of what had been said or

taught;[2795]2795 while, in the case of Christ, they served as the

foundation for His teaching. In the one case, the light of earth was

cast heavenwards, in the other, that of heaven earthwards; in the one

case, it was intended to make spiritual teaching appear Jewish and

national, in the other to convey spiritual teaching in a form adapted

to the standpoint of the hearers. This distinction will be found to

hold true, even in instances where there seems the closest parallelism

between a Rabbinic and an Evangelic Parable. On further examination,

the difference between them will appear not merely one of degree, but

of kind, or rather of standpoint. This may be illustrated by the

Parable of the woman who made anxious search for her lost

coin,[2796]2796 which there is an almost literal Jewish

parallel.[2797]2797 But, whereas in the Jewish Parable the moral is,

that a man ought to take much greater pains in the study of the Torah

than in the search for coin, since the former procures an eternal

reward, while the coin would, if found, at most only procure temporary

enjoyment, the Parable of Christ is intended to set forth, not the

merit of study or of works, but the compassion of the Saviour in

seeking the lost, and the joy of Heaven in his recovery. It need

scarcely be said, that comparison between such Parables, as regards

their spirit, is scarcely possible, except by way of

contrast.[2798]2798

But, to return. In Jewish writings a Parable (Mimshal, Mashal, Mathla)

is introduced by some such formula as this: 'I will tell thee a

parable' ({hebrew}) 'To what is the thing like? To one,' &c. Often it

begins more briefly, thus: 'A Parable. To what is the thing like?' or

else, simply: 'To what is the thing like?' Sometimes even this is

omitted and the Parable is indicated by the preposition 'to' at the

beginning of the illustrative story. Jewish writers extol Parables, as

placing the meaning of the Law within range of the comprehension of

all men. The 'wise King' had introduced this method, the usefulness of

which is illustrated by the Parable of a great palace which had many

doors, so that people lost their way in it, till one came who fastened

a ball of thread at the chief entrance, when all could readily find

their way in and out.[2799]2799 Even this will illustrate what has

been said of the difference between Rabbinic Parables and those

employed by our Lord.

The general distinction between a Parable and a Proverb, Fable and

Allegory, cannot here be discussed at length.[2800]2800 It will

sufficiently appear from the character and the characteristics of the

Parables of our Lord. That designation is, indeed, sometimes applied

to what are not Parables, in the strictest sense; while it is wanting

where we might have expected it. Thus, in the Synoptic Gospels

illustrations,[2801]2801 and even proverbial sayings, such as

'Physician, heal thyself,'[2802]2802 or that about the blind leading

the blind,[2803]2803 are designated Parables. Again, the term

'Parable,' although used in our Authorised Version, does not occur in

the original of St. John's Gospel; and this, although not a few

illustrations used in that Gospel might, on superficial examination,

appear to be Parables. The term must, therefore, be here restricted to

special conditions. The first of these is, that all Parables bear

reference to well-known scenes, such as those of daily life; or to

events, either real, or such as every one would expect in given

circumstances, or as would be in accordance with prevailing

notions.[2804]2804

Such pictures, familiar to the popular mind, are in the Parable

connected with corresponding spiritual realities. Yet, here also,

there is that which distinguishes the Parable from the mere

illustration. The latter conveys no more than - perhaps not so much as

- that which was to be illustrated; while the Parable conveys this and

a great deal beyond it to those, who can follow up its shadows to the

light by which they have been cast. In truth, Parables are the

outlined shadows - large, perhaps, and dim - as the light of heavenly

things falls on well-known scenes, which correspond to, and have their

higher counterpart in spiritual realities. For, earth and heaven are

twin-parts of His works. And, as the same law, so the same order,

prevails in them; and they form a grand unity in their relation to the

Living God Who reigneth. And, just as there is ultimately but one Law,

one Force, one Life, which, variously working, effects and affects all

the Phenomenal in the material universe, however diverse it may seem,

so is there but one Law and Life as regards the intellectual, moral -

nay, and the spiritual. One Law, Force, and Life, binding the earthly

and the heavenly into a Grand Unity - the outcome of the Divine Unity,

of which it is the manifestation. Thus things in earth and heaven are

kindred, and the one may become to us Parables of the other. And so,

if the place of our resting be Bethel, they become Jacob's ladder, by

which those from heaven come down to earth, and those from earth

ascend to heaven.

Another characteristic of the Parables, in the stricter sense, is that

in them the whole picture or narrative is used in illustration of some

heavenly teaching, and not merely one feature or phase of

it,[2805]2805 as in some of the parabolic illustrations and proverbs

of the Synoptists, or the parabolic narratives of the Fourth Gospel.

Thus, in the parabolic illustrations about the new piece of cloth on

the old garment,[2806]2806 about the blind leading the

blind,[2807]2807 about the forth-putting of leaves on the

fig-tree;[2808]2808 or in the parabolic proverb, 'Physician, heal

thyself;'[2809]2809 or in such parabolic narratives of St. John, as

about the Good Shepherd,[2810]2810 or the Vine,[2811]2811 in each

case, only one part is selected as parabolic. On the other hand, even

in the shortest Parables, such as those of the seed growing

secretly,[2812]2812 the leaven in the meal,[2813]2813 and the pearl of

great price,[2814]2814 the picture is complete, and has not only in

one feature, but in its whole bearing, a counterpart in spiritual

realities. But, as shown in the Parable of the seed growing

secretly,[2815]2815 it is not necessary that the Parable should always

contain some narrative, provided that not only one feature, but the

whole thing related, have its spiritual application.

In view of what has been explained, the arrangement of the Parables

into symbolical and typical[2816]2816 can only apply to their form,

not their substance. In the first of these classes a scene from nature

or from life serves as basis for exhibiting the corresponding

spiritual reality. In the latter, what is related serves as type

(t_pov), not in the ordinary sense of that term, but in that not

unfrequent in Scripture: as example - whether for imitation,[2817]2817

or in warning.[2818]2818 In the typical Parables the illustration

lies, so to speak, on the outside; in the symbolical, within the

narrative or scene. The former are to be applied; the latter must be

explained.

It is here that the characteristic difference between the various

classes of hearers lay. All the Parables, indeed, implied some

background of opposition, or else of unreceptiveness. In the record of

this first series of them,[2819]2819 the fact that Jesus spake to the

people in Parables,[2820]2820 and only in Parables,[2821]2821 is

strongly marked. It appears, therefore, to have been the first time

that this mode of popular teaching was adopted by him.[2822]2822

Accordingly, the disciples not only expressed their astonishment, but

inquired the reason of this novel method.[2823]2823 The answer of the

Lord makes a distinction between those to whom it is given to know the

mysteries of the Kingdom, and those to whom all things were done in

Parables. But, evidently, this method of teaching could not have been

adopted for the people, in contradistinction to the disciples, and as

a judicial measure, since even in the first series of Parables three

were addressed to the disciples, after the people had been

dismissed.[2824]2824 On the other hand, in answer to the disciples,

the Lord specially marks this as the difference between the teaching

vouchsafed to them and the Parables spoken to the people, that the

designed effect of the latter was judicial: to complete that hardening

which, in its commencement, had been caused by their voluntary

rejection of what they had heard.[2825]2825 But, as not only the

people, but the disciples also, were taught by Parables, the hardening

effect must not be ascribed to the parabolic mode of teaching, now for

the first time adopted by Christ. Nor is it a sufficient answer to the

question, by what this darkening effect, and hence hardening

influence, of the Parable on the people was caused, that the first

series, addressed to the multitude,[2826]2826 consisted of a

cumulation of Parables, without any hint as to their meaning or

interpretation.[2827]2827 For, irrespective of other considerations,

these Parables were at least as easily understood as those spoken

immediately afterwards to the disciples, on which, similarly, no

comment was given by Jesus. On the other hand, to us at least, it

seems clear, that the ground of the different effect of the Parables

on the unbelieving multitude and on the believing disciples was not

objective, or caused by the substance or form of these Parables, but

subjective, being caused by the different standpoint of the two

classes of hearers toward the Kingdom of God.

This explanation removes what otherwise would be a serious difficulty.

For, it seems impossible to believe, that Jesus had adopted a special

mode of teaching for the purpose of concealing the truth, which might

have saved those who heard Him. His words, indeed, indicate that such

was the effect of the Parables. But they also indicate, with at least

equal clearness, that the cause of this hardening lay, not in the

parabolic method of teaching, but in the state of spiritual

insensibility at which, by their own guilt, they had previously

arrived. Through this, what might, and, in other circumstances, would,

have conveyed spiritual instruction, necessarily became that which

still further and fatally darkened and dulled their minds and hearts.

Thus, their own hardening merged into the judgment of

hardening.[2828]2828

We are now in some measure able to understand, why Christ now for the

first time adopted parabolic teaching. Its reason lay in the altered

circumstances of the case. All his former teaching had been plain,

although initial. In it He had set forth by Word, and exhibited by

fact (in miracles), that Kingdom of God which He had come to open to

all believers. The hearers had now ranged themselves into two parties.

Those who, whether temporarily or permanently (as the result would

show), had admitted these premisses, so far as they understood them,

were His professing disciples. On the other hand, the Pharisaic party

had now devised a consistent theory, according to which the acts, and

hence also the teaching, of Jesus, were of Satanic origin. Christ must

still preach the Kingdom; for that purpose had he come into the world.

Only, the presentation of that Kingdom must now be for decision. It

must separate the two classes, leading the one to clearer

understanding of the mysteries of the Kingdom - of what not only

seems, but to our limited thinking really is, mysterious; while the

other class of hearers would now regard these mysteries as wholly

unintelligible, incredible, and to be rejected. And the ground of this

lay in the respective positions of these two classes towards the

Kingdom. 'Whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have

more abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away

even that he hath.' And the mysterious manner in which they were

presented in Parables was alike suited to, and corresponded with, the

character of these 'mysteries of the Kingdom,' now set forth, not for

initial instruction, but for final decision. As the light from heaven

falls on earthly objects, the shadows are cast. But our perception of

them, and its mode, depend on the position which we occupy relatively

to that Light.

And so it was not only best, but most merciful, that these mysteries

of substance should now, also, be presented as mysteries of form in

Parables. Here each would see according to his standpoint towards the

Kingdom. And this was in turn determined by previous acceptance or

rejection of that truth, which had formerly been set forth in a plain

form in the teaching and acting of the Christ. Thus, while to the

opened eyes and hearing ears of the one class would be disclosed that,

which prophets and righteous men of old had desired but not attained,

to them who had voluntarily cast aside what they had, would only come,

in their seeing and hearing, the final judgment of hardening. So would

it be to each according to his standpoint. To the one would come the

grace of final revelation, to the other the final judgment which, in

the first place, had been of their own choice, but which, as they

voluntarily occupied their position relatively to Christ, had grown

into the fulfilment of the terrible prediction of Esaias concerning

the final hardening of Israel.[2829]2829

Thus much in general explanation. The record of the first series of

Parables[2830]2830 contains three separate accounts: that of the

Parables spoken to the people; that of the reason for the use of

parabolic teaching, and the explanation of the first Parables (both

addressed to the disciples); and, finally, another series of Parables

spoken to the disciples. To each of these we must briefly address

ourselves.

On that bright spring morning, when Jesus spoke from 'the ship' to the

multitude that crowded the shore, He addressed to them these four

Parables: concerning Him Who sowed,[2831]2831 concerning the Wheat and

the Tares, concerning the Mustard-Seed, and concerning the Leaven. The

first, or perhaps the two first of these, must be supplemented by what

may be designated as a fifth Parable, that of the Seed growing

unobservedly. This is the only Parable of which St. Mark alone has

preserved the record.[2832]2832 All these Parables refer, as is

expressly stated, to the Kingdom of God; that is, not to any special

phase or characteristic of it, but to the Kingdom itself, or, in other

words, to its history. They are all such as befit an open-air address

at that season of the year, in that locality, and to those hearers.

And yet there is such gradation and development in them as might well

point upwards and onwards.

The first Parable is that of Him Who sowed. We can almost picture to

ourselves the Saviour seated in the prow of the boat, as He points His

hearers to the rich plain over against Him, where the young corn,

still in the first green of its growing, is giving promise of harvest.

Like this is the Kingdom of Heaven which He has come to proclaim. Like

what? Not yet like that harvest, which is still in the future, but

like that field over there. The Sower[2833]2833 has gone forth to sow

the Good Seed. If we bear in mind a mode of sowing peculiar (if we are

not mistaken) to those times, the Parable gains in vividness.

According to Jewish authorities there was twofold sowing, as the seed

was either cast by the hand ({hebrew}) or by means of cattle

({hebrew}[2834]2834). In the latter case, a sack with holes was filled

with corn and laid on the back of the animal, so that, as it moved

onwards, the seed was thickly scattered. Thus it might well be, that

it would fall indiscriminately on beaten roadway,[2835]2835 on stony

places but thinly covered with soil, or where the thorns had not been

cleared away, or undergrowth from the thorn-hedge crept into the

field,[2836]2836 as well as on good ground. The result in each case

need not here be repeated. But what meaning would all this convey to

the Jewish hearers of Jesus? How could this sowing and growing be like

the Kingdom of God? Certainly not in the sense in which they expected

it. To them it was only a rich harvest, when all Israel would bear

plenteous fruit. Again, what was the Seed, and who the Sower? or what

could be meant by the various kinds of soil and their

unproductiveness?

To us, as explained by the Lord, all this seems plain. But to them

there could be no possibility of understanding, but much occasion for

misunderstanding it, unless, indeed, they stood in right relationship

to the 'Kingdom of God.' The initial condition requisite was to

believe that Jesus was the Divine Sower, and His Word the Seed of the

Kingdom: no other Sower than He, no other Seed of the Kingdom than His

Word. If this were admitted, they had at least the right premisses for

understanding 'this mystery of the Kingdom.' According to Jewish view

the Messiah was to appear in outward pomp, and by display of power to

establish the Kingdom. But this was the very idea of the Kingdom, with

which Satan had tempted Jesus at the outset of His Ministry.[2837]2837

In opposition to it was this 'mystery of the Kingdom,' according to

which it consisted in reception of the Seed of the Word. That

reception would depend on the nature of the soil, that is, on the mind

and heart of the hearers. The Kingdom of God was within: it came

neither by a display of power, nor even by this, that Israel, or else

the Gospel-hearers, were the field on which the Seed of the Kingdom

was sown. He had brought the Kingdom: the Sower had gone forth to sow.

This was of free grace - the Gospel. But the seed might fall on the

roadside, and so perish without even springing up. Or it might fall on

rocky soil, and so spring up rapidly, but wither before it showed

promise of fruit. Or it might fall where thorns grew along with, and

more rapidly than, it. And so it would, indeed, show promise of fruit;

the corn might appear in the ear; but that fruit would not come to

ripeness ('bring no fruit to perfection'[2838]2838), because the

thorns growing more rapidly would choke the corn. Lastly, to this

threefold faultiness of soil, through which the seed did not spring up

at all, or merely sprung up, or just reached the promise, but not the

perfection of fruit, corresponded a threefold degree of fruit-bearing

in the soil, according to which it brought forth thirtyfold,

sixtyfold, or an hundredfold, in the varying measure of its capacity.

If even the disciples failed to comprehend the whole bearing of this

'Mystery of the Kingdom,' we can believe how utterly strange and

un-Jewish such a Parable of the Messianic Kingdom must have sounded to

them, who had been influenced by the Pharisaic representations of the

Person and Teaching of Christ. And yet the while these very hearers

were, unconsciously to themselves, fulfilling what Jesus was speaking

to them in the Parable!

Whether or not the Parable recorded by St. Mark alone,[2839]2839

concerning the Seed growing unobservedly, was spoken afterwards in

private to the disciples, or, as seems more likely, at the first, and

to the people by the sea-shore, this appears the fittest place for

inserting it. If the first Parable, concerning the Sower and the Field

of Sowing, would prove to all who were outside the pale of

discipleship a 'mystery,' while to those within it would unfold

knowledge of the very mysteries of the Kingdom, this would even more

fully be the case in regard to this second or supplementary Parable.

In it we are only viewing that portion of the field, which the former

Parable had described as good soil. 'So is the Kingdom of God, as if a

man had cast the seed on the earth, and slept and rose, night and day,

and the seed sprang up and grew: how, he knows not himself.

Automatous[2840]2840 [self-acting] the earth beareth fruit: first

blade, then ear, then full wheat in the ear! But when the fruit

presents itself, immediately he sendeth forth[2841]2841 the sickle,

because the harvest is come.' The meaning of all this seems plain. As

the Sower, after the seed has been cast into the ground, can do no

more; he goes to sleep at night, and rises by day, the seed the

meanwhile growing, the Sower knows not how, and as his activity ceases

till the time that the fruit is ripe, when immediately he thrusts in

the sickle - so is the Kingdom of God. The seed is sown; but its

growth goes on, dependent on the law inherent in seed and soil,

dependent also on Heaven's blessing of sunshine and showers, till the

moment of ripeness, when the harvest-time is come. We can only go

about our daily work, or lie down to rest, as day and night alternate;

we see, but know not the how of the growth of the seed. Yet, assuredly

it will ripen, and when that moment has arrived, immediately the

sickle is thrust in, for the harvest is come. And so also with the

Sower. His outward activity on earth was in the sowing, and it will be

in the harvesting. What lies between them is of that other

Dispensation of the Spirit, till He again send forth His reapers into

His field. But all this must have been to those 'without' a great

mystery, in no wise compatible with Jewish notions; while to them

'within' it proved a yet greater, and very needful unfolding of the

mysteries of the Kingdom, with very wide application of them.

The 'mystery' is made still further mysterious, or else it is still

further unfolded, in the next Parable concerning the Tares sown among

the Wheat. According to the common view, these Tares represent what is

botanically known as the 'bearded Darnel' (Lolium temulentum), a

poisonous rye-grass, very common in the East, 'entirely like wheat

until the ear appears,' or else (according to some), the 'creeping

wheat' or 'couch-grass' (Triticum repens), of which the roots creep

underground and become intertwined with those of the wheat. But the

Parable gains in meaning if we bear in mind that, according to ancient

Jewish (and, indeed, modern Eastern) ideas, the Tares were not of

different seed,[2842]2842 but only a degenerate kind of

wheat.[2843]2843 Whether in legend or symbol, Rabbinism has it that

even the ground had been guilty of fornication before the judgment of

the Flood, so that when wheat was sown tares sprang up.[2844]2844 The

Jewish hearers of Jesus would, therefore, think of these tares as

degenerate kind of wheat, originally sprung at the time of the Flood,

through the corruptness of the earth, but now, alas! so common in

their fields; wholly undistinguishable from the wheat, till the fruit

appeared: noxious, poisonous, and requiring to be separated from the

wheat, if the latter was not to become useless.

With these thoughts in mind, let us now try to realise the scene

pictured. Once more we see the field on which the corn is growing - we

know not how. The sowing time is past. 'The Kingdom of Heaven is

become[2845]2845 like to a man who sowed good seed in his field. But

in the time that men sleep came his enemy and over-sowed

tares[2846]2846 in (upon) the midst[2847]2847 of the wheat, and went

away.' Thus far the picture is true to nature, since such deeds of

enmity were, and still are, common in the East. And so matters would

go on unobserved, since, whatever kind of 'tares' may be meant, it

would, from their likeness, be for some time impossible to distinguish

them from the wheat. 'But when the herbage grew and made fruit, then

appeared (became manifest) also the tares.' What follows is equally

true to fact, since, according to the testimony of travellers, most

strenuous efforts are always made in the East to weed out the tares.

Similarly, in the parable, the servants of the householder are

introduced as inquiring whence these tares had come; and on the reply:

'A hostile person has done this,' they further ask: 'Wilt thou then

that we go (straightway) and gather them together?' The absence of any

reference to the rooting up or burning the tares, is intended to

indicate, that the only object which the servants had in view was to

keep the wheat pure and unmixed for the harvest. But this their final

object would have been frustrated by the procedure, which their

inconsiderate zeal suggested. It would, indeed, have been quite

possible to distinguish the tares from the wheat - and the Parable

proceeds on this very assumption - for, by their fruit they would be

known. But in the present instance separation would have been

impossible, without, at the same time, uprooting some of the wheat.

For, the tares had been sown right into the midst, and not merely by

the side, of the wheat; and their roots and blades must have become

intertwined. And so they must grow together to the harvest. Then such

danger would no longer exist, for the period of growing was past, and

the wheat had to be gathered into the barn. Then would be the right

time to bid the reapers first gather the tares into bundles for

burning, that afterwards the wheat, pure and unmixed, might be stored

in the garner.

True to life as the picture is, yet the Parable was, of all others,

perhaps the most un-Jewish, and therefore mysterious and

unintelligible. Hence the disciples specially asked explanation of

this only, which from its main subject they rightly designated as the

Parable 'of the Tares.'[2848]2848 Yet this was also perhaps the most

important for them to understand. For already 'the Kingdom of Heaven

is become like' this, although the appearance of fruit has not yet

made it manifest, that tares have been sown right into the midst of

the wheat. But they would soon have to learn it in bitter experience

and as a grievous temptation,[2849]2849 and not only as regarded the

impressionable, fickle multitude, nor even the narrower circle of

professing followers of Jesus, but that, alas! in their very midst

there was a traitor And they would have to learn it more and more in

the time to come, as we have to learn it to all ages, till the 'Age-'

or 'Æon-completion.'[2850]2850 Most needful, yet most mysterious also,

is this other lesson, as the experience of the Church has shown, since

almost every period of her history has witnessed, not only the

recurrence of the proposal to make the wheat unmixed, while growing,

by gathering out the tares, but actual attempts towards it. All such

have proved failures, because the field is the wide 'world,' not a

narrow sect; because the tares have been sown into the midst of the

wheat, and by the enemy; and because, if such gathering were to take

place, the roots and blades of tares and wheat would be found so

intertwined, that harm would come to the wheat. But why try to gather

the tares together, unless from undiscerning zeal? Or what have we,

who are only the owner's servants, to do with it, since we are not

bidden of Him? The 'Æon-completion' will witness the harvest, when the

separation of tares and wheat may not only be accomplished with

safety, but shall become necessary. For the wheat must be garnered in

the heavenly storehouse, and the tares bound in bundles to be burned.

Then the harvesters shall be the Angels of Christ, the gathered tares

'all the stumbling-blocks and those who do the lawlessness,' and their

burning the casting of them 'into the oven of the fire.'[2851]2851

More mysterious still, and, if possible, even more needful, was the

instruction that the Enemy who sowed the tares was the Devil. To the

Jews, nay, to us all, it may seem a mystery, that in 'the Messianic

Kingdom of Heaven' there should be a mixture of tares with the wheat,

the more mysterious, that the Baptist had predicted that the coming

Messiah would thoroughly purge His floor. But to those who were

capable of receiving it, it would be explained by the fact that the

Devil was 'the Enemy' of Christ, and of His Kingdom, and that he had

sowed those tares. This would, at the same time, be the most effective

answer to the Pharisaic charge, that Jesus was the Incarnation of

Satan, and the vehicle of his influence. And once instructed in this,

they would have further to learn the lessons of faith and patience,

connected with the fact that the good seed of the Kingdom grew in the

field of the world, and hence that, by the very conditions of its

existence, separation by the hand of man was impossible so long as the

wheat was still growing. Yet that separation would surely be made in

the great harvest, to certain, terrible loss of the children of the

wicked one,[2852]2852 and to the 'sun-like forthshining' in glory of

the righteous in the Kingdom prepared by their Father.

The first Parables were intended to present the mysteries of the

Kingdom as illustrated by the sowing, growing, and intermixture of the

Seed. The concluding two Parables set forth another equally mysterious

characteristic of the Kingdom: that of its development and power, as

contrasted with its small and weak beginnings. In the Parable of the

Mustard-seed this is shown as regards the relation of the Kingdom to

the outer world; in that of the Leaven, in reference to the world

within us. The one exhibits the extensiveness, the other the

intensiveness, of its power; in both cases at first hidden, almost

imperceptible, and seemingly wholly inadequate to the final result.

Once more we say it, that such Parables must have been utterly

unintelligible to all who did not see in the humble, despised,

Nazarene, and in His teaching, the Kingdom. But to those whose eyes,

ears and hearts had been opened, they would carry most needed

instruction and most precious comfort and assurance. Accordingly, we

do not find that the disciples either asked or received an

interpretation of these Parables.

A few remarks will set the special meaning of these Parables more

clearly before us. Here also the illustrations used may have been at

hand. Close by the fields, covered with the fresh green or growing

corn, to which Jesus had pointed, may have been the garden with its

growing herbs, bushes and plants, and the home of the householder,

whose wife may at that moment have been in sight, busy preparing the

weekly provision of bread. At any rate, it is necessary to keep in

mind the homeliness of these illustrations. The very idea of Parables

implies, not strict scientific accuracy, but popular pictorialness. It

is characteristic of them to present vivid sketches that appeal to the

popular mind, and exhibit such analogies of higher truths as can be

readily perceived by all. Those addressed were not to weigh every

detail, either logically or scientifically, but at once to recognise

the aptness of the illustration as presented to the popular mind.

Thus, as regards the first of these two Parables, the seed of the

mustard-plant passed in popular parlance as the smallest of

seeds.[2853]2853 In fact, the expression, 'small as a mustard-seed,'

had become proverbial, and was used, not only by our Lord,[2854]2854

but frequently by the Rabbis, to indicate the smallest amount, such as

the least drop of blood,[2855]2855 the least defilement,[2856]2856 or

the smallest remnant of sun-glow in the sky.[2857]2857 'But when it is

grown, it is greater than the garden-herbs.' Indeed, it looks no

longer like a large garden-herb or shrub, but 'becomes,' or rather,

appears like, 'a tree' - as St. Luke puts it, 'a great

tree,'[2858]2858 of course, not in comparison with other trees, but

with garden-shrubs. Such growth of the mustard seed was also a fact

well known at the time, and, indeed, still observed in the

East.[2859]2859

This is the first and main point in the Parable. The other, concerning

the birds which are attracted to its branches and 'lodge' - literally,

'make tents'[2860]2860 - there, or else under the shadow of

it,[2861]2861 is subsidiary. Pictorial, of course, this trait would

be, and we can the more readily understand that birds would be

attracted to the branches or the shadow of the mustard-plant, when we

know that mustard was in Palestine mixed with, or used as food for

pigeons,[2862]2862 and presumably would be sought by other birds. And

the general meaning would the more easily be apprehended, that a tree,

whose wide-spreading branches afforded lodgment to the birds of

heaven, was a familiar Old Testament figure for a mighty kingdom that

gave shelter to the nations.[2863]2863 Indeed, it is specifically used

as an illustration of the Messianic Kingdom.[2864]2864 Thus the

Parable would point to this, so full of mystery to the Jews, so

explanatory of the mystery to the disciples: that the Kingdom of

Heaven, planted in the field of the world as the smallest seed, in the

most humble and unpromising manner, would grow till it far outstripped

all other similar plants, and gave shelter to all nations under

heaven.

To this extensive power of the Kingdom corresponded its intensive

character, whether in the world at large or in the individual. This

formed the subject of the last of the Parables addressed at this time

to the people - that of the Leaven. We need not here resort to

ingenious methods of explaining 'the three measures,' or Seahs, of

meal in which the leaven was hid. Three Seahs were an Ephah,[2865]2865

of which the exact capacity differed in various districts. According

to the so-called 'wilderness,' or original Biblical, measurement, it

was supposed to be a space holding 432 eggs,[2866]2866 while the

Jerusalem ephah was one-fifth, and the Sepphoris (or Galilean) ephah

two-fifths, or, according to another authority, one-half

larger.[2867]2867 To mix 'three measures' of meal was common in

Biblical, as well as in later times.[2868]2868 Nothing further was

therefore conveyed than the common process of ordinary, everyday life.

And in this, indeed, lies the very point of the Parable, that the

Kingdom of God, when received within, would seem like leaven hid, but

would gradually pervade, assimilate, and transform the whole of our

common life.

With this most un-Jewish, and, to the unbelieving multitude, most

mysterious characterisation of the Kingdom of Heaven, the Saviour

dismissed the people. Enough had been said to them and for them, if

they had but ears to hear. And now He was again alone with the

disciples 'in the house' at Capernaum, to which they had

returned.[2869]2869 Many new and deeper thoughts of the Kingdom had

come to them. But why had He so spoken to the multitude, in a manner

so different, as regarded not only the form, but even the substance of

His teaching? And did they quite understand its solemn meaning

themselves? More especially, who was the enemy whose activity would

threaten the safety of the harvest? Of that harvest they had already

heard on the way through Samaria.[2870]2870 And what were those

'tares,' which were to continue in their very midst till the judicial

separation of the end? To these questions Jesus now made answer. His

statement of the reason for adopting in the present instance the

parabolic mode of teaching would, at the same time, give them farther

insight into those very mysteries of the Kingdom which it had been the

object of these Parables to set forth.[2871]2871 His unsolicited

explanation of the details of the first Parable would call attention

to points that might readily have escaped their notice, but which, for

warning and instruction, it most behooved them to keep in view.

The understanding of the first Parable seems to have shown them, how

much hidden meaning this teaching conveyed, and to have stimulated

their desire for comprehending what the presence and machinations of

the hostile Pharisees might, in some measure, lead them to perceive in

dim outline. Yet it was not to the Pharisees that the Lord referred.

The Enemy was the Devil; the field, the world; the good seed, the

children of the Kingdom; the tares, the children of the Wicked One.

And most markedly did the Lord, in this instance, not explain the

Parable, as the first one, in its details, but only indicate, so to

speak, the stepping-stones for its understanding. This, not only to

train the disciples, but because - unlike the first Parable - that of

the Tares would only in the future and increasingly unfold its

meaning.

But even this was not all. The disciples had now knowledge concerning

the mysteries of the Kingdom. But that Kingdom was not matter of the

understanding only, but of personal apprehension. This implied

discovery of its value, personal acquisition of it, and surrender of

all to its possession. And this mystery of the Kingdom was next

conveyed to the disciples in those Parables specially addressed to,

and suited only for, them.

Kindred, or rather closely connected, as are the two Parables of the

Treasure hid in the Field and of the Pearl of Great Price - now spoken

to the disciples - their differences are sufficiently marked. In the

first, one who must probably be regarded as intending to buy a, if not

this, field, discovers a treasure hidden there, and in his joy parts

with all else to become owner[2872]2872 of the field and of the hidden

treasure which he had so unexpectedly found. Some difficulty has been

expressed in regard to the morality of such a transaction. In reply it

may be observed, that it was, at least, in entire accordance with

Jewish law.[2873]2873 [2874]2874 If a man had found a treasure in

loose coins among the corn, it would certainly be his, if he bought

the corn. If he had found it on the ground, or in the soil, it would

equally certainly belong to him, if he could claim ownership of the

soil, and even if the field were not his own, unless others could

prove their right to it. The law went so far as to adjudge to the

purchaser of fruits anything found among these fruits. This will

suffice to vindicate a question of detail, which, in any case, should

not be too closely pressed in a parabolic history.

But to resume our analysis. In the second Parable we have a wise

merchantman who travels in search of pearls, and when he finds one

which in value exceeds all else, he returns and sells all that he has,

in order to buy this unique gem. The supreme value of the Kingdom, the

consequent desire to appropriate it, and the necessity of parting with

all else for this purpose, are the points common to this and the

previous Parable. But in the one case, it is marked that this treasure

is hid from common view in the field, and the finder makes unexpected

discovery of it, which fills him with joy. In the other case, the

merchantman is, indeed, in search of pearls, but he has the wisdom to

discover the transcendent value of this one gem, and the yet greater

wisdom to give up all further search and to acquire it at the

surrender of everything else. Thus, two different aspects of the

Kingdom, and two different conditions on the part of those who, for

its sake, equally part with all, are here set before the disciples.

Nor was the closing Parable of the Draw-net less needful Assuredly it

became, and would more and more become, them to know, that mere

discipleship - mere inclusion in the Gospel-net - was not sufficient.

That net let down into the sea of this world would include much which,

when the net was at last drawn to shore, would prove worthless or even

hurtful. To be a disciple, then, was not enough. Even here there would

be separation. Not only the tares, which the Enemy had designedly sown

into the midst of the wheat, but even much that the Gospel-net, cast

into the sea, had inclosed, would, when brought to land, prove fit

only to be cast away, into 'the oven of the fire where there is the

wailing and the gnashing of teeth.'

So ended that spring-day of first teaching in Parables, to the people

by the Lake, and in the house at Capernaum to the disciples. Dim,

shadowy outlines, growing larger and more faint in their tracings to

the people; shadowy outlines, growing brighter and clearer to all who

were disciples. Most wondrous instruction to all, and in all aspects

of it; which even negative critics admit to have really formed part of

Christ's own original teaching. But if this be the case, we have two

questions of decisive character to ask. Undoubtedly, these Parables

were un-Jewish. This appears, not only from a comparison with the

Jewish views of the Kingdom, but from the fact that their meaning was

unintelligible to the hearers of Jesus, and from this, that, rich as

Jewish teaching is in Parables, none in the least parallel to them can

be adduced.[2875]2875 Our first question, therefore, is: Whence this

un-Jewish and anti-Jewish teaching concerning the Kingdom on the part

of Jesus of Nazareth?

Our second question goes still farther. For, if Jesus was not a

Prophet - and, if a Prophet, then also the Son of God - yet no more

strangely unexpected prophecy, minutely true in all its details, could

be conceived, than that concerning His Kingdom which His parabolic

description of it conveyed. Has not History, in the strange,

unexpected fulfilling of that which no human ingenuity at the time

could have forecast, and no pen have described with more minute

accuracy of detail, proved Him to be more than a mere man - One sent

from God, the Divine King of the Divine Kingdom, in all the

vicissitudes which such a Divine Kingdom must experience when set up

upon earth?

CHAPTER XXIV.

CHRIST STILLS THE STORM ON THE LAKE OF GALILEE.

(St. Matt. viii. 18, 23-27; St. Mark iv. 35-41; St. Luke viii. 22-25.)

IT was the evening of that day of new teaching, and once more great

multitudes were gathering to Him. What more, or, indeed, what else,

could He have said to those to whom He had all that morning spoken in

Parables, which hearing they had not heard nor understood? It was

this, rather than weariness after a long day's working, which led to

the resolve to pass to the other side. To merely physical weariness

Jesus never subordinated his work. If, therefore, such had been the

motive, the proposal to withdraw for rest would have come from the

disciples, while here the Lord Himself gave command to pass to the

other side. In truth, after that day's teaching it was better, alike

for these multitudes and for His disciples that He should withdraw.

And so 'they took Him even as He was' - that is, probably without

refreshment of food, or even preparation of it for the journey. This

indicates how readily, nay, eagerly, the disciples obeyed the behest.

Whether in their haste they heeded not the signs of the coming storm;

whether they had the secret feeling, that ship and sea which bore such

burden were safe from tempest; or, whether it was one of those storms

which so often rise suddenly, and sweep with such fury over the Lake

of Galilee, must remain undetermined. He was in 'the ship'[2876]2876 -

whether that of the sons of Jonas, or of Zebedee - the well-known

boat, which was always ready for His service, whether as pulpit,

resting-place, or means of journeying. But the departure had not been

so rapid as to pass unobserved; and the ship was attended by other

boats, which bore those that would fain follow Him. In the stern of

the ship, on the low bench where the steersman sometimes takes rest,

was pillowed the Head of Jesus. Weariness, faintness, hunger,

exhaustion, asserted their mastery over His true humanity. He, Whom

earliest Apostolic testimony[2877]2877 proclaimed to have been in 'the

form of God,' slept. Even this evidences the truth of the whole

narrative. If Apostolic tradition had devised this narrative to

exhibit His Divine Power, why represent Him as faint and asleep in the

ship; and, if it would portray Him as deeply sleeping for very

weariness, how could it ascribe to Him the power of stilling the storm

by His rebuke? Each of these by themselves, but not the two in their

combination, would be as legends are written. Their coincidence is due

to the incidence of truth. Indeed, it is characteristic of the History

of the Christ, and all the more evidential that it is so evidently

undesigned in the structure of the narrative, that every deepest

manifestation of His Humanity is immediately attended by highest

display of His Divinity, and each special display of His Divine Power

followed by some marks of His true Humanity. Assuredly, no narrative

could be more consistent with the fundamental assumption that He is

the God-Man.

Thus viewed, the picture is unspeakably sublime. Jesus is asleep, for

very weariness and hunger, in the stern of the ship, His head on that

low wooden bench, while the heavens darken, the wild wind swoops down

those mountain-gorges, howling with hungry rage over the trembling

sea; the waves rise and toss, and lash and break over the ship, and

beat into it, and the white foam washes at His feet His Humanity here

appears as true as when He lay cradled in the manger; His Divinity, as

when the sages from the East laid their offerings at His Feet. But the

danger is increasing - 'so that the ship was now filling.'[2878]2878

They who watched it, might be tempted to regard the peaceful rest of

Jesus, not as indicative of Divine Majesty - as it were, sublime

consciousness of absolute safety - because they did not fully realize

Who He was. In that case it would, therefore, rather mean absolute

weakness in not being able, even at such a time, to overcome the

demands of our lower nature; real indifference, also, to their fate -

not from want of sympathy, but of power. In short, it might lead up to

the inference that the Christ was a no-Christ, and the Kingdom of

which he had spoken in Parables, not His, in the sense of being

identified with His Person.

In all this we perceive already, in part, the internal connection

between the teaching of that day and the miracle of that evening. Both

were quite novel: the teaching by Parables, and then the help in a

Parable. Both were founded on the Old Testament: the teaching on its

predictions,[2879]2879 the miracle on its proclamations of the special

Divine Manifestations in the sea;[2880]2880 and both show that

everything depended on the view taken of the Person of the Christ.

Further teaching comes to us from the details of the narrative which

follows. It has been asked, with which of the words recorded by the

Synoptists the disciples had wakened the Lord: with those of entreaty

to save them,[2881]2881 or with those of impatience, perhaps uttered

by Peter himself?[2882]2882 But why may not both accounts represent

what had passed? Similarly, it has been asked, which came first - the

Lord's rebuke of the disciples, and after it that of the wind and

sea,[2883]2883 or the converse?[2884]2884 But, may it not be that each

recorded that first which had most impressed itself on his mind? - St.

Matthew, who had been in the ship that night, the needful rebuke to

the disciples; St. Mark and St. Luke, who had heard it from

others,[2885]2885 the help first, and then the rebuke?

Yet it is not easy to understand what the disciples had really

expected, when they wakened the Christ with their 'Lord, save us - we

perish!' Certainly, not that which actually happened, since not only

wonder, but fear, came over them[2886]2886 as they witnessed it.

Probably theirs would be a vague, undefined belief in the unlimited

possibility of all in connection with the Christ. A belief this, which

seems to us quite natural as we think of the gradually emerging, but

still partially cloud-capped height of His Divinity, of which, as yet,

only the dim outlines were visible to them. A belief this, which also

accounts for the co-existing, not of disbelief, nor even of unbelief,

but of inability of apprehension, which, as we have seen,

characterised the bearing of the Virgin-Mother. And it equally

characterised that of the disciples up to the Resurrection-morning,

bringing them to the empty tomb, and filling them with unbelieving

wonder that the tomb was empty. Thus, we have come to that stage in

the History of the Christ when, in opposition to the now formulated

charge of His enemies as to His Person, neither His Teaching nor His

Working could be fully understood, except so far as his Personality

was understood - that He was of God and Very God. And so we are

gradually reaching on towards the expediency and the need of the

coming of the Holy Ghost to reveal that mystery of His Person.

Similarly, the two great stages in the history of the Church's

learning were: the first - to come to knowledge of what He was, by

experience of what He did; the second - to come to experience of what

He did and does, by knowledge of what He is. The former, which

corresponds, in the Old Testament, to the patriarchal age, is that of

the period when Jesus was on earth; the second, which answers to the

history of Israel, is that of the period after His Ascension into

Heaven and the Descent of the Holy Ghost.

When 'He was awakened'[2887]2887 by the voice of His disciples, 'He

rebuked the wind and the sea,' as Jehovah had of old[2888]2888 - just

as He had 'rebuked' the fever,[2889]2889 and the paroxysm of the

demonised.[2890]2890 For, all are His creatures, even when lashed to

frenzy of the 'hostile power.' And the sea He commanded as if it were

a sentient being: 'Be silent! Be silenced!' And immediately the wind

was bound, the panting waves throbbed into stillness, and a great calm

of rest fell upon the Lake. For, when Christ sleepeth, there is storm;

when He waketh, great peace. But over these men who had erst wakened

Him with their cry, now crept wonderment, awe, and fear. No longer, as

at His first wonder-working in Capernaum, was it: 'What is

this?'[2891]2891 but 'Who, then, is this?'[2892]2892 And so the grand

question, which the enmity of the Pharisees had raised, and which, in

part, had been answered in the Parables of teaching, was still more

fully and practically met in what, not only to the disciples, but to

all time, was a Parable of help. And Jesus also did wonder, but at

that which alone could call forth His wonder - the unreachingness of

their faith: where was it? and how was it, they had no faith?

Thus far the history, related, often almost in the same words, by the

three Evangelists. On all sides the narrative is admitted to form part

of the primitive Evangelic tradition. But if so, then, even on the

showing of our opponents, it must have had some foundation in an event

surpassing the ordinary facts in the history of Jesus. Accordingly, of

all negative critics, at most only two venture to dismiss it as

unfounded on fact. But such a bold assumption would rather increase

than diminish the difficulty. For, if legend it be, its invention and

insertion into the primitive record must have had some historical

reason. Such, however, it is absolutely impossible here to trace. The

Old Testament contains no analogous history which it might have been

wished to imitate; Jewish Messianic expectancy afforded no basis for

it; and there is absolutely no Rabbinic parallel[2893]2893 which could

be placed by its side. Similar objections apply to the suggestion of

exaggeration of some real event (Keim). For, the essence of the

narrative lies in its details, of which the origin and the universal

acceptance in the primitive belief of the Church have to be accounted

for. Nor is the task of those negative critics more easy, who,

admitting the foundation in fact for this narrative, have suggested

various theories to account for its miraculous details. Most of these

explanations are so unnatural,[2894]2894 as only to point the contrast

between the ingenuity of the nineteenth century and the simple, vivid

language of the original narrative. For it seems equally impossible to

regard it as based either on a misunderstanding of the words of Jesus

during a storm (Paulus), or on the calm faith of Jesus when even the

helmsman despaired of safety (Schenkel), or to represent it as only in

some way a symbol of analogous mental phenomena (Ammon,

Schleiermacher, Hase, Weiszäcker, and others). The very variety of

explanations proposed, of which not one agrees with the others, shows,

that none of them has proved satisfactory to any but their own

inventors. And of all it may be said, that they have no foundation

whatever in the narrative itself. Thus the only alternative left is

either wholly to reject, or wholly to accept, the narrative.

If our judgment is to be determined by the ordinary rules of

historical criticism, we cannot long be in doubt which of these

propositions is true. Here is a narrative, which has the consensus of

the three Evangelists; which admittedly formed part of the original

Evangelic tradition; for the invention of which no specific motive can

possibly be assigned; and which is told with a simplicity of language

and a pictorial vividness of detail that carry their own evidence.

Other corroborative points, such as the unlikeliness of the invention

of such a situation for the Christ, or of such bearing of the

disciples, have been previously indicated. Absolute historical

demonstration of the event is, of course, in the nature of things

impossible. But, besides the congruousness to the Parabolic teaching

which had preceded this Parabolic miracle, and the accord of the

Saviour's rebuke with His mode of silencing the hostile elements on

other occasions, some further considerations in evidence may be

offered to the thoughtful reader.

For, first, in this 'dominion over the sea,' we recognise, not only

the fullest refutation of the Pharisaic misrepresentation of the

Person of Christ, but the realisation in the Ideal Man of the ideal of

man as heaven-destined,[2895]2895 and the initial fulfilment of the

promise which this destination implied. 'Creation' has, indeed, been

'made subject to vanity;'[2896]2896 but this 'evil,' which implies not

merely decay but rebellion, was directly due to the Fall of man, and

will be removed at the final 'manifestation of the sons of God.' And

here St. Paul so far stands on the same ground as Jewish theology,

which also teaches that 'although all things were created in their

perfectness, yet when the first Adam sinned, they were

corrupted.'[2897]2897 Christ's dominion over the sea was, therefore,

only the Second and Unfallen Adam's real dominion over creation, and

the pledge of its restoration, and of our dominion in the future. And

this seems also to throw fresh light on Christ's rebuke, whether of

storm, disease, or demoniac possession. Thus there is a grand

consistency in this narrative, as regards the Scriptural presentation

of the Christ.

Again, the narrative expresses very markedly, that the interposition

of Christ, alike in itself, and in the manner of it, was wholly

unexpected by, indeed, contrary to the expectation of, the disciples.

This also holds true in regard to other of the great manifestations of

Christ, up to His Resurrection from the dead. This, of course, proves

that the narrative was not founded on existing Jewish ideas. But there

is more than this. The gratuitous introduction of traits which, so far

from glorifying, would rather detract from a legendary Christ, while

at the same time they seriously reflect on the disciples, presumably

the inventors of the legend, appears to us wholly inconsistent with

the assumption that the narrative is spurious.

Nor ought we to overlook another circumstance. While we regard the

narrative as that of an historical occurrence - indeed, because we do

so - we cannot fail to perceive its permanent symbolic and typical

bearing. It were, indeed, impossible to describe either the history of

the Church of Christ, or the experience of individual disciples, more

accurately, or with wider and deeper capability of application, than

in the Parable of this Miracle. And thus it is morally true to all

ages; just because it was historically true at the first.[2898]2898

And as we enter on this field of contemplation, many views open to us.

The true Humanity of the Saviour, by the side of His Divine Power; the

sleeping Jesus and the Almighty Word of rebuke and command to the

elements, which lay them down obedient at His feet: this sharp-edged

contrast resolved into a higher unity - how true is it to the

fundamental thought of the Gospel-History! Then this other contrast of

the failure of faith, and then the excitement of the disciples; and of

the calm of the sleeping, and then the Majesty of the wakening Christ.

And, lastly, yet this third contrast of the helplessness and

despondency of the disciples and the Divine certitude of conscious

Omnipotence.

We perceive only difficulties and the seemingly impossible, as we

compare what may be before us with that which we consciously possess.

He also makes this outlook: but only to know and show, that with Him

there can be no difficulty, since all is His - and all may be ours,

since He has come for our help and is in the ship. One thing only He

wonders at - the shortcomings of our faith; and one thing only makes

it impossible for Him to help - our unbelief.

THE ASCENT: FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF

TRANSFIGURATION

CHAPTER XXV.

AT GERASA - THE HEALING OF THE DEMONISED.

(St. Matt. viii. 28-34; St. Mark v. 1-20; St. Luke viii. 26-39.)

THAT day of wonders was not yet ended. Most writers have, indeed,

suggested, that the healing of the demonised on the other side took

place at early dawn of the day following the storm on the Lake. But

the distance is so short that, even making allowance for the delay by

the tempest, the passage could scarcely have occupied the whole

night.[2899]2899 This supposition would be further confirmed, if 'the

evening' when Jesus embarked was what the Jews were wont to call 'the

first evening,' that is, the time when the sun was declining in the

heaven, but before it had actually set, the latter time being 'the

second evening.'[2900]2900 For, it seems most unlikely that multitudes

would have resorted to Jesus at Capernaum after 'the second evening,'

or that either the disciples or other boats would have put to sea

after nightfall. On the other hand, the scene gains in grandeur - has,

so to speak, a fitting background - if we suppose the Saviour and His

disciples to have landed on the other side late in the evening, when

perhaps the silvery moon was shedding her pale light on the weird

scene, and laying her halo around the shadows cast upon the sea by the

steep cliff down which the herd of swine hurried and fell. This would

also give time afterwards for the dispersion, not only into 'the

city,' but into 'the country' of them who had fed the swine. In that

case, of course, it would be in the early morning that the Gerasenes

afterwards resorted to Jesus and that He again returned to Capernaum.

And, lastly this would allow sufficient time for those miracles which

took place on that same day in Capernaum after His return thither.

Thus, all the circumstances lead us to regard the healing of the

demonised at Gerasa as a night-scene, immediately on Christ's arrival

from Capernaum, and after the calming of the storm at sea.

It gives not only life to the narrative, but greatly illustrates it,

that we can with confidence describe the exact place where our Lord

and His disciples touched the other shore. The ruins right over

against the plain of Gennesaret, which still bear the name of Kersa or

Gersa, must represent the ancient Gerasa.[2901]2901 This is the

correct reading in St. Mark's, and probably in St. Luke's, perhaps

also in St. Matthew's Gospel.[2902]2902 The locality entirely meets

the requirements of the narrative. About a quarter of an hour to the

south of Gersa is a steep bluff, which descends abruptly on a narrow

ledge of shore. A terrified herd running down this cliff could not

have recovered its foothold, and must inevitably have been hurled into

the Lake beneath. Again, the whole country around is burrowed with

limestone caverns and rock-chambers for the dead, such as those which

were the dwelling of the demonised. Altogether the scene forms a

fitting background to the narrative.

From these tombs the demonised, who is specially singled out by St.

Mark and St. Luke, as well as his less prominent companion,[2903]2903

came forth to meet Jesus. Much that is both erroneous and misleading

has been written on Jewish Demonology. According to common Jewish

superstition, the evil spirits dwelt especially in lonely desolate

places, and also among tombs.[2904]2904 We must here remember what has

previously been explained as to the confusion in the consciousness of

the demonised between their own notions and the ideas imposed on them

by the demons. It is quite in accordance with the Jewish notions of

the demonised, that, according to the more circumstantial account of

St. Luke, he should feel as it were driven into the deserts, and that

he was in the tombs, while, according to St. Mark, he was 'night and

day in the tombs and in the mountains,' the very order of the words

indicating the notion (as in Jewish belief), that it was chiefly at

night that evil spirits were wont to haunt burying-places.

In calling attention to this and similar particulars, we repeat, that

this must be kept in view as characteristic of the demonised, that

they were incapable of separating their own consciousness and ideas

from the influence of the demon, their own identity being merged, and

to that extent lost, in that of their tormentors. In this respect the

demonised state was also kindred to madness. Self-consciousness, or

rather what may be termed Individuism, i.e. the consciousness of

distinct and independent individuality, and with it the power of

self-origination in matters mental and moral (which some might term an

aspect of free volition), distinguish the human soul from the mere

animal spirit. But in maniacal disease this power is in abeyance, or

temporarily lost through physical causes, such as disease of the brain

as the medium of communication between the mind and the world of

sense; disease of the nervous system, through which ordinarily

impressions are conveyed to and from the sensorium; or disease of both

brain and nervous system, when previously existing impressions on the

brain (in memory, and hence possibly imagination) may be excited

without corresponding outward causes. If in such cases the absolute

power of self-origination and self-action is lost to the mind, habits

of sin and vice (or moral disease) may have an analogous effect as

regards moral freedom - the power of moral self-origination and

action. In the demonised state the two appear combined, the cause

being neither disease nor vice, but the presence of a superior power

of evil. This loss of individuism, and the subjection of one's

identity to that of the demon might, while it lasted, be called

temporary 'possession,' in so far as the mental and moral condition of

the person was for the time not one of freedom and origination, but in

the control of the possessing demon.

One practical inference may even now be drawn from this somewhat

abstruse discussion. The language and conduct of the demonised,

whether seemingly his own, or that of the demons who influenced him,

must always be regarded as a mixture of the Jewish-human and the

demoniacal. The demonised speaks and acts as a Jew under the control

of a demon. Thus, if he chooses solitary places by day, and tombs by

night, it is not that demons really preferred such habitations, but

that the Jews imagined it, and that the demons, acting on the existing

consciousness, would lead him, in accordance with his preconceived

notions, to select such places. Here also mental disease offers points

of analogy. For, the demonised would speak and act in accordance with

his previous (Jewish) demonological ideas. He would not become a new

man, but be the old man, only under the influence of the demon, just

as in mania a person truly and consistently speaks and acts, although

under the false impressions which a diseased brain conveys to him. The

fact that in the demonised state a man's identity was not superseded,

but controlled, enables us to account for many phenomena without

either confounding demonism with mania, or else imputing to our Lord

such accommodation to the notions of the times, as is not only

untenable in itself, but forbidden even by the language of the present

narrative.

The description of the demonised, coming out of the tombs to meet

Jesus as He touched the shore at Gerasa, is vivid in the extreme. His

violence, the impossibility of control by others,[2905]2905 the

absence of self-control,[2906]2906 his homicidal,[2907]2907 and almost

suicidal,[2908]2908 frenzy, are all depicted. Evidently, it was the

object to set forth the extreme degree of the demonised state. Christ,

Who had been charged by the Pharisees with being the embodiment and

messenger of Satan, is here face to face with the extreme

manifestation of demoniac power and influence. It is once more, then,

a Miracle in Parable which is about to take place. The question, which

had been raised by the enemies, is about to be brought to the issue of

a practical demonstration. We do not deny that the contest and the

victory, this miracle, nay, the whole series of miracles of which it

forms part, are extraordinary, even in the series of Christ's

miracles. Our explanation proceeds on the very ground that such was,

and must have been, the case. The teaching by Parables, and the

parabolic miracles which follow, form, so to speak, an ascending

climax, in contrast to the terrible charge which by-and-by would

assume the proportions of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, and issue

in the betrayal and judicial murder of Jesus. There are critical

epochs in the history of the Kingdom of God, when the power of evil,

standing out in sharpest contrast, challenges that overwhelming

manifestation of the Divine, as such, to bear down and crush that

which opposes it. Periods of that kind are characterised by miraculous

interposition of power, unique even in Bible-history. Such a period

was, under the Old Testament, that of Elijah and Elisha, with its

altogether exceptional series of miracles; and, under the New

Testament, that after the first formulated charge of the Pharisees

against the Christ.

With irresistible power the demonised was drawn to Jesus, as He

touched the shore at Gerasa. As always, the first effect of the

contact was a fresh paroxysm,[2909]2909 but in this peculiar case not

physical, but moral. As always also, the demons knew Jesus, and His

Presence seemed to constrain their confession of themselves - and

therefore of Him. As in nature the introduction of a dominant element

sometimes reveals the hidden presence of others, which are either

attracted or repelled by it, so the Presence of Christ obliged the

manifestation, and, in the case of these evil spirits, the

self-confession, of the powers of evil. In some measure it is the same

still. The introduction of grace brings to light and experience sin

hitherto unknown, and the new life brings consciousness of, and

provokes contest with, evil within, of which the very existence had

previously been unsuspected. In the present instance the immediate

effect was homage,[2910]2910 which presently manifested itself in

language such as might have been expected.

Here also it must be remembered, that both the act of homage, or

'worship,' and the words spoken, were not the outcome either of the

demonised only, nor yet of the demons only, but a combination of the

two: the control of the demons being absolute over the man such as he

was. Their language led to his worship; their feelings and fears

appeared in his language. It was the self-confession of the demons,

when obliged to come into His Presence and do homage, which made the

man fall down and, in the well-known Jewish formula, recorded by the

three Evangelists, say: 'What have I to do with Thee,' or rather,

'What between me and Thee' - what have we in common (Mah li valakh)?

Similarly, although it was consciousness of subjection and fear in His

Presence, on the part of the demons, which underlay the adjuration not

to inflict torment on them, yet the language itself, as the text

shows, was that of the demonised, and the form in which their fear

expressed itself was that of his thinking. The demons, in their hold

on their victim, could not but own their inferiority, and apprehend

their defeat and subjection, especially on such an occasion; and the

Jew, who consciousness was under their control - not unified, but

identified with it - exclaimed: 'I adjure Thee by God, that Thou

torment me not.'

This strange mixture of the demoniac with the human, or rather, this

expression of underlying demoniac thought in the forms and modes of

thinking of the Jewish victim, explains the expressed fear of present

actual torment, or, as St. Matthew, who, from the briefness of his

account, does not seem to have been an eye-witness, expresses it:

'Thou art come to torment us before the time;' and possibly also for

the 'adjuration by God.'[2911]2911 For, as immediately on the homage

and protestation of the demonised: 'What between me and Thee, Jesus,

Thou Son of the Most High God?' Christ had commanded the unclean

spirit to come out of the man, it may have been, that in so doing He

had used the Name of the Most High God; or else the 'adjuration'

itself may have been the form in which the Jewish speaker clothed the

consciousness of the demons, with which his own was identified.

It may be conjectured, that it was partly in order to break this

identification, or rather to show the demonised that it was not real,

and only the consequence of the control which the demons had over him,

that the Lord asked his name. To this the man made answer, still in

the dual consciousness, 'My name is Legion: for we are

many.'[2912]2912 Such might be the subjective motive for Christ's

question. Its objective reason may have been to show the power of the

demoniac possession in the present instance, thus marking it as an

altogether extreme case. The remembrance, that the answer is once more

in the forms of Jewish thinking, enables us to avoid the strange

notion (whether it express the opinion of some, or the difficulties of

others), that the word 'Legion' conveys the idea of six thousand armed

and strong warriors of evil.[2913]2913 For, it was a common Jewish

idea, that, under certain circumstances, 'a legion of hurtful

spirits'[2914]2914 (of course not in the sense of a Roman legion)

'were on the watch for men, saying: When shall he fall into the hands

of one of these things, and be taken?'[2915]2915

This identification of the demons with the demonised, in consequence

of which he thought with their consciousness, and they spoke not only

through him but in his forms of thinking, may also account for the

last and most difficult part of this narrative. Their main object and

wish was not to be banished from the country and people, or, as St.

Luke puts it - again to 'depart into the abyss.' Let us now try to

realise the scene. On the very narrow strip of shore, between the

steep cliff that rises in the background and the Lake, stand Jesus

with His disciples and the demonised. The wish of the demons is not to

be sent out of the country - not back into the abyss. The one is the

cliff overhead, the other the Lake beneath: so, symbolically, and, to

the demonised, really. Up on that cliff a great herd of swine is

feeding; up that cliff, therefore, is 'into the swine;' and this also

agrees with Jewish thoughts concerning uncleanness. The rendering of

our Authorised Version,[2916]2916 that, in reply to the demoniac

entreaty, 'forthwith Jesus gave them leave,' has led to

misunderstanding. The distinction here to be made is, though narrow,

yet real and important. The verb, which is the same in all the three

Gospels, would be better rendered by 'suffered' than by 'gave them

leave.' With the latter we associate positive permission. None such

was either asked or given. The Lord suffered it - that is, He did not

actually hinder it.[2917]2917 He only 'said unto them, Go!'

What followed belongs to the phenomena of supersensuous influences

upon animals, of which many instances are recorded, but the rationale

of which it is impossible to explain. How the unclean spirits could

enter into the swine, is a question which cannot be entertained till

we shall know more of the animal soul than is at present within our

range. This, however, we can understand, that under such circumstances

a panic would seize the herd, that it would madly rush down the steep

on which it could not arrest itself, and so perish in the sea. And

this also we can perceive, how the real object of the demons was thus

attained; how they did not leave the country, when Christ was

entreated to leave it.

The weird scene over which the moon had shed her ghostlike light, was

past. The unearthly utterances of the demonised, the wild panic among

the herd on the cliff, the mad rush down the steep, the splashing

waters as the helpless animals were precipitated into the Lake - all

this makes up a picture, unsurpassed for vivid, terrible realism. And

now sudden silence has fallen on them. From above, the keepers of the

herd had seen it all - alike what had passed with the demonised, and

then the issue in the destruction of the herd. From the first, as they

saw the demonised, for fear of whom 'no man might pass that way,'

running to Jesus, they must have watched with eager interest. In the

clear Eastern air not a word that was spoken could have been lost. And

now in wild terror they fled, into Gerasa - into the country round

about, to tell what had happened.

It is morning, and a new morning-sacrifice and morning-Psalm are about

to be offered. He that had erst been the possession of foul and evil

spirits - a very legion of them - and deprived of his human

individuality, is now 'sitting at the feet of Jesus,' learning of Him,

'clothed and in his right mind.' He has been brought to God, restored

to self, to reason, and to human society - and all this by Jesus, at

Whose Feet he is gratefully, humbly sitting, 'a disciple.' Is He not

then the Very Son of God? Viewing this miracle, as an historical fact,

viewing it as a Parabolic Miracle, viewing it also as symbolic of what

has happened in all ages - is He not the Son of the Most High God? And

is there not now, on His part, in the morning-light the same calmness

and majesty of conscious Almighty Power as on the evening before, when

He rebuked the storm and calmed the sea?

One other point as regards the healing of this demonism deserves

special consideration. Contrary to what was commonly the case, when

the evil spirits came out of the demonised, there was no paroxysm of

physical distress. Was it then so, that the more complete and lasting

the demoniac possession, the less of purely physical symptoms attended

it?

But now from town and country have they come, who had been startled by

the tidings which those who fed the swine had brought. We may contrast

the scene with that of the shepherds when on Bethlehem's plains the

great revelation had come to them, and they had seen the Divine Babe

laid in the manger, and had worshipped. Far other were the tidings

which these herdsmen brought, and their effect. It is not necessary to

suppose, that their request that Jesus would depart out of their

coasts was prompted only by the loss of the herd of swine.[2918]2918

There could be no doubt in their minds, that One possessing supreme

and unlimited power was in their midst. Among men superstitious, and

unwilling to submit absolutely to the Kingdom which Christ brought,

there could only be one effect of what they had heard, and now

witnessed in the person of the healed demonised - awe and fear! The

'Depart from me, for I am a sinful man,' is the natural expression of

a mind conscious of sin when brought into contact with the Divine,

Whose supreme and absolute Power is realised as hostile. And this

feeling would be greatly increased, in measure as the mind was under

the influence of superstitious fears.

In such place and circumstances Jesus could not have continued. And,

as He entered the ship, the healed demonised humbly, earnestly

entreated, that he might go with his Saviour. It would have seemed to

him, as if he could not bear to lose his new found happiness; as if

there were calm, safety, and happiness only in His Presence; not far

from Him, not among those wild mountains and yet wilder men. Why

should he be driven from His fellowship, who had so long been an

outcast from that of his fellow-men, and why again left to himself?

So, perhaps, should we have reasoned and spoken; so too often do we

reason and speak, as regards ourselves or those we love. Not so He Who

appoints alike our discipline and our work. To go back, now healed, to

his own, and to publish there, in the city - nay, through the whole of

the large district of the ten confederate cities, the Decapolis - how

great things Jesus had done for him, such was henceforth to be his

life-work. In this there would be both safety and happiness.

'And all men did marvel.' And presently Jesus Himself came back into

that Decapolis, where the healed demonised had prepared the way for

Him.[2919]2919

CHAPTER XXVI.

THE HEALING OF THE WOMAN - CHRIST'S PERSONAL APPEARANCE - THE

RAISING OF

JAIRUS' DAUGHTER

(St. Matt. ix. 18-26; St. Mark v. 21-43; St. Luke viii. 40-56.)

THERE seems remarkable correspondence between the two miracles which

Jesus had wrought on leaving Capernaum and those which He did on His

return. In one sense they are complementary to each other. The

stilling of the storm and the healing of the demonised were

manifestations of the absolute power inherent in Christ; the recovery

of the woman and the raising of Jairus' daughter, evidence of the

absolute efficacy of faith. The unlikeliness of dominion over the

storm, and of command over a legion of demons, answers to that of

recovery obtained in such a manner, and of restoration when disease

had passed into actual death. Even the circumstances seem to

correspond, though at opposite poles; in the one case, the Word spoken

to the unconscious element, in the other the touch of the unconscious

Christ; in the one case the absolute command of Christ over a world of

resisting demons, in the other absolute certainty of faith as against

the hostile element, of actual fact. Thus the Divine character of the

Saviour appears in the absoluteness of His Omnipotence, and the Divine

character of His Mission in the all-powerfulness of faith which it

called forth.

On the shore at Capernaum many were gathered on the morning after the

storm. It may have been, that the boats which had accompanied His had

returned to friendly shelter, ere the storm had risen to full fury,

and had brought anxious tidings of the storm out on the Lake. There

they were gathered now in the calm morning, friends eagerly looking

out for the well-known boat that bore the Master and His disciples.

And as it came in sight, making again for Capernaum, the multitude

also would gather in waiting for the return of Him, Whose words and

deeds were indeed mysteries, but mysteries of the Kingdom. And

quickly, as He again stepped on the well-known shore, was He welcomed,

surrounded, soon 'thronged,' inconveniently pressed upon,[2920]2920 by

the crowd, eager, curious, expectant. It seemed as if they had been

all 'waiting for Him,' and He had been away all too long for their

impatience. The tidings rapidly spread, and reached two homes where

His help was needed; where, indeed, it alone could now be of possible

avail. The two most nearly concerned must have gone to seek that help

about the same time, and prompted by the same feelings of expectancy.

Both Jairus, the Ruler of the Synagogue, and the woman suffering these

many years from disease, had faith. But the weakness of the one arose

from excess, and threatened to merge into superstition, while the

weakness of the other was due to defect, and threatened to end in

despair. In both cases faith had to be called out, tried, purified,

and so perfected; in both the thing sought for was, humanely speaking,

unattainable, and the means employed seemingly powerless; yet, in

both, the outward and inward results required were obtained through

the power of Christ, and by the peculiar discipline to which, in His

all-wise arranging, faith was subjected.

It sounds almost like a confession of absolute defeat, when negative

critics (such as Keim) have to ground their mythical explanation of

this history on the supposed symbolical meaning of what they designate

as the fictitious name of the Ruler of the Synagogue - Jair, 'he will

give light'[2921]2921 - and when they[2922]2922 further appeal to the

correspondence between the age of the maiden and the years (twelve)

during which the woman had suffered from the bloody flux. This

coincidence is, indeed, so trivial as not to deserve serious notice;

since there can be no conceivable connection between the age of the

child and the duration of the woman's disease, nor, indeed, between

the two cases, except in this, that both appealed to Jesus. As regards

the name Jairus, the supposed symbolism is inapt; while internal

reasons are opposed to the hypothesis of its fictitiousness. For, it

seems most unlikely that St. Mark and St. Luke would have rendered the

discovery of 'a myth' easy by needlessly breaking the silence of St.

Matthew, and giving the name of so well-known a person as a

Synagogue-ruler of Capernaum. And this the more readily, that the

name, though occurring in the Old Testament, and in the ranks of the

Nationalist party in the last Jewish War,[2923]2923 was apparently not

a common one.[2924]2924 But these are comparatively small difficulties

in the way of the mythical interpretation.

Jairus, one of the Synagogue-rulers[2925]2925 of Capernaum, had an

only daughter,[2926]2926 who at the time of this narrative had just

passed childhood, and reached the period when Jewish Law declared a

woman of age.[2927]2927 Although St. Matthew, contracting the whole

narrative into briefest summary, speaks of her as dead at the time of

Jarius' application to Jesus, the other two Evangelists, giving fuller details, describe her

as on the point of death, literally, 'at the

last breath' (in extremis).[2928]2928 Unless her disease had been both

sudden and exceedingly rapid, which is barely possible, it is

difficult to understand why her father had not on the previous day

applied to Jesus, if his faith had been such as is generally supposed.

But if, as the whole tenour of the history shows, his faith had been

only general and scarcely formed, we can account the more easily for

the delay. Only in the hour of supreme need, when his only child lay

dying, did he resort to Jesus. There was need to perfect such faith,

on the one side into perseverance of assurance, and on the other into

energy of trustfulness. The one was accomplished through the delay

caused by the application of the woman, the other by the supervention

of death during this interval.

There was nothing unnatural or un-Jewish in the application of this

Ruler to Jesus. He must have known of the healing of the son of the

Court-official, and of the servant of the Centurion, there or in the

immediate neighbourhood - as it was said, by the mere word of Christ.

For there had been no imposition of silence in regard to them, even

had such been possible. Yet in both cases the recovery might be

ascribed by some to coincidence, by others to answer of prayer. And

perhaps this may help us to understand one of the reasons for the

prohibition of telling what had been done by Jesus, while in other

instances silence was not enjoined. Of course, there were occasions -

such as the raising of the young man at Nain and of Lazarus - when the

miracle was done so publicly, that a command of this kind would have

been impossible. But in other cases may this not be the line of

demarcation, that silence was not enjoined when a result was achieved

which, according to the notions of the time, might have been

attributed to other than direct Divine Power, while in the latter

cases[2929]2929 publicity was (whenever possible) forbidden? And this

for the twofold reason, that Christ's Miracles were intended to aid,

not to supersede, faith; to direct to the Person and Teaching of

Christ, as that which proved the benefit to be real and Divine; not to

excite the carnal Jewish expectancies of the people, but to lead in

humble discipleship to the Feet of Jesus. In short, if only those were

made known which would not necessarily imply Divine Power (according

to Jewish notions), then would not only the distraction and tumult of

popular excitement be avoided, but in each case faith in the Person of

Christ be still required, ere the miracles were received as evidence

of His Divine claims.[2930]2930 And this need of faith was the main

point.

That, in view of his child's imminent death, and with the knowledge he

had of the 'mighty deeds' commonly reported of Jesus, Jairus should

have applied to Him, can the less surprise us, when we remember how

often Jesus must, with consent and by invitation of this Ruler, have

spoken in the Synagogue; and what irresistible impression His words

had made. It is not necessary to suppose, that Jairus was among those

elders of the Jews who interceded for the Centurion; the form of his

present application seems rather opposed to it. But after all, there

was nothing in what he said which a Jew in those days might not have

spoken to a Rabbi, who was regarded as Jesus must have been by all in

Capernaum who believed not the horrible charge, which the Judæan

Pharisees had just raised. Though we cannot point to any instance

where the laying on of a great Rabbi's hands was sought for healing,

such, combined with prayer, would certainly be in entire accordance

with Jewish views at the time. The confidence in the result, expressed

by the father in the accounts of St. Mark and St. Matthew, is not

mentioned by St. Luke. And perhaps, as being the language of an

Eastern, it should not be taken in its strict literality as indicating

actual conviction on the part of Jairus, that the laying on of

Christ's Hands would certainly restore the maiden.

Be this as it may, when Jesus followed the Ruler to his house, the

multitude 'thronging Him' in eager curiosity, another approached Him

from out that crowd, whose inner history was far different from that

of Jairus. The disease from which this woman had suffered for twelve

years would render her Levitically 'unclean.' It must have been not

unfrequent in Palestine, and proved as intractable as modern science

has found it, to judge by the number and variety of remedies

prescribed, and by their character. On one leaf of the

Talmud[2931]2931 not less than eleven different remedies are proposed,

of which at most only six can possibly be regarded as astringents or

tonics, while the rest are merely the outcome of superstition, to

which resort is had in the absence of knowledge.[2932]2932 But what

possesses real interest is, that, in all cases where astringents or

tonics are prescribed, it is ordered, that, while the woman takes the

remedy, she is to be addressed in the words: 'Arise (Qum) from thy

flux.' It is not only that psychical means are apparently to accompany

the therapeutical in this disease, but the coincidence in the command,

Arise (Qum), with the words used by Christ in raising Jairus' daughter

is striking. But here also we mark only contrast to the magical cures

of the Rabbis. For Jesus neither used remedies, nor spoke the word Qum

to her who had come 'in the press behind' to touch for her healing

'the fringe of His outer garment.'

As this is almost the only occasion on which we can obtain a glimpse

of Christ's outward appearance and garb, it may be well to form such

accurate conception of it, as is afforded by a knowledge of the dress

of the ancient Hebrews. The Rabbis laid it down as a rule, that the

learned ought to be most careful in their dress. It was a disgrace if

a scholar walked abroad with clouted shoes;[2933]2933 to wear dirty

clothes deserved death;[2934]2934 for 'the glory of God was man, and

the glory of man was his dress.'[2935]2935 This held specially true of

the Rabbi, whose appearance might otherwise reflect on the theological

profession. It was the general rule to eat and drink below (or else

according to) a man's means, but to dress and lodge above

them.[2936]2936 [2937]2937 For, in these four things a man's character

might be learned; at his cups, in many matters, when he was angry and

by his ragged dress.[2938]2938 Nay, 'The clothing of the wife of a

Chabher (learned associate) is of greater importance than the life of

the ignorant (rustic), for the sake of the dignity of the

learned'[2939]2939 Accordingly, the Rabbis were wont to wear such

dress by which they might be distinguished. At a latter period they

seem at their ordination to have been occasionally arrayed in a mantle

of gold-stuff.[2940]2940 Perhaps a distinctive garment, most likely a

head-gear, was worn, even by 'rulers' ('the elder,'{hebrew}), at their

ordination.[2941]2941 The Palestinian Nasi, or President of the

Sanhedrin, also had a distinctive dress,[2942]2942 and the head of the

Jewish community in Babylon a distinctive girdle.[2943]2943 [2944]2944

In referring to the dress which may on a Sabbath be saved from a

burning house - not, indeed, by carrying it, but by successively

putting it on, no fewer than eighteen articles are

mentioned.[2945]2945 If the meaning of all the terms could be

accurately ascertained, we should know precisely what the Jews in the

second century, and presumably earlier, wore, from the shoes and

stockings on their feet to the gloves[2946]2946 on the hands.

Unfortunately, many of these designations are in dispute. Nor must it

be thought that, because there are eighteen names, the dress of an

Israelite consisted of so many separate pieces. Several of them apply

to different shapes or kinds of the same under or upper garments,

while the list indicates their extreme number and variety rather than

the ordinary dress worn. The latter consisted, to judge by the

directions given for undressing and dressing in the bathroom, of six,

or perhaps more generally, of five articles: the shoes, the

head-covering, the Tallith or upper cloak, the girdle, the Chaluq or

under-dress, and the Aphqarsin or innermost covering.[2947]2947 As

regarded shoes, a man should sell his very roof-tree for

them,[2948]2948 although he might have to part with them for food if

he were in a weak condition through blood-letting.[2949]2949 But it

was not the practice to provide more than one pair of shoes,[2950]2950

and to this may have referred the injunction[2951]2951 of Christ to

the Apostle not to provide shoes for their journey, or else to the

well-known distinction between shoes (Manalim) and sandals (Sandalim).

The former, which were sometimes made of very coarse material, covered

the whole foot, and were specially intended for winter or rainy

weather; while the sandals, which only protected the soles and sides

of the feet, were specially far summer use.[2952]2952

In regard to the covering of the head, it was deemed a mark of

disrespect to walk abroad, or to pass a person, with bared

head.[2953]2953 Slaves covered their heads in presence of their heads

in presence of their masters, and the Targum Onkelos indicates

Israel's freedom by paraphrasing the expression they 'went out with a

high hand'[2954]2954 by 'with uncovered head'[2955]2955 The ordinary

covering of the head was the so-called Sudar (or Sudarimn), a kerchief

twisted into a turban, and which might also be worn round the neck. A

kind of hat was also in use, either of light material or of felt

(Aphilyon shel rosh or Philyon).[2956]2956 The Sudar was twisted by

Rabbis in a peculiar manner to distinguish them from others.[2957]2957

We read besides of a sort of cap or hood attached to garments.

Three, or else four articles commonly constituted the dress of the

body. First came the under-grment, commonly the Chaluq of the

Kittuna[2958]2958 (The Biblical Kethoneth), from which latter some

have derived the word 'cotton.' The Chaluq might be of linen or of

wool.[2959]2959 The sages wore it down to the feet. It was covered by

the upper garment or Tallith to within about a handbreadth.[2960]2960

The Chaluq lay close to the body, and had no other opening than that

round the neck and for the arms. At the bottom it had a kind of hem.

To posses only one such 'coat' or inner garment was a mark of

poverty.[2961]2961 Hence, when the Apostles were sent on their

temporary mission, they were directed not to take 'two

coats.'[2962]2962 Closely similar to, if not identical with, the

Chaluq, was the ancient garment mentioned in the Old Testament as

Kethoneth, to which the Greek 'Chiton' (cit_n) corresponds. As the

garment which our Lord wore,[2963]2963 [2964]2964 and those of which

He spoke to His Apostles are designated by that name, we conclude that

it represents the well-know Kethoneth or Rabbinic Kittuna. This might

be of almost any material, even leather, though it was generally of

wool or flax. It was sleeved, close-fitting, reached to the ankles,

and was fastened round the loins, or just under the breast,[2965]2965

by a girdle. One kind of the latter, the Pundah or Aphundah,[2966]2966

was provided with pockets or other receptacles,[2967]2967 and hence

might not be worn outside by those who went into the Temple,[2968]2968

probably to indicate that he who went to worship should not be engaged

in, nor bear mark of, any other occupation.

Of the two other garments mentioned as parts of a man's toilette, the

Aphqarsin or Aphikarsus seems to have been an article of luxury rather

than of necessity. Its precise purpose is difficult to determine. A

comparison of the passages in which the term occurs conveys the

impression, that it was a large kerchief used partly as a head-gear,

and which hung down and was fastened under the right arm.[2969]2969

[2970]2970 Probably it was also used for the upper part of the body.

But the circumstance that, unlike the other articles of dress, it need

not be rent in mourning,[2971]2971 and that, when worn by females, it

was regarded as a mark of wealth,[2972]2972 shows that it was not a

necessary article of dress, and hence that, in all likelihood, it was

not worn by Christ. It was otherwise with the upper garment. Various

shapes and kinds of such were in use, from the coarser Boresin and

Bardesin - the modern Burnoose - upwards. The Gelima was a cloak of

which 'the border,' or 'hem,' is specially mentioned

({hebrew}).[2973]2973 The Gunda was a peculiarly Pharisaic

garb.[2974]2974 But the upper garment which Jesus wore would be either

the so-called Goltha, or, most likely, the Tallith. Both the

Goltha[2975]2975 and the Tallith[2976]2976 were provided, on the four

borders, with the so-called Tsitsith, or 'fringes.' These were

attached to the four corners of the outer dress, in supposed

fulfilment of the command, Numb. xv. 38-41; Deut. xxii. 12. At first,

this observance seems to have been comparatively simple. The question

as to the number of filaments on these 'frings' was settled in

accordance with the teaching of the School of Shammai. Four filaments

(not three, as the Hillelites proposed), each of four finger-lengths

(these, as later tradition put it, doubled), and attached to the four

corners of what must be a strictly square garment - such were the

earliest rules on the subject.[2977]2977 The Mishnah leaves it still a

comparatively open question, whether these filaments were to be blue

or white.[2978]2978 But the Targum makes a strong point of it as

between Moses and Korah, that there was to be a filament of hyacinth

colour among four of white.[2979]2979 It seems even to imply the

peculiar symbolical mode of knotting them at present in use.[2980]2980

Further symbolic details were, of course, added in the course of

time.[2981]2981 As these fringes were attached to the corners of any

square garment, the question, whether the upper garment which Jesus

wore was the Goltha or the Tallith, is of secondary importance. But as

all that concerns His Sacred Person is of deepest interest, we may be

allowed to state our belief in favour of the Tallith. Both are

mentioned as distinctive dresses of teachers, but the Goltha (so far

as it differed from the Tallith) seems the more peculiarly Rabbinic.

We can now form an approximate idea of the outward appearance of Jesus

on that spring-morning amidst the throng at Capernaum. He would, we

may safely assume, go about in the ordinary, although not in the more

ostentatious, dress, worn by the Jewish teachers of Galilee. His

head-gear would probably be the Sudar (Sudarium) would into a kind of

turban, or perhaps the Maaphoreth,[2982]2982 which seems to have

served as a covering for the head, and to have descended over the back

of the neck and shoulders, somewhat like the Indian pugaree. His feet

were probably shod with sandals. The Chaluq, or more probably the

Kittuna, which formed his inner garment, must have been close-fitting,

and descended to His feet, since it was not only so worn by teachers,

but was regarded as absolutely necessary for any one who would

publicly read or 'Targum' the Scriptures, or exercise any function in

the Synagogue.[2983]2983 As we know, it 'was without seam, woven from

the top throughout;'[2984]2984 and this closely accords with the

texture of these garments. Round the middle it would be fastened with

a girdle.[2985]2985 Over this inner, He would most probably wear the

square outer garment, or Tallith, with the customary fringes of four

long white threads with one of hyacinth knotted together on each of

the four corners. There is reason to believe, that three square

garments were made with these 'fringes,' although, by way of

ostentation, the Pharisees made them particularly wide so as to

attract attention, just as they made their phylacteries

broad.[2986]2986 Although Christ only denounced the latter practice,

not the phylacteries themselves, it is impossible to believe that

Himself ever wore them, either on the forehead or the arm.[2987]2987

There was certainly no warrant for them in Holy Scripture, and only

Pharisee externalism could represent their use as fulfilling the

import of Exod. xiii. 9, 16; Deut. vi. 8; xi. 18. The admission that

neither the officiating priests, nor the representatives of the

people, wore them in the Temple,[2988]2988 seems to imply that this

practice was not quite universal. For our part, we refuse to believe

that Jesus, like the Pharisees, appeared wearing phylacteries every

day and all day long, or at least a great part of the day. For such

was the ancient custom, and not merely; as the modern practice, to

wear them only at prayer.[2989]2989

One further remark may be allowed before dismissing this subject. Our

inquiries enable us in this matter also to confirm the accuracy of the

Fourth Gospel. We read[2990]2990 that the quaternion of soldiers who

crucified Christ made division of the riches of His poverty, taking

each one part of His dress, while for the fifth, which, if divided,

would have had to be rent in pieces, they cast lots. This incidental

remark carries evidence of the Judæan authorship of the Gospel in the

accurate knowledge which it displays. The four pieces of dress to be

divided would be the head-gear, the more expensive sandals or shoes,

the long girdle, and the coarse Tallith - all about equal in

value.[2991]2991 And the fifth undivided and, comparatively, most

expensive garment. 'without seam, woven from the top throughout,'

probably of wool, as befitted the season of the year, was the Kittuna,

or inner garment. How strange, that, what would have been of such

priceless value to Christendom, should have been divided as the poor

booty of a rough, unappreciative soldiery! Yet how well for us, since

not even the sternest warning could have kept within the bounds of

mere reverence the veneration with which we should have viewed and

handled that which He wore, Who died for us on the Cross.

Can we, then, wonder that this Jewish woman, 'having heard the things

concerning Jesus,' with her imperfect knowledge, in the weakness of

her strong faith, thought that, if she might but touch His garment,

she would be made whole? It is but what we ourselves might think, if

He were still walking on earth among men: it is but what, in some form

or other, we still feel when in the weakness - the rebound or diastole

- of our faith it seems to us, as if the want of this touch in not

outwardly-perceived help or Presence left us miserable and sick, while

even one real touch, if it were only of His garment, one real act of

contact, however mediate, would bring us perfect healing. And in some

sense it really is so. For, assuredly, the Lord cannot be touched by

disease and misery, without healing coming from Him, for He is the

God-Man. And He is also the loving, pitying Saviour. Who disdains not,

nor turns from our weakness in the manifestation of our faith, even as

He turned not from hers who touched His garment for her healing.

We can picture her to our minds as, mingling with those who thronged

and pressed upon the Lord, she put forth her hand and 'touched the

border of His garment,' most probably[2992]2992 the long Tsitsith of

one of the corners of the Tallith. We can understand how, with a

disease which not only rendered her Levitically defiling, but where

womanly shamefacedness would make public speech so difficult, she,

thinking of Him Whose Word, spoken at a distance, had brought healing,

might thus seek to have her heart's desire. What strong faith to

expect help where all human help, so long and earnestly sought, had so

signally failed! And what strong faith to expect, that even contact

with Him, the bare touch of His garment, would carry such Divine Power

as to make her 'whole.' Yet in this very strength lay also its

weakness. She believed so much in Him, that she felt as if it needed

not personal appeal to Him; she felt so deeply the hindrances to her

making request of Himself, that, believing so strongly in Him, she

deemed it sufficient to touch, not even Himself, but that which in

itself had no power nor value, except as it was in contact with His

Divine Person. But it is here that her faith was beset by two-fold

danger. In its excess it might degenerate into superstition, as trees

in their vigour put forth shoots, which, unless they be cut off, will

prevent the fruit-bearing, and even exhaust the life of the tree. Not

the garments in which He appeared among men, and which touched His

Sacred Body, nor even that Body, but Himself brings healing. Again,

there was the danger of losing sight of that which, as the moral

element, is necessary in faith: personal application to, and personal

contact with, Christ.

And so it is to us also. As we realise the Mystery of the Incarnation,

His love towards, and His Presence with, His own, and the Divine Power

of the Christ, we cannot think too highly of all that is, or brings,

in contact with Him. The Church, the Sacraments, the Apostolic

Ministry of His Institution - in a word, the grand historic Church,

which is alike His Dwelling-place, His Witness, and His Representative

on earth, ever since He instituted it, endowed it with the gift of the

Holy Spirit, and hallowed it by the fulfilled promise of His Eternal

Presence, is to us what the garment He wore was to her who touched

Him. We shall think highly of all this in measure as we consciously

think highly of Him. His Bride the Church; the Sacraments which are

the fellowship of His Body and Blood, of His Crucifixion and

Resurrection; the Ministry and Embassy of Him, committed to the

Apostles, and ever since continued with such direction and promise,

cannot be of secondary importance - must be very real and full of

power, since they are so connected, and bring us into such connection

with Him: the spirituo-physical points of contact between Him, Who is

the God-man, and those who, being men, are also the children of God.

Yet in this strength of our faith may also lie its danger if not its

weakness. Through excess it may pass into superstition, which is the

attachment of power to anything other than the Living God; or else, in

the consciousness of our great disease, want of courage might deprive

faith of its moral element in personal dealing and personal contact

with Christ.

Very significantly to us who, in our foolish judging and merciless

condemning of one another, ever re-enacted the Parable of the Two

Debtors, the Lord did not, as Pseudo-orthodoxy would prescribe it,

disappoint her faith for the weakness of its manifestation. To have

disappointed her faith, which was born of such high thoughts of Him,

would have been to deny Himself - and he cannot deny Himself. But very

significantly, also, while He disappointed not her faith, He corrected

the error of its direction and manifestation. And to this His

subsequent bearing toward her was directed. No sooner had she so

touched the border of His garment than 'she knew in the body that she

was healed of the scourge.'[2993]2993 No sooner, also, had she so

touched the border of His garment than He knew, 'perceived in

Himself,' what had taken place: the forthgoing of the Power that is

from out of Him.[2994]2994

Taking this narrative in its true literality, there is no reason to

overweight and mar it by adding what is not conveyed in the text.

There is nothing in the language of St. Mark[2995]2995 (as correctly

rendered), nor of St. Luke, to oblige us to conclude that this

forthgoing of Power, which He perceived in Himself, had been through

an act, of the full meaning of which Christ was unconscious - in other

words, that He was ignorant of the person who, and the reason why, she

Had touched Him. In short, 'the forthgoing of the Power that is out of

Him' was neither unconscious nor unwilled on His part. It was caused

by her faith, not by her touch. 'Thy faith hath made thee whole.' And

the question of Jesus could not have been misleading, when

'straightway'[2996]2996 He 'turned Him about in the crowd and said,

Who touched My garments?' That He knew who had done it, and only

wished, through self-confession, to bring her to clearness in the

exercise of her faith, appears from what is immediately added: 'And He

looked round about,' not to see who had done it, but 'to see her that

had done this thing.' And as His look of unspoken appeal was at last

fixed on her alone in all that crowd, which, as Peter rightly said,

was thronging and pressing Him, 'the woman saw that she was not

hid,'[2997]2997 and came forward to make full confession. Thus, while

in His mercy He had borne with her weakness, and in His faithfulness

not disappointed her faith, its twofold error was also corrected. She

learned that it was not from the garment, but from the Saviour, that

the Power proceeded; she learned also, that it was not the touch of

it, but the faith in Him, that made whole - and such faith must ever

be of personal dealing with Him. And so He spoke to her the Word of

twofold help and assurance: 'Thy faith hath made thee whole - go forth

into peace,[2998]2998 and be healed of thy scourge.'

Brief as is the record of this occurrence, it must have caused

considerable delay in the progress of our Lord to the house of Jairus.

For in the interval the maiden, who had been at the last gasp when her

father went to entreat the help of Jesus, had not only died, but the

house of mourning was already filled with relatives, hired mourners,

wailing women, and musicians, in preparation for the funeral. The

intentional delay of Jesus when summoned to Lazarus[2999]2999 leads us

to ask, whether similar purpose may not have influenced His conduct in

the present instance. But even were it otherwise, no outcome of God's

Providence is of chance, but each is designed. The circumstances,

which in their concurrence make up an event, may all be of natural

occurrence, but their conjunction is of Divine ordering and to a

higher purpose, and this constitutes Divine Providence. It was in the

interval of this delay that the messengers came, who informed Jairus

of the actual death of his child. Jesus overheard[3000]3000 it, as

they whispered to the Ruler not to trouble the Rabbi any

further,[3001]3001 but He heeded it not, save so far as it affected

the father. The emphatic admonition, not to fear, only to believe,

gives us an insight into the threatening failure of the Ruler's faith;

perhaps, also, into the motive which prompted the delay of Christ. The

utmost need, which would henceforth require the utmost faith on the

part of Jairus had now come. But into that, which was to pass within

the house, no stranger must intrude. Even of the Apostles only those,

who now for the first time became, and henceforth continued, the

innermost circle,[3002]3002 might witness, without present danger to

themselves or others, what was about to take place. How Jesus

dismissed the multitude, or else kept them at bay, or where He parted

from all his disciples except Peter, James, and John, does not clearly

appear, and, indeed, is of no importance. He may have left the nine

Apostles with the people, or outside the house, or parted from them in

the courtyard of Jairus' house before he entered the inner

apartments.[3003]3003

Within, 'the tumult' and weeping, the wail of the mourners, real or

hired, and the melancholy sound of the mourning flutes[3004]3004 - sad

preparation for, and pageantry of, an Eastern funeral - broke with

dismal discord on the majestic calm of assured victory over death,

with which Jesus had entered the house of mourning. But even so He

would tell it them, as so often in like circumstances He tells it to

us, that the damsel was not dead, but only sleeping. The Rabbis also

frequently have the expression 'to sleep' (demakh {hebrew}, or

{hebrew}, when the sleep is overpowering and oppressive), instead of

'to die.' It may well have been that Jesus made use of this word of

double meaning in some such manner as this: Talyetha dimkhath, 'the

maiden sleepeth.' And they understood Him well in their own way, yet

understood Him not at all.

As so many of those who now hear this word, they to whom it was then

spoken, in their coarse realism, laughed Him to scorn. For did they

not verily know that she had actually died, even before the messengers

had been despatched to prevent the needless trouble of His coming? Yet

even this their scorn served a higher purpose. For it showed these two

things: that to the certain belief of those in the house the maiden

was really dead, and that the Gospel-writers regarded the raising of

the dead as not only beyond the ordinary range of Messianic activity,

but as something miraculous even among the miracles of Christ. And

this also is evidential, at least so far as to prove that the writers

recorded the event not lightly, but with full knowledge of the demand

which it makes on our faith.

The first thing to be done by Christ was to 'put out' the mourners,

whose proper place this house no longer was, and who by their conduct

had proved themselves unfit to be witnesses of Christ's great

manifestation. The impression which the narrative leaves on the mind

is, that all this while the father of the maiden was stupefied,

passive, rather than active in the matter. The great fear, which had

come upon him when the messengers apprised him of his only child's

death, seemed still to numb his faith. He followed Christ without

taking any part in what happened; he witnessed the pageantry of the

approaching obsequies in his house without interfering; he heard the

scorn which Christ's majestic declaration of the victory over death

provoked, without checking it. The fire of his faith was that of

'dimly burning flax.'[3005]3005 But 'He will not quench' it.

He now led the father and the mother into the chamber where the dead

maiden lay, followed by the three Apostles, witnesses of His chiefest

working and of His utmost earthly glory, but also of His inmost

sufferings. Without doubt or hesitation He took her by the hand and

spoke only these two words: Talyetha Qum [Kum] ({hebrew}[3006]3006),

Maiden, arise! 'And straightway the damsel arose.' But the great

astonishment which came upon them, as well as the 'strait charge' that

no man should know it, are further evidence, if such were required,

how little their faith had been prepared for that which in its

weakness was granted to it. And thus Jesus, as He had formerly

corrected in the woman that weakness of faith which came through very

excess, so now in the Ruler of the Synagogue the weakness which was by

failure. And so 'He hath done all things well: He maketh even the deaf

to hear, and the dumb to speak.'[3007]3007

How Jesus conveyed Himself away, whether through another entrance into

the house, or by 'the road of the roofs,' we are not told. But

assuredly, He must have avoided the multitude. Presently we find Him

far from Capernaum. Probably He had left it immediately on quitting

the house of Jairus. But what of that multitude? The tidings must have

speedily reached them, that the daughter of the Synagogue-Ruler was

not dead. Yet it had been straitly charged that none of them should be

informed, how it had come to pass that she lived. They were then with

this intended mystery before them. She was not dead: thus much was

certain. The Christ had, ere leaving that chamber, given command that

meat should be brought her; and, as that direction must have been

carried out by one of the attendants, this would become immediately

known to all that household. Had she then not really died, but only

been sleeping? Did Christ's words of double meaning refer to literal

sleep? Here then was another Parable of twofold different bearing: to

them that had hearts to understand, and to them who understood not. In

any case, their former scorn had been misplaced; in any case, the

Teacher of Nazareth was far other than all the Rabbis. In what Name,

and by what Power, did He come and act? Who was He really? Had they

but known of the 'Talyetha Qum,' and how these two words had burst

open the two-leaved doors of death and Hades! Nay, but it would have

only ended in utter excitement and complete misunderstanding, to the

final impossibility of the carrying out of Christ's Mission. For, the

full as well as the true knowledge, that He was the Son of God, could

only come after His contest and suffering. And our faith also in Him

is first of the suffering Saviour, and then of the Son of God. Thus

was it also from the first. It was through what He did for them that

they learned Who He was. Had it been otherwise, the full blaze of the

Sun's glory would have so dazzled them, that they could not have seen

the Cross.

Yet to all time has this question engaged the minds of men: Was the

maiden really dead, or did she only sleep? With it this other and

kindred one is connected: Was the healing of the woman miraculous, or

only caused by the influence of mind over body, such as is not

unfrequently witnessed, and such as explains modern so-called

miraculous cures, where only superstition perceives supernatural

agency? But these very words 'Influence of mind over body,' with which

we are so familiar, are they not, so to speak, symbolic and typical?

Do they not point to the possibility, and, beyond it, to the fact of

such influence of the God-Man, of the command which he wielded over

the body? May not command of soul over body be part of unfallen Man's

original inheritance; all most fully realised in the Perfect Man, the

God-Man, to Whom has been given the absolute rule of all things, and

Who has it in virtue of His Nature? These are only dim feelings after

possible higher truths.

No one who carefully reads this history can doubt, that the

Evangelists, at least, viewed this healing as a real miracle, and

intended to tell it as such. Even the statement of Christ, that by the

forthgoing of Power He knew the moment when the woman touched the hem

of His garment, would render impossible the view of certain critics

(Keim and others), that the cure was the effect of natural causes:

expectation acting through the imagination on the nervous system, and

so producing the physical results. But even so, and while these

writers reiterate certain old cavils[3008]3008 propounded by Strauss,

and by him often derived from the ancient armoury of our own Deists

(such as Woolston), they admit being so impressed with the 'simple,'

'natural,' and 'life-like' cast of the narrative, that they contend

for its historic truth. But the great leader of negativism, Strauss,

has shown that any natural explanation of the event is opposed to the

whole tenour of the narrative, indeed of the Gospel-history; so that

the alternative is its simple acceptance or its rejection. Strauss

boldly decides for the latter, but in so doing is met by the obvious

objection, that his denial does not rest on any historical foundation.

We can understand, how a legend could gather around historical facts

and embellish them, but not how a narrative so entirely without

precedent in the Old Testament, and so opposed, not only to the common

Messianic expectation, but to Jewish thought, could have been invented

to glorify a Jewish Messiah.[3009]3009

As regards the restoration to life of Jairus' daughter, there is a

like difference in the negative school (between Keim and Strauss). One

party insists that the maiden only seemed, but was not really dead, a

view open also to this objection, that it is manifestly impossible by

such devices to account for the raising of the young man at Nain, or

that of Lazarus. On the other hand, Strauss treats the whole as a

myth. It is well, that in this case, he should have condescended to

argument in support of his view, appealing to the expectancy created

by like miracles of Elijah and Elisha, and to the general belief at

that time, that the Messiah would raise the dead. For, the admitted

differences between the recorded circumstances of the miracles of

Elijah and Elisha and those of Christ are so great, that another

negative critic (Keim) finds proof of imitation in their

contrasts![3010]3010 But the appeal to Jewish belief at that time

tells, if possible, even more strongly against the hypothesis in

question (of Keim and Strauss). It is, to say the least, doubtful

whether Jewish theology generally ascribed to the Messiah the raising

of the dead.[3011]3011 There are isolated statements to that effect,

but the majority of opinions is, that God would Himself raise the

dead. But even those passages in which this is attributed to the

Messiah tell against the assertions of Strauss. For, the resurrection

to which they refer is that of all the dead (whether at the end of the

present age, or of the world), and not of single individuals. To the

latter there is not the faintest allusion in Jewish writings, and it

may be safely asserted that such a dogma would have been foreign, even

incongruous, to Jewish theology.

The unpleasant task of stating and refuting these objections seemed

necessary, if only to show that, as of old so now, this history cannot

be either explained or accounted for. It must be accepted or rejected,

accordingly as we think of Christ. Admittedly, it formed part of the

original tradition and belief of the Church. And it is recorded with

such details of names, circumstances, time and place, as almost to

court inquiry, and to render fraud well-nigh impossible. And it is so

recorded by all the three Evangelists, with such variations, or

rather, additions, of details as only to confirm the credibility of

the narrators, by showing their independence of each other. Lastly, it

fits into the whole history of the Christ, and into this special

period of it; and it sets before us the Christ and His bearing in a

manner, which we instinctively feel to be accordant with what we know

and expect. Assuredly, it implies determined rejection of the claims

of the Christ, and that on grounds, not of history, but of

preconceived opinions hostile to the Gospel, not to see and adore in

it the full manifestation of the Divine Saviour of the world, 'Who

hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light

through the Gospel.'[3012]3012 And with this belief our highest

thoughts of the potential for humanity, and our dearest hopes for

ourselves and those we love, are inseparably connected.

CHAPTER XXVII.

SECOND VISIT TO NAZARETH - THE MISSION OF THE TWELVE.

(St. Matt. xiii. 54-58; x. 1, 5-42; xi. 1; St. Mark vi. 1-13; St. Luke

ix. 1-6.)

It almost seems, as if the departure of Jesus from Capernaum marked a

crisis in the history of that town. From henceforth it ceases to be

the center of His activity, and is only occasionally, and in passing,

visited. Indeed, the concentration and growing power of Pharisaic

opposition, and the proximity of Herod's residence at

Tiberias[3013]3013 would have rendered a permanent stay there

impossible at this stage in our Lord's history. Henceforth, His Life

is, indeed, not purely missionary, but He has no certain

dwelling-place: in the sublime pathos of His own language, 'He hath

not where to lay His Head.'

The notice in St. Mark's Gospel,[3014]3014 that His disciples followed

Him, seems to connect the arrival of Jesus in 'His own country' (at

Nazareth) with the departure from the house of Jairus, into which He

had allowed only three of His Apostles to accompany Him. The

circumstances of the present visit, as well as the tone of His

countrymen at this time, are entirely different from what is recorded

of His former sojourn at Nazareth.[3015]3015 [3016]3016 The tenacious

narrowness, and the prejudices, so characteristic of such a town, with

its cliques and petty family-pride, all the more self-asserting that

the gradation would be almost imperceptible to an outsider, are, of

course, the same as on the former visit of Jesus. Nazareth would have

ceased to be Nazareth, had its people felt or spoken otherwise than

nine or ten months before. That His fame had so grown in the interval,

would only stimulate the conceit of the village-town to try, as it

were, to construct the great Prophet out of its own building

materials, with this additional gratification that He was thoroughly

their own, and that they possessed even better materials in their

Nazareth. All this is so quite according to life, that the substantial

repetition of the former scene in the Synagogue, so far from

surprising us, seems only natural. What surprises us is, what He

marvelled at: the unbelief of Nazareth, which lay at the foundation of

its estimate and treatment of Jesus.

Upon their own showing their unbelief was most unwarrantable. If ever

men had the means of testing the claims of Jesus, the Nazarenes

possessed them. True, they were ignorant of the miraculous event of

His Incarnation; and we can now perceive at least one of the reasons

for the mystery, which was allowed to enwrap it, as well as the higher

purpose in Divine Providence of His being born, not in Nazareth, but

in Bethlehem of Judæa, and of the interval of time between that Birth

and the return of His parents from Egypt to Nazareth. Apart from

prophecy, it was needful for Nazareth that Christ should have been

born in Bethlehem, otherwise the 'mystery of His Incarnation' must

have become known. And yet it could not have been made known, alike

for the sake of those most nearly concerned, and for that of those

who, at that period of His History, could not have understood it; to

whom, indeed, it would have been an absolute hindrance to belief in

Him. And He could not have returned to Bethlehem, where He was born,

to be brought up there, without calling attention to the miracle of

His Birth. If, therefore, for reasons easily comprehended, the mystery

of His Incarnation was not to be divulged, it was needful that the

Incarnate of Nazareth should be born at Bethlehem, and the Infant of

Bethlehem be brought up at Nazareth.

By thus withdrawing Him successively from one and the other place,

there was really none on earth who knew of His miraculous Birth,

except the Virgin-Mother, Joseph, Elizabeth, and probably Zacharias.

The vision and guidance vouchsafed to the shepherds on that December

night did not really disclose the mystery of His Incarnation.

Remembering their religious nations, it would not leave on them quite

the same impression as on us. It might mean much, or it might mean

little, in the present: time would tell. In those lands the sand

buries quickly and buries deep - preserving, indeed, but also hiding

what it covers. And the sands of thirty years had buried the tale

which the shepherds had brought; the wise men from the East had

returned another way; the excitement which their arrival in Jerusalem

and its object had caused, was long forgotten. Messianic expectations

and movements were of constant recurrence: the religious atmosphere

seemed charged with such elements; and the political changes and

events of the day were too engrossing to allow of much attention to an

isolated report, which, after all, might mean little, and which

certainly was of the long past. To keep up attention, there must be

communication; and that was precisely what was wanting in this

instance. The reign of Herod was tarnished by many suspicious and

murders such as those of Bethlehem. Then intervened the death of

Herod, - while the carrying of Jesus into Egypt and His non-return to

Bethlehem formed a complete break in the continuity of His History.

Between obscure Bethlehem in the far south, and obscure Nazareth in

the far north, there was no communication such as between towns in our

own land, and they who had sought the Child's life, as well as they

who might have worshipped Him, must have been dead. The aged parents

of the Baptist cannot have survived the thirty years which lay between

the Birth of Christ and the commencement of His Ministry. We have

already seen reason for supposing that Joseph had died before. None,

therefore, knew all except the Virgin-Mother; and she would hide it

the deeper in her heart, the more years passed, and she increasingly

felt, as they passed, that, both in His early obscurity and in His

later manifestation, she could not penetrate into the real meaning of

that mystery, with which she was so closely connected. She could not

understand it; how dared she speak of it? She could not understand;

nay, we can almost perceive, how she might even misunderstand - not

the fact, but the meaning and the purport of what had passed.

But in Nazareth they knew nothing of all this; and of Him only as that

Infant Whom His parents, Joseph the carpenter and Mary, had brought

with them months after they had first left Nazareth. Jewish law and

custom made it possible, that they might have been married long

before. And now they only knew of this humble family, that they lived

in retirement, and that sons and daughters had grown around their

humble board. Of Jesus, indeed, they must have heard that He was not

like others around - so quite different in all ways, as He grew in

wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man. Then came that

strange tarrying behind on His first visit to Jerusalem, when His

parents had to return to seek, and at last found Him in the temple.

This, also was only strange, though perhaps not strange in a child

such as Jesus; and of His own explanation of it, so full of deepest

meaning, they might not have heard. If we may draw probable, though

not certain, inferences, after that only these three outward

circumstances in the history of the family might have been generally

noticed: that Jesus followed the occupation of His adoptive

father;[3017]3017 that Joseph had died; and that the mother and

'brethren' of Jesus had left Nazareth,[3018]3018 while His 'sisters'

apparently continued there, being probably married to

Nazarenes.[3019]3019

When Jesus had first left Nazareth to seek Baptism at the hands of

John, it could scarcely have attracted much attention. Not only did

'the whole world' go after the Baptist, but, considering what was

known of Jesus, His absence from, not His presence at the banks of

Jordan, would have surprised the Nazarenes. Then came vague reports of

His early doings, and, what probably His countrymen would much more

appreciate, the accounts which the Galileans brought back from the

Feast of what Jesus had done at Jerusalem. His fame had preceded Him

on that memorable Sabbath, when all Nazareth had thronged the

Synagogue, curious to hear what the Child of Nazareth would have to

say, and still more eager to see what He could do. Of the charm of His

words there could be no question. Both what He said and how He said

it, was quite other that what they had ever listened to. The

difference was not in degree, but in kind: He spoke to them of the

Kingdom; yet not as for Israel's glory, but for unspeakable comfort in

the soul's deepest need. It was truly wonderful, and that not

abstractly, but as on the part of 'Joseph's Son.' That was all they

perceived. Of that which they had most come to see there was, and

could be, no manifestation, so long as they measured the Prophet by

His outward antecedents, forgetful that it was inward kinship of

faith, which connected Him that brought the blessing with those who

received it.

But this seeming assumption of superiority on the part of Joseph's Son

was quite too much for the better classes of Nazareth. It was

intolerable, that He should not only claim equality with an Elijah or

an Elisha, but place them, the burghers of Nazareth, as it were,

outside the pale of Israel, below a heathen man or woman. And so, if

He had not, without the show of it, proved the authority and power He

possessed, they would have cast Him headlong over the ledge of the

hill of their insulted town. And now He had come back to them, after

nine or ten months, in totally different circumstances. No one could

any longer question His claims, whether for good or for evil. As on

the Sabbath He stood up once more in that Synagogue to teach, they

were astonished. The rumour must have spread that, notwithstanding

all, His own kin - probably His 'sisters,' whom He might have been

supposed by many to have come to visit - did not own and honour Him as

a Prophet. Or else, had they of His own house purposely spread it, so

as not to be involved in His Fate? But the astonishment with which

they heard Him on that Sabbath was that of unbelief. The cause was so

apparently inadequate to the effect! They knew His supposed parentage

and His brothers; His sisters were still with them; and for these many

years had they known Him as the carpenter, the son of the carpenter.

Whence, then, had 'this One,' 'these things,' 'and what the wisdom

which' was 'given to this One' - and 'these mighty works done by His

Hands?'[3020]3020

It was, indeed, more than a difficulty - an impossibility - to account

for it on their principles. There could be no delusion, no collusion,

no deception. In our modern cant-phraseology, theirs might have been

designated Agnosticism and philosophic doubt. But philosophic it

certainly was not, any more than much that now passes, because it

bears that name; at least, if, according to modern negative criticism,

the inexplicable is also the unthinkable. Nor was it really doubt or

Agnosticism, any more than much that now covers itself with that garb.

It was, what Christ designated it - unbelief, since the questions

would have been easily answered - indeed, never have arisen - had they

believed that He was the Christ. And the same alternative still holds

true. If 'this One' is what negative criticism declares Him, which is

all that it can know of Him by the outside: the Son of Mary, the

Carpenter and Son of the carpenter of Nazareth, Whose family occupied

the humblest position among Galileans - then whence this wisdom which,

say of it what you will, underlies all modern thinking, and these

mighty works, which have moulded all modern history? Whence - if He be

only what you can see by the outside, and yet His be such wisdom, and

such mighty deeds have been wrought by His Hands? Is He only what you

say and see, seeing that such results are noways explicable on such

principles; or is He not much more than this - even the Christ of God?

'And He marvelled because of their unbelief.' In view of their own

reasoning it was most unreasonable. And equally unreasonable is modern

unbelief. For, the more strongly negative criticism asserts its

position as to the Person of Jesus, the more unaccountable are His

Teaching and the results of His Work.

In such circumstances as at Nazareth, nothing could be done by a

Christ, in contradistinction to a miracle-monger. It would have been

impossible to have finally given up His own town of Nazareth without

one further appeal and one further opportunity of repentance. As He

had begun, so He closed this part of His Galilean Ministry, by

preaching in His own Synagogue of Nazareth. Save in the case of a few

who were receptive, on whom He laid His Hands for healing, His visit

passed away without such 'mighty works' as the Nazarenes had heard of.

He will not return again to Nazareth. Henceforth He will make

commencement of sending forth His disciples, partly to disarm

prejudices of a personal character, partly to spread the Gospel-tiding

farther and wider than he alone could have carried them. For His Heart

compassionated the many who were ignorant and out of the way. And the

harvest was near, and the harvesting was great, and it was His

Harvest, into which He would send forth labourers.

For, although, in all likelihood, the words, from which quotation has

just been made,[3021]3021 were spoken at a later time,[3022]3022 they

are so entirely in the spirit of the present Mission of the Twelve,

that they, or words to a similar effect, may also have been uttered on

the present occasion. Of such seeming repetitions, when the

circumstances were analogous, although sometimes with different

application of the same many-sided words, there are not a few

instances, of which one will presently come under notice.[3023]3023

Truly those to whom the Twelve were sent forth were

'troubled'[3024]3024 as well as 'scattered,' like sheep that have not

a Shepherd, and it was to deliver them from the 'distress' caused by

'grievous wolves,' and to gather into His fold those that had been

scattered abroad, that Jesus sent forth the Twelve with the special

commission to which attention will now be directed. Viewing it in its

fullest form,[3025]3025 it is to be noted: -

First: That this Discourse of Christ consists of five parts: vv. 5 to

15; vv. 16 to 23; vv. 24 to 33; vv. 34 to 39; vv. 40 to the end.

Secondly: That many passages in it occur in different connections in

the other two Synoptic Gospels, specially in St. Mark xiii. and in St.

Luke xii. and xxi. From this it may be inferred, either that Jesus

spake the same or similar words on more than one occasion (when the

circumstances were analogous), or else that St. Matthew grouped

together into one Discourse, as being internally connected, sayings

that may have been spoken on different occasions. Or else - and this

seems to us the most likely - both these inferences may in part be

correct. For,

Thirdly: It is evident, that the Discourse reported by St. Matthew

goes far beyond that Mission of the Twelve, beyond even that of the

Early Church, indeed, sketches the history of the Church's Mission in

a hostile world, up 'to the end.' At the same time it is equally

evident, that the predictions, warnings, and promises applicable to a

later period in the Church's history, hold equally true in principle

in reference to the first Mission of the Twelve; and, conversely, that

what specially applied to it, also holds true in principle of the

whole subsequent history of the Church in its relation to a hostile

world. Thus, what was specially spoken at this time to the Twelve, has

ever since, and rightly, been applied to the Church; while that in it,

which specially refers to the Church of the future, would in principle

apply also to the Twelve.

Fourthly: This distinction of primary and secondary application in the

different parts of the Discourse, and their union in the general

principles underlying them, has to be kept in view, if we are to

understand this Discourse of Christ. Hence, also, the present and the

future seem in it so often to run into each other. The horizon is

gradually enlarging throughout the Discourse, but there is no change

in the standpoint originally occupied; and so the present merges into

the future, and the future mingles with the present. And this, indeed,

is also the characteristic of much of Old Testament prophecy, and

which made the prophet ever a preacher of the present, even while he

was a foreteller of the future.

Lastly: It is evidential of its authenticity, and deserves special

notice, that this Discourse, while so un-Jewish in spirit, is more

than any other, even more than that on the Mount, Jewish in its forms

of thought and modes of expression.

With the help of these principles, it will be more easy to mark the

general outline of this Discourse. Its first part[3026]3026 applies

entirely to this first Mission of the Twelve, although the closing

words point forward to 'the judgment.'[3027]3027 Accordingly it has

its parallels, although in briefer form, in the other two

Gospels.[3028]3028

1. The Twelve were to go forth two and two,[3029]3029 furnished with

authority[3030]3030 - or, as St. Luke more fully expresses it, with

'power and authority' - alike over all demons and to heal all manner

of diseases. It is of secondary importance, whether this was conveyed

to them by word only, or with some sacramental sign, such as breathing

on them or the laying on of hands. The special commission, for which

they received such power, was to proclaim the near advent of the

Kingdom, and, in manifestation as well as in evidence of it, to heal

the sick, cleanse the lepers, and cast out demons.[3031]3031 They were

to speak good and to do good in the highest sense, and that in a

manner which all would feel good: freely, even as they had received

it. Again, they were not to make any special provision[3032]3032 for

their journey, beyond the absolute immediate present.[3033]3033 They

were but labourers, yet as such they had claim to support. Their

Employer would provide, and the field in which they worked might well

be expected to supply it.[3034]3034 [3035]3035

In accordance with this, singleness of purpose and an entire

self-denial, which should lead them not to make provision 'for the

flesh,' but as labourers to be content with daily food, were the

further injunctions laid on them. Before entering into a city, they

were to make inquiry, literally to 'search out,' who in it was

'worthy,' and of them to ask hospitality; not seeking during their

stay a change for the gratification of vanity or for self-indulgence.

If the report on which they had made choice of a host proved true,

then the 'Peace with thee!' with which they had entered their

temporary home, would become a reality. Christ would make it such. As

He had given them 'power and authority,' so He would 'honour' the

draft on Him, in acknowledgment of hospitable reception, which the

Apostles' 'Peace with thee!' implied.

But even if the house should prove unworthy, the Lord would none the

less own the words of His messengers and make them real; only, in such

case the peace would return to them who had spoken it. Yet another

case was possible. The house to which their inquiries had led them, or

the city into which they had entered, might refuse to receive them,

because they came as Christ's ambassadors. Greater, indeed, would be

their guilt than that of the cities of the plain, since these had not

known the character of the heavenly guests to whom they refused

reception; and more terrible would be their future punishment. So

Christ would vindicate their authority as well as His own, and show

the reality of their commission: on the one hand, by making their Word

of Peace a reality to those who had proved 'worthy;' and, on the

other, by punishment if their message was refused. Lastly, in their

present Mission they were not to touch either Gentile or Samaritan

territory. The direction - so different in spirit from what Jesus

Himself had previously said and done, and from their own later

commission - was, of course, only 'for the present

necessity.'[3036]3036 For the present they were neither prepared nor

fitted to go beyond the circuit indicated. It would have been a fatal

anticipation of their inner and outer history to have attempted this,

and it would have defeated the object of our Lord of disarming

prejudices when making a final appeal to the Jews of Galilee.

Even these considerations lead us to expect a strictly Jewish cast in

this Discourse to the Disciples. The command to abstain from any

religious fellowship with Gentiles and Samaritans was in temporary

accommodation to the prejudices of His disciples and of the Jews. And

the distinction between 'the way of the Gentiles' and 'any city of the

Samaritans' is the more significant, when we bear in mind that even

the dust of a heathen road was regarded as defiling,[3037]3037 while

the houses, springs, roads, and certain food of the Samaritans were

declared clean.[3038]3038 At the same time, religiously and as

regarded fellowship, the Samaritans were placed on the same footing

with Gentiles.[3039]3039 Nor would the injunction, to impart their

message freely, sound strange in Jewish ears. It was, in fact, what

the Rabbis themselves most earnestly enjoined in regard to the

teaching of the Law and traditions, however different their practice

may have been.[3040]3040 Indeed, the very argument, that they were to

impart freely, because they had received freely, is employed by the

Rabbis, and derived from the language and example of Moses in Deut.

iv. 5.[3041]3041 [3042]3042 Again, the directions about not taking

staff, shoes, nor money-purse, exactly correspond to the Rabbinic

injunction not to enter the Temple-precincts with staff,

shoes[3043]3043 (mark, not sandals), and a money-girdle.[3044]3044 The

symbolic[3045]3045 reasons underlying this command would, in both

cases, be probably the same: to avoid even the appearance of being

engaged on other business, when the whole being should be absorbed in

the service of the Lord. At any rate, it would convey to the disciples

the idea, that they were to consider themselves as if entering the

Temple-precincts, thus carrying out the principle of Christ's first

thought in the Temple: 'Wist ye not that I must be about My Father's

business?'[3046]3046 Nor could they be in doubt what severity of final

punishment a doom heavier than that of Sodom and Gomorrah would imply,

since, according to early tradition, their inhabitants were to have no

part in the world to come.[3047]3047 And most impressive to a Jewish

mind would be the symbolic injunction, to shake off the dust of their

feet for a testimony against such a house or city. The expression, no

doubt, indicated that the ban of the Lord was resting on it, and the

symbolic act would, as it were, be the solemn pronouncing that 'nought

of the cursed thing' clave to them.[3048]3048 [3049]3049 In this

sense, anything that clave to a person was metaphorically called 'the

dust,' as for example, 'the dust of an evil tongue,'[3050]3050 'the

dust of usury,' as, on the other hand, to 'dust to idolatry' meant to

cleave to it.[3051]3051 Even the injunction not to change the

dwelling, where one had been received, was in accordance with Jewish

views, the example of Abraham being quoted, who[3052]3052 'returned to

the place where his tent had been at the beginning.'[3053]3053

[3054]3054

These remarks show how closely the Lord followed, in this first part

of His charge to the disciples,[3055]3055 Jewish forms of thinking and

modes of expression. It is not otherwise in the second,[3056]3056

although the difference is here very marked. We have no longer merely

the original commission, as it is given in almost the same terms by

St. Mark and St. Luke. But the horizon is now enlarged, and St.

Matthew reports that which the other Evangelists record at a later

stage of the Lord's Ministry. Whether or not when the Lord charged His

disciples on their first mission, He was led gradually to enlarge the

scope of His teaching so as to adapt it to all times, need not be

discussed. For St. Matthew himself could not have intended to confine

the words of Christ to this first journey of the Apostles, since they

contain references to division in families, persecutions, and conflict

with the civil power,[3057]3057 such as belong to a much later period

in the history of the Church; and, besides, contain also that

prediction which could not have applied to this first Mission of the

Apostles, 'Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the

Son of Man be come.'[3058]3058

Without here anticipating the full inquiry into the promise of His

immediate Coming, it is important to avoid, even at this stage, any

possible misunderstanding on the point. The expectation of the Coming

of 'the Son of Man' was grounded on a prophecy of Daniel,[3059]3059 in

which that Advent, or rather manifestation, was associated with

judgment. The same is the case in this Charge of our Lord. The

disciples in their work are described 'as sheep in the midst of

wolves,' a phrase which the Midrash[3060]3060 applies to the position

of Israel amidst a hostile world, adding: How great is that Shepherd,

Who delivers them, and vanquishes the wolves! Similarly, the

admonition to 'be wise as serpents and harmless as doves' is

reproduced in the Midrash,[3061]3061 where Israel is described as

harmless as the dove towards God, and wise as serpents towards the

hostile Gentile nations. Such and even greater would be the enmity

which the disciples, as the true Israel, would have to encounter from

Israel after the flesh. They would be handed over to the various

Sanhedrin,[3062]3062 and visited with such punishments as these

tribunals had power to inflict.[3063]3063 More than this, they would

be brought before governors and kings - primarily, the Roman governors

and the Herodian princes.[3064]3064 And so determined would be this

persecution, as to break the ties of the closest kinship, and to bring

on them the hatred of all men.[3065]3065 The only, but the

all-sufficient, support in those terrible circumstances was the

assurance of such help from above, that, although unlearned and

humble, they need have no care, nor make preparation in their defence,

which would be given them from above. And with this they had the

promise, that he who endured to the end would be saved, and the

prudential direction, so far as possible, to avoid persecution by

timely withdrawal, which could be the more readily achieved, since

they would not have completed their circuit of the cities of Israel

before the 'Son of Man be come.'

It is of the greatest importance to keep in view that, at whatever

period of Christ's Ministry this prediction and promise were spoken,

and whether only once or oftener, they refer exclusively to a Jewish

state of things. The persecutions are exclusively Jewish. This appears

from verse 18, where the answer of the disciples is promised to be

'for a testimony against them,' who had delivered them up, that is,

here evidently the Jews, as also against 'the Gentiles.' And the

Evangelistic circuit of the disciples in their preaching was to be

primarily Jewish; and not only so, but in the time when there were

still 'cities of Israel,' that is, previous to the final destruction

of the Jewish commonwealth. The reference, then, is to that period of

Jewish persecution and of Apostolic preaching in the cities of Israel,

which is bounded by the destruction of Jerusalem. Accordingly, the

'coming of the Son of Man,' and the 'end' here spoken of, must also

have the same application. It was, as we have seen, according to Dan.

vii. 13, a coming in judgment. To the Jewish persecuting authorities,

who had rejected the Christ, in order, as they imagined, to save their

City and Temple from the Romans,[3066]3066 and to whom Christ had

testified that He would come again, this judgment on their city and

state, this destruction of their polity, was 'the Coming of the Son of

Man' in judgment, and the only coming which the Jews, as a state,

could expect, the only one meet for them, even as, to them who look

for Him, He will appear a second time, without sin unto salvation.

That this is the only natural meaning attaching to this prediction,

especially when compared with the parallel utterances recorded in St.

Mark xiii. 9-13, appears to us indubitable. It is another question

how, or how far, those to whom these words were in the first place

addressed would understand their full bearing, at least at that time.

Even supposing, that the disciples who first heard did not distinguish

between the Coming to Israel in judgment, and that to the world in

mingled judgment and mercy, as it was afterwards conveyed to them in

the Parable of the Forthshooting of the Fig-tree,[3067]3067 yet the

early Christians must soon have become aware of it. For, the

distinction is sharply marked. As regards its manner, the 'second'

Coming of Christ may be said to correspond to the state of those to

whom He cometh. To the Jews His first Coming was visible, and as

claiming to be their King. They had asked for a sign; and no sign was

given them at the time. They rejected Him, and placed the Jewish

polity and nation in rebellion against 'the King.' To the Jews, who so

rejected the first visible appearance of Christ as their King, the

second appearance would be invisible but real; the sign which they had

asked would be given them, but as a sign of judgment, and His Coming

would be in judgment. Thus would His authority be vindicated, and He

appear, not, indeed, visibly but really, as what He had claimed to be.

That this was to be the manner and object of His Coming to Israel, was

clearly set forth to the disciples in the Parable of the Unthankful

Husbandmen.[3068]3068 The coming of the Lord of the vineyard would be

the destruction of the wicked husbandmen. And to render

misunderstanding impossible, the explanation is immediately added,

that the Kingdom of God was to be taken from them, and given to those

who would bring forth the fruits thereof. Assuredly, this could not,

even in the view of the disciples, which may have been formed on the

Jewish model, have applied to the Coming of Christ at the end of the

present Æon dispensation.

We bear in mind that this second, outwardly invisible but very real,

Coming of the Son of Man to the Jews, as a state, could only be in

judgment on their polity, in that 'Sign' which was once refused, but

which, when it appeared, would only too clearly vindicate His claims

and authority. Thus viewed, the passages, in which that second Coming

is referred to, will yield their natural meaning. Neither the mission

of the disciples, nor their journeying through the cities of Israel,

was finished, before the Son of Man came. Nay, there were those

standing there who would not taste death, till they had seen in the

destruction of the city and state the vindication of the Kingship of

Jesus, which Israel had disowned.[3069]3069 And even in those last

Discourses in which the horizon gradually enlarges, and this Coming in

judgment to Israel merges in the greater judgment on an unbelieving

world,[3070]3070 this earlier Coming to the Jewish nation is clearly

marked. The three Evangelists equally record it, that 'this

generation' should not pass away, till all things were

fulfilled.[3071]3071 To take the lowest view, it is scarcely

conceivable that these sayings would have been allowed to stand in all

the three Gospels, if the disciples and the early Church had

understood the Coming of the Son of Man in any other sense than as to

the Jews in the destruction of their polity. And it is most

significant, that the final utterances of the Lord as to His Coming

were elicited by questions arising from the predicted destruction of

the Temple. This the early disciples associated with the final Coming

of Christ. To explain more fully the distinction between them would

have been impossible, in consistency with the Lord's general purpose

about the doctrine of His Coming. Yet the Parables which in the

Gospels (especially in that by St. Matthew) follow on these

predictions,[3072]3072 and the teaching about the final Advent of 'the

Son of Man,' point clearly to a difference and an interval between the

one and the other.

The disciples must have the more readily applied this prediction of

His Coming to Palestine, since 'the woes' connected with it so closely

corresponded to those expected by the Jews before the Advent of

Messiah.[3073]3073 Even the direction to flee from persecution is

repeated by the Rabbis in similar circumstances and established by the

example of Jacob,[3074]3074 of Moses,[3075]3075 and of

David.[3076]3076

In the next section of this Discourse of our Lord, as reported by St.

Matthew,[3077]3077 the horizon is enlarged. The statements are still

primarily applicable to the early disciples, and their preaching among

the Jews and in Palestine. But their ultimate bearing is already

wider, and includes predictions and principles true to all time. In

view of the treatment which their Master received, the disciples must

expect misrepresentation and evil-speaking. Nor could it seem strange

to them, since even the common Rabbinic proverb had it:[3078]3078 'It

is enough for a servant to be as his lord' ({hebrew}). As we hear it

from the lips of Christ, we remember that this saying afterwards

comforted those, who mourned the downfall of wealthy and liberal homes

in Israel, by thoughts of the greater calamity which had overthrown

Jerusalem and the Temple. And very significant is its application by

Christ: 'If they have called the Master of the house

Beelzebul,[3079]3079 how much more them of His household.' This

charge, brought of course by the Pharisaic party of Jerusalem, had a

double significance. We believe, that the expression 'Master of the

house' looked back to the claims which Jesus had made on His first

purification of the Temple. We almost seem to hear the coarse Rabbinic

witticism in its play on the word Beelzebul. For, Zebhul, ({hebrew})

means in Rabbinic language, not any ordinary dwelling, but

specifically the Temple,[3080]3080 [3081]3081 and Beel-Zebul would be

the 'Master of the Temple.' On the other hand, Zibbul ({hebrew})

means[3082]3082 sacrificing to idols;[3083]3083 and hence Beel-zebul

would, in that sense, be equivalent to 'lord' or 'chief of idolatrous

sacrificing'[3084]3084 - the worst and chiefest of demons, who

presided over, and incited to, idolatry. 'The Lord of the Temple'

(which truly was His Church) was to them 'the chief of idolatrous

worship,' the Representative of God that of the worst of demons:

Beelzebul was Beelzibbul![3085]3085 What then might 'His Household'

expect at their hands?

But they were not to fear such misrepresentations. In due time the

Lord would make manifest both His and their true character.[3086]3086

[3087]3087 Nor were they to be deterred from announcing in the

clearest and most public manner, in broad daylight, and from the flat

roofs of houses, that which had been first told them in the darkness,

as Jewish teachers communicated the deepest and highest doctrines in

secret to their disciples, or as the preacher would whisper his

discourse into the ear of the interpreter. The deepest truths

concerning His Person, and the announcement of His Kingdom and Work,

were to be fully revealed, and loudly proclaimed. But, from a much

higher point of view, how different was the teaching of Christ from

that of the Rabbis! The latter laid it down as a principle, which they

tried to prove from Scripture,[3088]3088 that, in order to save one's

life, it was not only lawful, but even duty - if necessary, to commit

any kind of sin, except idolatry, incest, or murder.[3089]3089 Nay,

even idolatry was allowed, if only it were done in secret, so as not

to profane the Name of the Lord - than which death was infinitely

preferable.[3090]3090 Christ, on the other hand, not only ignored this

vicious Jewish distinction of public and private as regarded morality,

but bade His followers set aside all regard for personal safety, even

in reference to the duty of preaching the Gospel. There was a higher

fear than of men: that of God - and it should drive out the fear of

those who could only kill the body. Besides, why fear? God's

Providence extended even over the meanest of His creatures. Two

sparrows cost only an assarion ({hebrew}), about the third of a

penny.[3091]3091 Yet even one of them would not perish without the

knowledge of God. No illustration was more familiar to the Jewish mind

than that of His watchful care even over the sparrows. The beautiful

allusion in Amos iii. 5 was somewhat realistically carried out in a

legend which occurs in more than one Rabbinic passage. We are told

that, after that great miracle-worker of Jewish legend, R. Simeon ben

Jochai, had been for thirteen years in hiding from his persecutors in

a cave, where he was miraculously fed, he observed that, when the

bird-catcher laid his snare, the bird escaped, or was caught,

according as a voice from heaven proclaimed, 'Mercy,' or else,

'Destruction.' Arguing, that if even a sparrow could not be caught

without heaven's bidding, how much more safe was the life of a 'son of

man' ({hebrew}), he came forth.[3092]3092

Nor could even the additional promise of Christ: 'But of you even the

hairs of the head are all numbered,'[3093]3093 surprise His disciples.

But it would convey to them the gladsome assurance that, in doing His

Work, they were performing the Will of God, and were specially in His

keeping. And it would carry home to them - with the comfort of a very

different application, while engaged in doing the Work and Will of God

- what Rabbinism expressed in a realistic manner by the common

sayings, that whither a man was to go, thither his feet would carry

him; and, that a man could not injure his finger on earth, unless it

had been so decreed of him in heaven.[3094]3094 And in later Rabbinic

writings[3095]3095 we read, in almost the words of Christ: 'Do I not

number all the hairs of every creature?' And yet an even higher

outlook was opened to the disciples. All preaching was confessing, and

all confessing a preaching of Christ; and our confession or denial

would, almost by a law of nature, meet with similar confession or

denial on the part of Christ before His Father in heaven.[3096]3096

This, also, was an application of that fundamental principle, that

'nothing is covered that shall not be revealed,' which, indeed,

extendeth to the inmost secrets of heart and life.

What follows in our Lord's Discourse[3097]3097 still further widens

the horizon. It describes the condition and laws of His Kingdom, until

the final revelation of that which is now covered and hidden. So long

as His claims were set before a hostile world they could only provoke

war.[3098]3098 On the other hand, so long as such decision was

necessary, in the choice of either those nearest and dearest, of ease,

nay, of life itself, or else of Christ, there could be no compromise.

Not that, as is sometimes erroneously supposed, a very great degree of

love to the dearest on earth amounts to loving them more than Christ.

No degree of proper affection can ever make affection wrongful, even

as no diminution of it could make wrongful affection right. The love

which Christ condemneth differs not in degree, but in kind, from

rightful affection. It is one which takes the place of love to Christ

- not which is placed by the side of that of Christ. For, rightly

viewed, the two occupy different provinces. Wherever and whenever the

two affections come into comparison, they also come into collision.

And so the questions of not being worthy of Him (and who can be

positively worthy?), and of the true finding or losing of our life,

have their bearing on our daily life and profession.[3099]3099

But even in this respect the disciples must, to some extent, have been

prepared to receive the teaching of Christ. It was generally expected,

that a time of great tribulation would precede the Advent of the

Messiah. Again, it was a Rabbinic axiom, that the cause of the

Teacher, to whom a man owed eternal life, was to be taken in hand

before that of his father, to whom he owed only the life of this

world.[3100]3100 [3101]3101 Even the statement about taking up the

cross in following Christ, although prophetic, could not sound quite

strange. Crucifixion was, indeed, not a Jewish punishment, but the

Jews must have become sadly familiar with it. The Targum[3102]3102

speaks of it as one of the four modes of execution of which Naomi

described to Ruth as those in custom in Palestine, the other three

being - stoning, burning, and beheading. Indeed, the expression

'bearing the cross,' as indicative of sorrow and suffering, is so

common, that we read, Abraham carried the wood for the sacrifice of

Issac, 'like who bears his cross on his shoulder.'[3103]3103

Nor could the disciples be in doubt as to the meaning of the last part

of Christ's address.[3104]3104 They were old Jewish forms of thought,

only filled with the new wine of the Gospel. The Rabbis taught, only

in extravagant terms, the merit attaching to the reception and

entertainment of sages.[3105]3105 The very expression 'in the name of'

a prophet, or a righteous man, is strictly Jewish ({hebrew}), and

means for the sake of, or with intention, in regard to. It appears to

us, that Christ introduced His own distinctive teaching by the

admitted Jewish principle, that hospitable reception for the sake of,

or with the intention of doing it to, a prophet or a righteous man,

would procure a share in the prophet's righteous man's reward. Thus,

tradition had it, that a Obadiah of King Ahab's court[3106]3106 had

become the prophet of that name, because he had provided for the

hundred prophets.[3107]3107 And we are repeatedly assured, that to

receive a sage, or even an elder, was like receiving the Shekhinah

itself. But the concluding promise of Christ, concerning the reward of

even 'a cup of cold water' to 'one of these little ones' 'in the name

of a disciple,' goes far beyond the farthest conceptions of His

contemporaries. Yet even so, the expression would, so far as its form

is concerned, perhaps bear a fuller meaning to them than to us. These

'little ones' ({hebrew}) were 'the children,' who were still learning

the elements of knowledge, and who would by-and-by grow into

'disciples.' For, as the Midrash has it: 'Where there are no little

ones, there are no disciples; and where no disciples, no sages: where

no sages, there no elders; where no elders, there no prophets; and

where no prophets, there[3108]3108 does God not cause His Shekhinah to

rest.'[3109]3109

We have been so particular in marking the Jewish parallelisms in this

Discourse, first, because it seemed important to show, that the words

of the Lord were not beyond the comprehension of the disciples.

Starting from forms of thought and expressions with which they were

familiar, He carried them far beyond Jewish ideas and hopes. But,

secondly, it is just in this similarity of form, which proves that it

was of the time, and to the time, as well as to us and to all times,

that we best see, how far the teaching of Christ transcended all

contemporary conception.

But the reality, the genuineness, the depth and fervour of

self-surrender, which Christ expects, is met by equal fulness of

acknowledgment on His part, alike in heaven and on earth. In fact,

there is absolute identification with His ambassadors on the part of

Christ. As He is the Ambassador of the Father, so are they His, and as

such also the ambassadors of the Father. To receive them was.

therefore, not only to receive Christ, but the Father, Who would own

the humblest, even the meanest service of love to one of the learners,

'the little ones.' All the more painful is the contrast of Jewish

pride and self-righteousness, which attributes supreme merit to

ministering, not as to God, but as to man; not for God's sake, but for

that of the man; a pride which could give utterance to such a saying,

' All the prophets have announced salvation only to the like of those

who give their daughters in marriage to sages, or cause them to make

gain, or give of their goods to them. But what the bliss of the sages

themselves is, no mortal eye has seen.'[3110]3110

It was not with such sayings that Christ sent forth His disciples; nor

in such spirit, that the world has been subdued to Him. The

relinquishing of all that is nearest and dearest, cross-bearing, loss

of life itself - such were the terms of His discipleship. Yet

acknowledgment there would surely, be first, in the felt and assured

sense of His Presence; then, in the reward of a prophet, a righteous

man, or, it might be, a disciple. But all was to be in Him, and for

Him, even the gift of 'a cup of cold water' to 'a little one.' Nay,

neither the 'little ones,' the learners, nor the cup of cold water

given them, would be overlooked or forgotten.

But over all did the 'Meek and Lowly One' cast the loftiness of His

Humility.

CHAPTER XXVIII.

THE STORY OF THE BAPTIST, FROM HIS LAST TESTIMONY TO JESUS TO HIS

BEHEADING

IN PRISON

(1. St. John iii. 25-30. 2. St. Matt. ix. 14-17; St. Mark ii. 18-22;

St. Luke v. 33-39. 3. St. Matt. xi. 2-14; St. Luke vii. 18-35. 4. St.

Matt. xiv. 1-12; St. Mark vi.14-29; St. Luke ix. 7-9.)

WHILE the Apostles went forth by two and two on their first

Mission,[3111]3111 Jesus Himself taught and preached in the towns

around Capernaum.[3112]3112 This period of undisturbed activity seems,

however, to have been of brief duration.[3113]3113 That it was

eminently successful, we infer not only from direct notices,[3114]3114

but also from the circumstance that, for the first time, the attention

of Herod Antipas was now called to the Person of Jesus. We suppose

that, during the nine or ten months of Christ's Galilean Ministry, the

Tetrarch had resided in his Paraean dominions (east of the Jordan),

either at Julias or at Machærus, in which latter fortress the Baptist

was beheaded. We infer, that the labours of the Apostles had also

extended thus far, since they attracted the notice of Herod. In the

popular excitement caused by the execution of the Baptist, the

miraculous activity of the messengers of the Christ, Whom John had

announced, would naturally attract wider interest, while Antipas

would, under the influence of fear and superstition, give greater heed

to them. We can scarcely be mistaken in supposing, that this accounts

for the abrupt termination of the labours of the Apostles, and their

return to Jesus. At any rate, the arrival of the disciples of John,

with tidings of their master's death, and the return of the Apostles,

seem to have been contemporaneous.[3115]3115 Finally, we conjecture,

that it was among the motives which influenced the removal of Christ

and His Apostles from Capernaum. Temporarily to withdraw Himself and

His disciples from Herod, to give them a season of rest and further

preparation after the excitement of the last few weeks, and to avoid

being involved in the popular movements consequent on the murder of

the Baptist - such we may venture to indicated as among the reasons of

the departure of Jesus and His disciples, first into the dominions of

the Tetrarch Philip, on the eastern side of the Lake,[3116]3116 and

after that 'into the borders of Tyre and Sidon.'[3117]3117 Thus the

fate of the Baptist was, as might have been expected, decisive in its

influence on the History of the Christ and of His Kingdom. But we have

yet to trace the incidents in the life of John, so far as recorded in

the Gospels, from the time of His last contact with Jesus to his

execution.

1. It was[3118]3118 in the late spring, or rather early summer of the

year 27 of our era, that John was baptizing in Ænon, near to Salim. In

the neighbourhood, Jesus and His disciples were similarly

engaged.[3119]3119 The Presence and activity of Jesus in Jerusalem at

the Passover[3120]3120 had determined the Pharisaic party to take

active measures against Him and His Forerunner, John. As to the first

outcome of this plan we notice the discussions on the question of

'purification,' and the attempt to separate between Christ and the

Baptist by exciting the jealousy of the latter.[3121]3121 But the

result was far different. His disciples might have been influenced,

but John himself was too true a man, and too deeply convinced of the

reality of Christ's Mission, to yield even for a moment to such

temptation. Nothing more noble can be conceived than the

self-abnegation of the Baptist in circumstances which would not only

have turned aside an impostor or an enthusiast, but must have severely

tried the constancy of the truest man. At the end of a most trying

career of constant self-denial its scanty fruits seemed, as it were,

snatched from Him, and the multitude, which he had hitherto swayed,

turned after Another, to Whom himself had first given testimony, but

Who ever since had apparently neglected him. And now he had seemingly

appropriated the one distinctive badge of his preaching! Not to rebel,

nor to murmur, but even to rejoice in this as the right and proper

thing, for which he had longed as the end of his own work - this

implies a purity, simplicity, and grandeur of purpose, and a strength

of conviction unsurpassed among men. The moral height of this

testimony of John, and the evidential force of the introduction of

this narrative - utterly unaccountable, nay, unintelligible on the

hypothesis that it is not true - seem to us among the strongest

evidences in favour of the Gospel-history.

It was not the greatness of the Christ, to his own seeming loss, which

could cloud the noonday of the Baptist's convictions. In simple Judæan

illustration, he was only 'the friend of the Bridegroom' (the

'Shoshebheyna'), with all that popular association or higher Jewish

allegory connected with that relationship.[3122]3122 He claimed not

the bride. His was another joy - that of hearing the Voice of her

rightful Bridegroom, Whose 'groomsman' he was. In the sound of that

Voice lay the fulfilment of his office. And St. John, looking back

upon the relation between the Baptist and Jesus - on the reception of

the testimony of the former and the unique position of 'the

Bridegroom' - points out the lessons of the answer of the Baptist to

his disciples (St. John iii. 31 to 36[3123]3123) as formerly those of

the conversation with Nicodemus.[3124]3124

This hour of the seeming abasement of the Baptist was, in truth, that

of the highest exaltation, as marking the fulfilment of his office,

and, therefore, of his joy. Hours of cloud and darkness were to

follow.

2. The scene has changed, and the Baptist has become the prisoner of

Herod Antipas. The dominions of the latter embraced, in the north:

Galilee, west of the Jordan and of the Lake of Galilee; and in the

south: Peræa, east of the Jordan. To realise events we must bear in

mind that, crossing the Lake eastwards, we should pass from the

possessions of Herod to those of the Tetrarch Philip, or else come

upon the territory of the 'Ten Cities,' or Decapolis, a kind of

confederation of townships, with constitution and liberties, such as

those of the Grecian cities.[3125]3125 By a narrow strip northwards,

Peræa just slipped in between the Decapolis and Samaria. It is

impossible with certainty to localise the Ænon, near Salim, where John

baptized. Ancient tradition placed the latter a few miles south of

Scythopolis or Bethshean, on the borders of Galilee, or rather, the

Decapolis, and Samaria. But as the eastern part of Samaria towards the

Jordan was very narrow, one may well believe that the place was close

to, perhaps actually in, the north-eastern angle of the province of

Judæa, where it borders on Samaria. We are now on the western bank of

Jordan. The other, or eastern, bank of the river would be that narrow

northern strip of Peræa which formed part of the territory of Antipas.

Thus a few miles, or the mere crossing of the river, would have

brought the Baptist into Peræa. There can be no doubt but that the

Baptist must either have crossed into, or else that Ænon, near Salim,

was actually within the dominions of Herod.[3126]3126 It was on that

occasion that Herod seized on his person,[3127]3127 and that Jesus,

Who was still within Judæan territory, withdrew from the intrigues of

the Pharisees and the proximity of Herod, through Samaria, into

Galilee.[3128]3128

For, although Galilee belonged to Herod Antipas, it was sufficiently

far from the present residence of the Tetrarch in Peræa. Tiberias, his

Galilean residence, with its splendid royal palace, had only been

built a year or two before;[3129]3129 and it is impossible to suppose,

that Herod would not have sooner heard of the fame of Jesus,[3130]3130

if his court had been in Tiberias, in the immediate neighbourhood of

Capernaum. We are, therefore, shut up to the conclusion, that during

the nine or ten months of Christ's Ministry in Galilee, the Tetrarch

resided in Peræa. Here he had two palaces, one at Julias, or Livias,

the other at Machærus. The latter will be immediately described as the

place of the Baptist's imprisonment and martyrdom. The Julias, or

Livias, of Peræa must be distinguished from another city of that name

(also called Bethsaida) in the North (east of the Jordan), and within

the dominions of the Tetrarch Philip. The Julias of Peræa represented

the ancient Beth Haram in the tribe of Gad,[3131]3131 a name for which

Josephus gives[3132]3132 Betharamphtha, and the Rabbis Beth

Ramthah.[3133]3133 [3134]3134 It still survives in the modern

Beit-harân. But of the fortress and palace which Herod had built, and

named after the Empress, 'all that remains' are 'a few traces of walls

and foundations.'[3135]3135

Supposing Antipas to have been at the Peræan Julias, he would have

been in the closest proximity to the scene of the Baptist's last

recorded labours at AEnon. We can now understand, not only how John

was imprisoned by Antipas, but also the threefold motives which

influenced it. According to Josephus,[3136]3136 the Tetrarch was

afraid that his absolute influence over the people, who seemed

disposed to carry out whatever he advised, might lead to a rebellion.

This circumstance is also indicated in the remark of St.

Matthew,[3137]3137 that Herod was afraid to put the Baptist to death

on account of the people's opinion of him. On the other hand, the

Evangelic statement,[3138]3138 that Herod had imprisoned John on

account of his declaring his marriage with Herodias unlawful, is in no

way inconsistent with the reason assigned by Josephus. Not only might

both motives have influenced Herod, but there is an obvious connection

between them. For, John's open declaration of the unlawfulness of

Herod's marriage, as unlike incestuous and adulterous, might, in view

of the influence which the Baptist exercised, have easily led to a

rebellion. In our view, the sacred text gives indication of yet a

third cause which led to John's imprisonment, and which indeed, may

have given final weight to the other two grounds of enmity against

him. It has been suggested, that Herod must have been attached to the

Sadducees, if to any religious party, because such a man would not

have connected himself with the Pharisees. The reasoning is singularly

inconclusive. On political grounds, a Herod would scarcely have lent

his weight to the Sadducean or aristocratic priest-party in Jerusalem;

while, religiously, only too many instances are on record of what the

Talmud itself calls 'painted ones, who are like the Pharisees, and who

act like Zimri, but expect the reward of Phinehas.'[3139]3139 Besides,

the Pharisees may have used Antipas as their tool, and worked upon his

wretched superstition to effect their own purposes. And this is what

we suppose to have been the case. The reference to the Pharisaic

spying and to their comparisons between the influence of Jesus and

John,[3140]3140 which led to the withdrawal of Christ into Galilee,

seems to imply that the Pharisees had something to do with the

imprisonment of John. Their connection with Herod appears even more

clearly in the attempt to induce Christ's departure from Galilee, on

pretext of Herod's machinations. It will be remembered that the Lord

unmasked their hypocrisy by bidding them go back to Herod, showing

that He fully knew that real danger threatened Him, not from the

Tetrarch, but from the leaders of the party in Jerusalem.[3141]3141

Our inference therefore is, that Pharisaic intrigue had a very large

share in giving effect to Herod's fear of the Baptist and of his

reproofs.

3. We suppose, then, that Herod Antipas was at Julias, in the

immediate neighbourhood of Ænon, at the time of John's imprisonment.

But, according to Josephus, whose testimony there is no reason to

question, the Baptist was committed to the strong fortress of

Machærus.[3142]3142 [3143]3143 If Julias lay where the Wady of the

Heshban debouches into the Jordan, east of that river, and a little

north of the Dead Sea, Machærus is straight south of it, about two and

a half hours north-west of the ancient Kiriathaim (the modern

Kurêiyât), the site of Chedorlaomer's victory.[3144]3144 Machærus(the

modern M'Khaur) marked the extreme point south, as Pella that north,

in Peræa. As the boundary fortress in the south-east (towards Arabia),

its safety was of the greatest importance, and everything was done to

make a place, exceedingly strongly by nature, impregnable. It had been

built by Alexander Jannæus, but destroyed by Gabinius in the wars of

Pompey.[3145]3145 It was not only restored, but greatly enlarged, by

Herod the Great, who surrounded it with the best defences known at

that time. In fact, Herod the Great built a town along the shoulder of

the hill, and surrounded it by walls, fortified by towers. From this

town a farther height had to be climbed, on which the castle stood,

surrounded by walls, and flanked by towers one hundred and sixty

cubits high. Within the inclosure of the castle Herod had built a

magnificent palace. A large number of cisterns, storehouses, and

arsenals, containing every weapon of attack or defence, had been

provided to enable the garrison to stand a prolonged siege. Josephus

describes even its natural position as unassailable. The highest point

of the fort was on the west, where it looked sheer down into a valley.

North and south the fort was equally cut off by valleys, which could

not be filled up for siege purposes. On the east there was, indeed, a

valley one hundred cubits deep, but it terminated in a mountain

opposite to Machærus. This was evidently the weak point of the

situation.[3146]3146

A late and very trustworthy traveller[3147]3147 has pronounced the

description of Josephus[3148]3148 as sufficiently accurate, although

exaggerated, and as probably not derived from personal observation. He

has also furnished such pictorial details, that we can transport

ourselves to that rocky keep of the Baptist, perhaps the more vividly

that, as we wander over the vast field of stones, upturned

foundations, and broken walls around, we seem to view the scene in the

lurid sunset of judgment. 'A rugged line of upturned squared stones'

shows the old Roman paved road to Machærus. Ruins covering quite a

square mile, on a group of undulating hills, mark the site of the

ancient town of Machærus. Although surrounded by a wall and towers,

its position is supposed not to have been strategically defensible.

Only a mass of ruins here, with traces of a temple to the Syrian

Sun-God, broken cisterns, and desolateness all around. Crossing a

narrow deep valley, about a mile wide, we climb up to the ancient

fortress on a conical hill. Altogether it covered a ridge of more than

a mile. The key of the position was a citadel to the extreme east of

the fortress. It occupied the summit of the cone, was isolated, and

almost impregnable, but very small. We shall return to examine it.

Meanwhile, descending a steep slope about 150 yards towards the west,

we reach the oblong flat plateau that formed the fortress, containing

Herod's magnificent palace. Here, carefully collected, are piled up

the stones of which the citadel was built. These immense heaps look

like a terrible monument of judgment.

We pass on among the ruins. No traces of the royal palace are left,

save foundations and enormous stones upturned. Quite at the end of

this long fortress in the west, and looking southwards, is a square

fort. We return, through what we regard as the ruins of the

magnificent castle-palace of Herod, to the highest and strongest part

of the defences - the eastern keep or the citadel, on the steep slope

150 yards up. The foundations of the walls all around, to the height

of a yard or two above the ground, are still standing. As we clamber

over them to examine the interior, we notice how small this keep is:

exactly 100 yards in diameter. There are scarcely any remains of it

left. A well of great depth, and a deep cemented cistern with the

vaulting of the roof still complete, and - of most terrible interest

to us - two dungeons, one of them deep down, its sides scarcely broken

in, 'with small holes still visible in the masonry where staples of

wood and iron had once been fixed!' As we look down into its hot

darkness, we shudder in realising that this terrible keep had for nigh

ten months been the prison of that son of the free 'wilderness,' the

bold herald of the coming Kingdom, the humble, earnest, self-denying

John the Baptist. Is this the man whose testimony about the Christ may

be treated as a falsehood?

We withdraw our gaze from trying to pierce this gloom and to call up

in it the figure of the camel-hair-clad and leather-girt preacher, and

look over the ruins at the scene around. We are standing on a height

not less than 3,800 feet above the Dead Sea. In a straight line it

seems not more than four or five miles; and the road down to it leads,

as it were, by a series of ledges and steps. We can see the whole

extent of this Sea of Judgment, and its western shores from north to

south. We can almost imagine the Baptist, as he stands surveying this

noble prospect. Far to the south stretches the rugged wilderness of

Judæa, bounded by the hills of Hebron. Here nestles Bethlehem, there

is Jerusalem. Or, turning another way, and looking into the deep cleft

of the Jordan valley: this oasis of beauty is Jericho; beyond it, like

a silver thread, Jordan winds through a burnt, desolate-looking

country, till it is lost to view in the haze which lies upon the edge

of the horizon. As the eye of the Baptist travelled over it, he could

follow all the scenes of His life and labours, from the home of his

childhood in the hill-country of Judæa, to those many years of

solitude and communing with God in the wilderness, and then to the

first place of his preaching and Baptism, and onwards to that where he

had last spoken of the Christ, just before his own captivity. And now

the deep dungeon in the citadel on the one side, and, on the other,

down that slope, the luxurious palace of Herod and his adulterous,

murderous wife, while the shouts of wild revelry and drunken merriment

rise around! Was this the Kingdom he had come to announce as near at

hand; for which he had longed, prayed, toiled, suffered, utterly

denied himself and all that made life pleasant, and the rosy morning

of which he had hailed with hymns of praise? Where was the Christ? Was

He the Christ? What was He doing? Was he eating and drinking all this

while with publicans and sinners, when he, the Baptist, was suffering

for Him? Was He in His Person and Work so quite different from

himself? and why was He so? And did the hot haze and mist gather also

over this silver thread in the deep cleft of Israel's barren burnt-up

desolateness?

4. In these circumstances we scarcely wonder at the feelings of John's

disciples, as months of this weary captivity passed. Uncertain what to

expect, they seem to have oscillated between Machærus and Capernaum.

Any hope in their Master's vindication and deliverance lay in the

possibilities involved in the announcement he had made of Jesus as the

Christ. And it was to Him that their Master's finger had pointed them.

Indeed, some of Jesus' earliest and most intimate disciples had come

from their ranks; and, as themselves had remarked, the multitude had

turned to Jesus even before the Baptist's imprisonment.[3149]3149 And

yet, could He be the Christ? How many things about Him that were

strange and seemed inexplicable! In their view, there must have been a

terrible contrast between him who lay in the dungeon of Machærus, and

Him Who sat down to eat and drink at a feast of the publicans.

His reception of publicans and sinners they could understand; their

own Master had not rejected them. But why eat and drink with them? Why

feasting, and this in a time when fasting and prayer would have seemed

specially appropriate? And, indeed, was not fasting always

appropriate? And yet this new Messiah had not taught his disciples

either to fast or what to pray! The Pharisees, in their anxiety to

separate between Jesus and His Forerunner, must have told them all

this again and again, and pointed to the contrast.

At any rate, it was at the instigation of the Pharisees, and in

company with them,[3150]3150 that the disciples of John propounded to

Jesus this question about fasting and prayer, immediately after the

feast in the house of the converted Levi-Matthew.[3151]3151 We must

bear in mind that fasting and prayer, or else fasting and alms, or all

the three, were always combined. Fasting represented the negative,

prayer and alms the positive element, in the forgiveness of sins.

Fasting, as self-punishment and mortification, would avert the anger

of God and calamities. Most extraordinary instances of the purposes in

view in fasting, and of the results obtained are told in Jewish

legend, which (as will be remembered) went so far as to relate how a

Jewish saint was thereby rendered proof against the fire of Gehenna,

of which a realistic demonstration was given when his body was

rendered proof against ordinary fire.[3152]3152

Even apart from such extravagances,[3153]3153 Rabbinism gave an

altogether external aspect to fasting. In this it only developed to

its utmost consequences a theology against which the Prophets of old

had already protested. Perhaps, however, the Jews are not solitary in

their misconception and perversion of fasting. In their view, it was

the readiest means of turning aside any threatening calamity, such as

drought, pestilence, or national danger. This, ex opere operato:

because fasting was self-punishment and mortification, not because a

fast meant mourning (for sin, not for its punishment), and hence

indicated humiliation, acknowledgment of sin, and repentance. The

second and fifth days of the week (Monday and Thursday)[3154]3154 were

those appointed for public fasts, because Moses was supposed to have

gone up the Mount for the second Tables of the Law on a Thursday, and

to have returned on a Monday. The self-introspection of Pharisaism led

many to fast on these two days all the year round,[3155]3155 just as

in Temple-times not a few would offer daily trespass-offering for sins

of which they were ignorant. Then there were such painful minutiæ of

externalism, as those which ruled how, on a less strict fast, a person

might wash and anoint; while on the strictest fast, it was prohibited

even to salute one another.[3156]3156 [3157]3157

It may well have been, that it was on one of those weekly fasts that

the feast of Levi-Matthew had taken place, and that this explains the

expression: 'And John's disciples and the Pharisees were

fasting.[3158]3158 [3159]3159 This would give point to their

complaint,' 'Thy disciples fast not.' Looking back upon the standpoint

from which they viewed fasting, it is easy to perceive why Jesus could

not have sanctioned, not even tolerated, the practice among His

disciples, as little as St. Paul could tolerate among Judaising

Christians the, in itself indifferent, practice of circumcision. But

it was not so easy to explain this at the time of the disciples of

John. For, to understand it, implied already entire transformation

from the old to the new spirit. Still more difficult must it have been

to do it in in such manner, as at the same time to lay down principles

that would rule all similar questions to all ages. But our Lord did

both, and even thus proved His Divine Mission.

The last recorded testimony of the Baptist had pointed to Christ as

the 'Bridegroom.'[3160]3160 As explained in a previous chapter, John

applied this in a manner which appealed to popular custom. As he had

pointed out, the Presence of Jesus marked the marriage-week. By

universal consent and according to Rabbinic law, this was to be a time

of unmixed festivity.[3161]3161 Even in the Day of Atonement a bride

was allowed to relax one of the ordinances of that strictest

fast.[3162]3162 During the marriage-week all mourning was to be

suspended - even the obligation of the prescribed daily prayers

ceased. It was regarded as a religious duty to gladden the bride and

bridegroom. Was it not, then, inconsistent on the part of John's

disciples to expect 'the sons of the bride-chamber' to fast, so long

as the Bridegroom was with them?

This appeal of Christ is still further illustrated by the Talmudic

ordinance[3163]3163 which absolved 'the friends of the bridegroom,'

and all 'the sons of the bride-chamber,' even from the duty of

dwelling in booths (at the Feast of Tabernacles). The expression,

'sons of the bride-chamber' ({hebrew}), which means all invited

guests, has the more significance, when we remember that the

Covenant-union between God and Israel was not only compared to a

marriage, but the Tabernacle and Temple designated as 'the bridal

chambers.'[3164]3164 [3165]3165 And, as the institution of 'friends of

the bridegroom' prevailed in Judæa, but not in Galilee, this marked

distinction of the 'friends of the bridegroom,'[3166]3166 in the mouth

of the Judæan John and 'sons of the bride-chamber' in that of the

Galilean Jesus, is itself evidential of historic accuracy, as well as

of the Judæan authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

But let it not be thought that it was to be a time of unbroken joy to

the disciples of Jesus. Nay, the ideas of the disciples of John

concerning the Messianic Kingdom, as one of resistless outward victory

and assertion of power, were altogether wrong. The Bridegroom would be

violently taken from them, and then would be the time for mourning and

fasting. Not that this necessarily implies literal fasting, any more

than it excludes it, provided the great principles, more fully

indicated immediately afterwards, are contrary to the spirit of the

joyous liberty of the children of God. It is only a sense of sin, and

the felt absence of the Christ, which should lead to mourning and

fasting, though not in order thereby to avert either the anger of God

or outward calamity. Besides the evidential force of this highly

spiritual, and thoroughly un-Jewish view of fasting, we notice some

other points in confirmation of his, and of the Gospel-history

generally. On the hypothesis of a Jewish invention of the

Gospel-history, or of its Jewish embellishment, the introduction of

this narrative would be incomprehensible. Again, on the theory of a

fundamental difference in the Apostolic teaching, St. Matthew and St.

Mark representing the original Judaic, St. Luke the freer Pauline

development, the existence of this narrative in the first two Gospels

would seem unaccountable. Or, to take another view - on the hypothesis

of the much later and non-Judæan (Ephesian) authorship of the Fourth

Gospel, the minute archæological touches, and the general fitting of

the words of the Baptist[3167]3167 into the present narrative would be

inexplicable. Lastly, as against all deniers and detractors of the

Divine Mission of Jesus, this early anticipation of His violent

removal by death, and of the consequent mourning of the Church, proves

that it came not to him from without, as by the accident of events,

but that from the beginning He anticipated the end, and pursued it of

set, steadfast purpose.

Yet another point in evidence comes to us from the eternal and

un-Jewish principles implied in the two illustrations, of which Christ

here made use.[3168]3168 In truth, the Lord's teaching is now carried

down to its ultimate principles. The slight variations which here

occur in the Gospel of St. Luke, as, indeed, such exist in so many of

the narratives of the same events by different Evangelists, should not

be 'explained away.' For, the sound critic should never devise an

explanation for the sake of a supposed difficulty, but truthfully

study the text - as an interpreter, not an apologist. Such variations

of detail present no difficulty. As against a merely mechanical

unspiritual accord, they afford evidence of truthful, independent

witness, and irrefragable proof that, contrary to modern negative

criticism, and three narratives are not merely different recensions of

one and the same original document.

In general, the two illustrations employed - that of the piece of

undressed cloth (or, according to St. Luke, a piece torn from a new

garment) sewed upon the rent of an old garment, and that of the new

wine put into a old wine-skins - must not be too closely pressed in

regard to their language.[3169]3169 They seem chiefly to imply this:

You ask, why do we fast often, but Thy disciples fast not? You are

mistaken in supposing that the old garment can be retained, and merely

its rents made good by patching it with a piece of new cloth. Not to

speak of the incongruity, the effect would only be to make the rent

ultimately worse. The old garment will not bear mending with the

'undressed cloth.' Christ's was not merely a reformation: all things

must become new. Or, again, take the other view of it - as the old

garment cannot be patched from the new, so, on the other hand, can the

new wine of the Kingdom not be confined in the old forms. It would

burst those wine-skins. The spirit must, indeed, have its

corresponding form of expression; but that form must be adapted, and

correspond to it. Not the old with a little of the new to hold it

together where it is rent; but the new, and that not in the old

wine-skins, but in a form corresponding to the substance. Such are the

two final principles[3170]3170 - the one primary addressed to the

Pharisees, the other to the disciples of John, by which the

illustrative teaching concerning the marriage-feast, with its bridal

garment and wine of banquet, is carried far beyond the original

question of the disciples of John, and receives an application to all

time.

5. We are in spirit by the mount of God, and about to witness the

breaking of a terrible storm.[3171]3171 It is one that uproots the

great trees and rends the rocks; and all we shall watch it solemnly,

earnestly, as with bared head - or, like Elijah, with face wrap in

mantle. Weeks had passed, and the disciples of John had come back and

showed their Master of all these things. He still lay in the dungeon

of Machærus; his circumstances unchanged - perhaps, more hopeless than

before. For, Herod was in that spiritually most desperate state: he

had heard the Baptist, and was much perplexed. And still he heard -

but only heard - him gladly.[3172]3172 [3173]3173 It was a case by no

means singular, and of which Felix, often sending for St. Paul, at

whose preaching of righteousness, temperance, and the judgement to

come, he had trembled, offers only one of many parallels. That, when

hearing him, Herod was 'much perplexed,' we can understand, since he

'feared him, knowing that he was a righteous man and holy,' and thus

fearing 'heard him.' But that being 'much perplexed,' he still 'heard

him gladly,' constituted the hopelessness of his case. But was the

Baptist right? Did it constitute part of his Divine calling to have

not only denounced, but apparently directly confronted Herod on his

adulterous marriage? Had he not attempt to lift himself the axe which

seemed to have slip from the grasp of Him, of Whom the Baptist had

hoped and said that He would lay it to the root of the tree?

Such thoughts may have been with him, as he passed from his dungeon to

the audience of Herod, and from such bootless interviews back to his

deep keep. Strange as it may seem, it was, perhaps, better for the

Baptist when he was alone. Much as his disciples honoured and loved

him, and truly zealous and jealous for him as they were, it was best

when they were absent. There are times when affection only pains, by

forcing on our notice inability to understand, and adding to our

sorrow that of feeling our inmost being a stranger to those nearest,

and who love us must. Then, indeed, is a man alone. It is so with the

Baptist. The state of mind and experience of his disciples had already

appeared, even in the slight notices of his disciples has already

appeared, even in the slight notices concerning them. Indeed, had they

fully understood him, and not ended where he began - which, truly, is

the characteristic of all sects, in their crystallisation, or, rather,

ossification of truth - they would not have remained his disciples;

and this consciousness must also have brought exquisite pain. Their

very affection for him, and their zeal for his credit (as shown in the

almost coarse language of their inquiry: 'John the Baptist hath sent

us unto Thee, saying, Art Thou He that cometh, or look we for

another?'), as well as their tenacity of unprogressiveness - were all,

so to speak, marks of his failure. And, if he had failed with them,

had he succeeded in anything?

And yet further and more terrible questions rose in that dark dungeon.

Like serpents that crept out of its walls, they would uncoil and raise

their heads with horrible hissing. What if, after all, there had been

some terrible mistake on his part? At any rate the logic of events was

against him. He was now the fast prisoner of that Herod, to whom he

had spoken with authority; in the power of that bold adulteress,

Herodias. If he were Elijah, the great Tishbite had never been in the

hands of Ahab and Jezebel. And the Messiah, Whose Elijah he was, moved

not; could not, or would not, move, but feasted with publicans and

sinners! Was it all a reality? or - oh, thought too horrible for

utterance - could it have been a dream, bright but fleeting, uncaused

by any reality, only the reflection of his own imagination? It must

have been a terrible hour, and the power of darkness. At the end of

one's life, and that of such self-denial and suffering, and with a

conscience so alive to God, which had - when a youth - driven him

burning with holy zeal into the wilderness, to have such a question

meeting him as: Art Thou He, or do we wait for another? Am I right, or

in error and leading others into error? must have been truly awful.

Not Paul, when forsaken of all he lay in the dungeon, the aged

prisoner of Christ; not Huss, when alone at Constance he encountered

the whole Catholic Council and the flames; only He, the God-Man, over

Whose soul crept the death-coldness of great agony when, one by one,

all light of God and man seemed to fade out, and only that one

remained burning - His own faith in the Father, could have experienced

bitterness like this. Let no one dare to say that the faith of John

failed, at least till the dark waters have rolled up to his own soul.

For mostly all and each of us must pass through some like experience;

and only our own hearts and God know, how death-bitter are the doubts,

whether of head or of heart, when question after question raises, as

with devilish hissing, its head, and earth and heaven seem alike

silent to us.

But here we must for a moment pause to ask ourselves this, which

touches the question of all questions: Surely, such a man as this

Baptist, so thoroughly disillusioned in that hour, could not have been

an imposter, and his testimony to Christ a falsehood? Nor yet could

the record, which gives us this insight into the weakness of the

strong man and the doubts of the great Testimony-bearer, be a

cunningly-invented fable. We cannot imagine the record of such a

failure, if the narrative were an invention. And if this record be

true, it is not only of present failure, but also of the previous

testimony of John. To us, at least, the evidential force of this

narrative seems irresistible. The testimony of the Baptist to Jesus

offers the same kind of evidence as does that of the human soul to

God: in both cases the one points to the other, and cannot be

understood without it.

In that terrible conflict John overcame, as we all must overcome. His

very despair opened the door of hope. The helpless doubt, which none

could solve but One, he brought to Him around Whom it had gathered.

Even in this there is evidence for Christ, as the unalterably True

One. When John asked the question: Do we wait for another? light was

already struggling through darkness. It was incipient victory even in

defeat. When he sent his disciples with this question straight to

Christ, he had already conquered; for such a question addressed to a

possibly false Messiah has no meaning. And so must it ever be with us.

Doubt is the offspring of our disease, diseased as is its paternity.

And yet it cannot be cast aside. It may be the outcome of the worst,

or the problems of the best souls. The twilight may fade into outer

night, or it may usher in the day. The answer lies in this: whether

doubt will lead us to Christ, or from Christ.

Thus viewed, the question: 'Art Thou the Coming One, or do we wait for

another?' indicated faith both in the great promise and in Him to Whom

it was addressed. The designation 'The Coming One' (habba), though a

most truthful expression of Jewish expectancy, was not one ordinarily

used of the Messiah. But it was invariably used in reference to the

Messianic age, as the Athid labho, or coming future (literally, the

prepared for to come), and the Olam habba, the coming world or

Æon.[3174]3174 But then it implied the setting right of all things by

the Messiah, the assumption and vindication of His Power. In the mouth

of John it might therefore mean chiefly this: Art Thou He that is to

establish the Messianic Kingdom in its outward power, or have we to

wait for another? In that case, the manner in which the Lord answered

it would be all the more significant. The messengers came just as He

was engaged in healing body and soul.[3175]3175 [3176]3176 Without

interrupting His work, or otherwise noticing their inquiry, He bade

them tell John for answer what they had seen and heard, and that 'the

poor,[3177]3177 are evangelised.' To this, as the inmost

characteristic of the Messianic Kingdom, He only added, not by way of

reproof nor even of warning, but as a fresh 'Beatitude:' 'Blessed is

he, whosoever shall not be scandalised in Me.' To faith, but only to

faith, this was the most satisfactory and complete answer to John's

inquiry. And such a sight of Christ's distinctive Work and Word, with

believing submission to the humbleness of the Gospel, is the only true

answer to our questions, whether of head or heart.

But a harder saying than this did the Lord speak amidst the

forthpouring of His testimony to John, when his messengers had left.

It pointed the hearers beyond their present horizon. Several facts

here stand out prominently. First, He to Whom John had formerly borne

testimony, now bore testimony to him; and that, not in the hour when

John had testified for Him, but when his testimony had wavered and

almost failed. This is the opposite of what one would have expected,

if the narrative had been a fiction, while it is exactly what we might

expect if the narrative be true. Next, we mark that the testimony of

Christ is as from a higher standpoint. And it is a full vindication as

well as unstinted praise, spoken, not as in his hearing, but after his

messengers - who had met a seemingly cold reception - had left. The

people were not coarsely to misunderstand the deep soul-agony, which

had issued in John's inquiry. It was not the outcome of a fickleness

which, like the reed shaken by every wind, was moved by popular

opinion. Nor was it the result of fear of bodily consequences, such as

one that pampered the flesh might entertain. Let them look back to the

time when, in thousands, they had gone into the wilderness to hear his

preaching. What had attracted them thither? Surely it was, that he was

the opposite of one swayed by popular opinion, 'a reed shaken by the

wind.' And when they had come to him, what had they

witnessed?[3178]3178 Surely, his dress and food betokened the opposite

of pampering or care of the body, such as they saw in the courtiers of

a Herod. But what they did expect, that they really did see: a

prophet, and much more than a mere prophet, the very Herald of God and

Preparer of Messiah's Way.[3179]3179 And yet - and this truly was a

hard saying and utterly un-Judaic - it was neither self-denial nor

position, no, not even that of the New Testament Elijah, which

constituted real greatness, as Jesus viewed it, just as nearest

relationship constituted not true kinship to Him. To those who sought

the honour which is not of man's bestowing, but of God, to be a little

one in the Kingdom of God was greater greatness than even the

Baptist's.

But, even so, let there be no mistake. As afterwards St. Paul argued

with the Jews, that their boast in the Law only increased their guilt

as breakers of the Law, so here our Lord. The popular concourse to,

and esteem of, the Baptist,[3180]3180 [3181]3181 did not imply that

spiritual reception which was due to his Mission.[3182]3182 It only

brought out, in more marked contrast, the wide inward difference

between the expectancy of the people as a whole, and the spiritual

reality presented to them in the Forerunner of the Messiah and in the

Messiah Himself.[3183]3183 Let them not be deceived by the crowds that

had submitted to the Baptism of John. From the time that John began to

preach the Kingdom, hindrances of every kind had been raised. To

overcome them and enter the Kingdom, it required, as it were, violence

like that to enter a city which was surrounded by a hostile

army.[3184]3184 Even by Jewish admission,[3185]3185 the Law 'and all

the prophets prophesied only of the days of Messiah.'[3186]3186 John,

then, was the last link; and, if they would but have received it, he

would have been to them the Elijah, the Restorer of all things. Selah

- 'he that hath ears, let him hear.'

Nay, but it was not so. The children of that generation expected quite

another Elijah and quite another Christ, and disbelieved and

complained, because the real Elijah and Christ did not meet their

foolish thoughts. They were like children in a market-place, who

expected their fellows to adapt themselves to the tunes they played.

It was as if they said: We have expected great Messianic glory and

national exaltation, and ye have not responded ('we have

piped[3187]3187 unto you, and ye have not danced'); we have looked for

deliverance from our national sufferings, and they stirred not your

sympathies nor brought your help ('we have mourned to you, and ye have

not lamented'). But you thought of the Messianic time as children, and

of us, as if we were your fellows, and shared your thoughts and

purposes! And so when John came with his stern asceticism, you felt he

was not one of you. He was in one direction outside your

boundary-line, and I, as the Friend of sinners, in the other

direction. The axe which he wielded you would have laid to the tree of

the Gentile world, not to that of Israel and of sin; the welcome and

fellowship which I extended, you would have had to 'the wise' and 'the

righteous,' not to sinners. Such was Israel as a whole. And yet there

was an election according to grace: the violent, who had to fight

their way through all this, and who took the Kingdom by violence - and

so Heaven's Wisdom (in opposition to the children's folly) is

vindicated[3188]3188 by all her children.[3189]3189 If anything were

needed to show the internal harmony between the Synoptists and the

Fourth Gospel, it would be this final appeal, which recalls those

other words: 'He came unto His own (things or property), and his own

(people, they who were His own) received Him not. But as many as

received Him, to them gave He power (right, authority) to become

children of God, which were born (begotten,) not . . . of the will of

man, but of God.'[3190]3190

6. The scene once more changes, and we are again at

Machærus.[3191]3191 Weeks have passed since the return of John's

messengers. We cannot doubt that the sunlight of faith has again

fallen into the dark dungeon, nor yet that the peace of restful

conviction has filled the martyr of Christ. He must have known that

his end was at hand, and been ready to be offered up. Those not

unfrequent conversations, in which the weak, superstitious, wicked

tyrant was 'perplexed' and yet 'heard him gladly,' could no longer

have inspired even passing hopes of freedom. Nor would he any longer

expect from the Messiah assertions of power on his behalf. He now

understood 'that for which He had come;' he knew the better liberty,

triumph, and victory which He brought. And what mattered it? His

life-work had been done, and there was nothing further that fell to

him or that he could do, and the weary servant of the Lord must have

longed for his rest.

It was early spring, shortly before the Passover, the anniversary of

the death of Herod the Great and of the accession of (his son) Herod

Antipas to the Tetrarchy.[3192]3192 A fit time this for a

Belshazzar-feast, when such an one as Herod would gather to a grand

banquet 'his lords,' and the military authorities, and the chief men

of Galilee. It is evening, and the castle-palace is brilliantly lit

up. The noise of music and the shouts of revelry come across the slope

into the citadel, and fall into the deep dungeon where waits the

prisoner of Christ. And now the merriment in the great banqueting-hall

has reached its utmost height. The king has nothing further to offer

his satiated guests, no fresh excitement. So let it be the sensuous

stimulus of dubious dances, and, to complete it, let the dancer be the

fair young daughter of the king's wife, the very descendant of the

Asmonæan priest-princes! To viler depth of coarse familiarity even a

Herod could not have descended.

She has come, and she has danced, this princely maiden, out of whom

all maidenhood and all princeliness have been brazed by a degenerate

mother, wretched offspring of the once noble Maccabees. And she has

done her best in that wretched exhibition, and pleased Herod and them

that sat at meat with him. And now, amidst the general plaudits, she

shall have her reward - and the king swears it to her with loud voice,

that all around hear it - even to the half of his kingdom. The maiden

steals out of the banquet-hall to ask her mother what it shall be. Can

there be doubt or hesitation in the mind of Herodias? If there was one

object she had at heart, which these ten months she had in vain sought

to attain: it was the death of John the Baptist. She remembered it all

only too well - her stormy, reckless past. The daughter of

Aristobulus, the ill-fated son of the ill-fated Asmonæan princess

Mariamme (I.), she had been married to her half-uncle, Herod

Philip,[3193]3193 the son of Herod the Great and of Mariamme (II.),

the daughter of the High-Priest (Boëthos). At one time it seemed as if

Herod Philip would have been sole heir of his father's dominions. But

the old tyrant had changed his testament, and Philip was left with

great wealth, but as a private person living in Jerusalem. This little

suited the woman's ambition. It was when his half-brother, Herod

Antipas, came on a visit to him at Jerusalem, that an intrigue began

between the Tetrarch and his brother's wife. It was agreed that, after

the return of Antipas from his impending journey to Rome, he would

repudiate his wife, the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia, and wed

Herodias. But Aretas' daughter heard of the plot, and having obtained

her husband's consent to go to Machærus, she fled thence to her

father. This, of course, led to enmity between Antipas and Aretas.

Nevertheless, the adulterous marriage with Herodias followed. In a few

sentences the story may be carried to its termination. The woman

proved the curse and ruin of Antipas. First came the murder of the

Baptist, which sent a thrill of horror through the people, and to

which all the later misfortunes of Herod were attributed. Then

followed a war with Aretas, in which the Tetrarch was worsted. And,

last of all, his wife's ambition led him to Rome to solicit the title

of King, lately given to Agrippa, the brother of Herodias. Antipas not

only failed, but was deprived of his dominions, and banished to Lyons

in Gaul. The pride of the woman in refusing favours from the Emperor,

and her faithfulness to her husband in his fallen fortunes, are the

only redeeming points in her history.[3194]3194 As for Salome, she was

first married to her uncle, Philip the Tetrarch. Legend has it, that

her death was retributive, being in consequence of a fall on the ice.

Such was the woman who had these many months sought with the

vengefulness and determination of a Jezebel, to rid herself of the

hated person, who alone had dared publicly denounce her sin, and whose

words held her weak husband in awe. The opportunity had now come for

obtaining from the vacillating monarch what her entreaties could never

have secured. As the Gospel puts it,[3195]3195 'instigated' by her

mother, the damsel hesitated not. We can readily fill in the outlined

picture of what followed. It only needed the mother's whispered

suggestion, and still flushed from her dance, Salome reentered the

banqueting-hall. 'With haste,' as if no time were to be lost, she went

up to king: 'I would that thou forthwith give me in a charger, the

head of John the Baptist!' Silence must have fallen on the assembly.

Even into their hearts such a demand from the lips of little more than

a child must have struck horror. They all knew John to be a righteous

and holy man. Wicked as they were, in their superstition, if not

religiousness, few, if any of them, would have willingly lent himself

to such work. And they all knew, also, why Salome, or rather Herodias,

had made this demand. What would Herod do? 'The king was exceeding

sorry.' For months he had striven against this. His conscience, fear

of the people, inward horror at the deed, all would have kept him from

it. But he had sworn to the maiden, who now stood before him, claiming

that the pledge be redeemed, and every eye in the assembly was now

fixed upon him. Unfaithful to his God, to his conscience, to truth and

righteousness; not ashamed of any crime or sin, he would yet be

faithful to his half-drunken oath, and appear honorable and true

before such companions!

It has been but the contest of a moment. 'Straightway' the king gives

the order to one of the body-guard.[3196]3196 The maiden hath

withdrawn to await the result with her mother. The guardsman has left

the banqueting-hall. Out into the cold spring night, up that slope,

and into the deep dungeon. As its door opens, the noise of the revelry

comes with the light of the torch which the man bears. No time for

preparation is given, nor needed. A few minutes more, and the gory

head of the Baptist is brought to the maiden in a charger, and she

gives the ghastly dish to her mother.

It is all over! As the pale morning light streams into the keep, the

faithful disciples, who had been told of it, come reverently to bear

the headless body to the burying. They go forth for ever from that

accursed place, which is so soon to become a mass of shapeless ruins.

They go to tell it to Jesus, and henceforth to remain with Him. We can

imagine what welcome awaited them. But the people ever afterwards

cursed the tyrant, and looked for those judgments of God to follow,

which were so soon to descend on him. And he himself was ever

afterwards restless, wretched, and full of apprehensions. He could

scarcely believe that the Baptist was really dead, and when the fame

of Jesus reached him, and those around suggested that this was Elijah,

a prophet, or as one of them, Herod's mind, amidst its strange

perplexities, still reverted to the man whom he had murdered. It was a

new anxiety, perhaps, even so, a new hope; and as formerly he had

often and gladly heard the Baptist, so now he would fain have seen

Jesus.[3197]3197 He would see Him; but not now. In that dark night of

betrayal, he, who at the bidding of the child of an adulteress, had

murdered the Forerunner, might, with the aprobation of a Pilate, have

rescued Him whose faithful witness John had been. But night was to

merge into yet darker night. For it was the time and the power of the

Evil One. And yet: 'Jehovah reigneth.'

CHAPTER XXIX.

THE MIRACULOUS FEEDING OF THE FIVE THOUSAND

(St. Matt. xiv. 13-21; St. Mark vi. 30-44; St. Luke ix. 10-17; St.

John vi. 1-14)

In the circumstances described in the previous chapter, Jesus resolved

at once to leave Capernaum; and this probably alike for the sake of

His disciples, who needed rest; for that of the people, who might have

attempted a rising after the murder of the Baptist; and temporarily to

withdraw Himself and His followers from the power of Herod. For this

purpose He chose the place outside the dominions of Antipas, nearest

to Capernaum. This was Beth-Saida ('the house of fishing,'

'Fisher-town,'[3198]3198 as we might call it), on the eastern border

of Galilee,[3199]3199 just within the territory of the Tetrarch

Philip. Originally a small village, Philip had converted it into a

town, and named it Julias, after Cæsar's daughter. It lay on the

eastern bank of Jordan, just before that stream enters the Lake of

Galilee.[3200]3200 It must, however, not be confounded with the other

'Fisher-town,' or Bethsaida, on the western shore of the

Lake,[3201]3201 which the Fourth Gospel, evidencing by this local

knowledge its Judæan, or rather Galilean, authorship, distinguishes

from the eastern as 'Bethsaida of Galilee.'[3202]3202 [3203]3203

Other minute points of deep interest in the same direction will

present themselves in the course of this narrative. Meantime we note,

that this is the only history, previous to Christ's last visit to

Jerusalem, which is recorded by all the four Evangelists; the only

series of events also in the whole course of that Galilean Ministry,

which commenced after His return from the 'Unknown Feast,'[3204]3204

which is referred to in the Fourth Gospel;[3205]3205 and that it

contains to distinct notices as to time, which enable us to fit it

exactly into the frame-work of this history. For, the statement of the

Fourth Gospel,[3206]3206 that the 'Passover was nigh,'[3207]3207 is

confirmed by the independent notice of St. Mark,[3208]3208 that those

whom the Lord miraculously led were ranged 'on the green grass.' In

that climate there would have been no 'green grass' soon after the

Passover. We must look upon the coincidence of these two notices as

one of the undesigned confirmations of their narrative.

For, miraculous it certainly is, and the attempts rationalistically to

explain it, to sublimate it into a parable, to give it the

spiritualistic meaning of spiritual feeding, or to account for its

mythical origin by the precedent of the descent of the manna, or of

the miracle of Elisha,[3209]3209 are even more palpable failures than

those made to account for the miracle at Cana. The only alternative is

to accept - or entirely to reject it. In view of the exceptional

record of this history in all the four Gospels, no unbiased historical

student would treat it as a simple invention, for which there was no

ground in reality. Nor can its origin be accounted for by previous

Jewish expectancy, or Old Testament precedent. The only rational mode

of explaining it is on the supposition of its truth. This miracle, and

what follows, mark the climax in our Lord's doing, as the healing of

the Syro-Phoenician maiden the utmost sweep of His activity, and the

Transfiguration the highest point in regard to the miraculous about

His Person. The only reason which can be assigned for the miracle of

His feeding the five thousand was that of all His working: Man's need,

and, in view of it, the stirring of the Pity and Power that were King

Herod, and the banquet that ended with the murder of the Baptist, and

King Jesus, and the banquet that ended with His lonely prayer on the

mountain-side, the calming of the storm on the lake, and the

deliverance from death of His disciples.

Only a few hours' sail from Capernaum, and even a shorter distance by

land (round the head of the Lake) lay the district of the

Bethsaida-Julias. It was natural that Christ, wishing to avoid public

attention, should have gone 'by ship,' and equally so that the many

'seeing them departing, and knowing' - viz., what direction the boat

was taking, should have followed on foot, and been joined by others

from the neighbouring villages,[3210]3210 as those from Capernaum

passed through them, perhaps, also, as they recognised on the Lake the

now well-known sail,[3211]3211 speeding towards the other shore. It is

an incidental but interesting confirmation of the narrative, that the

same notice about this journey occurs, evidently undesignedly, in St.

John vi. 22. Yet another we find in the fact, that some of those who

'ran there on foot' had reached the place before Jesus and His

Apostles.[3212]3212 Only some, as we judge. The largest proportion

arrived later, and soon swelled to the immense number of 'about 5,000

men,' 'besides women and children.' The circumstances that the

Passover was nigh at hand, so that many must have been starting on

their journey to Jerusalem, round the Lake and through Peræa, partly

accounts for the concourse of such multitudes. And this, perhaps in

conjunction with the effect on the people of John's murder, may also

explain their ready and eager gathering to Christ, thus affording yet

another confirmation of the narrative.

It was a well-known spot where Jesus and His Apostles touched the

shore. Not many miles south of it was the Gerasa or Gergesa, where the

great miracle of healing the demonished had been wrought.[3213]3213

Just beyond Gerasa the mountains and hills recede, and the plain along

the shore enlarges, till it attains wide proportions on the northern

bank of the Lake. The few ruins which mark the site of

Bethsaida-Julias - most of the basalt-stones having been removed for

building purposes - lie on the edge of a hill, three or four miles

north of the Lake. The ford, by which those who came from Capernaum

crossed the Jordan, was, no doubt, that still used, about two miles

from where the river enters the Lake. About a mile further, on that

wide expanse of grass, would be the scene of the great miracle. In

short, the locality throughly accords with the requirements of the

Gospel-narrative.

As we picture it to ourselves, our Lord with His disciples, and

perhaps followed by those who had outrun the rest, first retired to

the top of a height, and there rested in teaching converse with

them.[3214]3214 Presently, as He saw the great multitudes gathering,

He was 'moved with compassion towards them.'[3215]3215 [3216]3216

There could be no question of retirement or rest in view of this.

Surely, it was the opportunity which God had given - a call which came

to Him from His Father. Every such opportunity was unspeakably

precious to Him, Who longed to gather the lost under His wings. It

might be, that even now they would learn what belonged to their peace.

Oh, that they would learn it! At least, He must work while it was

called to-day, ere the night of judgment came; work with that unending

patience and intense compassion which made Him weep, when He could no

longer work. It was this depth of longing and intenseness of pity

which now ended the Saviour's rest, and brought Him down from the hill

to meet the gathering multitude in the 'desert' plain beneath.

And what a sight to meet His gaze - these thousands of strong men,

besides women and children; and what thoughts of the past, the

present, and the future, would be called up by the scene! 'The

Passover was nigh,'[3217]3217 with its remembrances of the Paschal

night, the Paschal Lamb, the Paschal Supper, the Paschal deliverance -

and most of them were Passover-pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem.

These Passover-pilgrims and God's guests, now streaming out into this

desert after Him; with a murdered John just buried, and no earthly

teacher, guide, or help left! Truly they were 'as sheep having no

shepherd.'[3218]3218 The very surroundings seemed to give to the

thought the vividness of a picture: this wandering, straying

multitude, the desert sweep of country, the very want of provisions. A

Passover, indeed, but of which He would be the Paschal Lamb, the Bread

which He gave, the Supper, and around which He would gather those

scattered, shepherdless sheep into one flock of many 'companies,' to

which His Apostles would bring the bread He had blessed and broken, to

their sufficient and more than sufficient nourishment; from which,

indeed, they would carry the remnant-baskets full, after the flock had

been fed, to the poor in the outlying places of far-off heathendom.

And so thoughts of the past, the present, and the future must have

mingled - thoughts of the Passover in the past, of the Last, the Holy

Supper in the future, and of the deeper inward meaning and bearing of

both the one and the other; thoughts also of this flock, and of that

other flock which was yet to gather, and of the far-off places, and of

the Apostles and their service, and of the provision which they were

to carry from His Hands - a provision never exhausted by present need,

and which always leaves enough to carry thence and far away.

There is, at least in our view, no doubt that thoughts of the Passover

and of the Holy Supper, of their commingling and mystic meaning, were

present to the Saviour, and that it is in this light the miraculous

feeding of the multitude must be considered, if we are in any measure

to understand it. Meantime the Saviour was moving among them -

'beginning to teach them many things,'[3219]3219 and 'healing them

that had need of healing.'[3220]3220 Yet, as He so moved and thought

of it all, from the first, 'He Himself knew what He was about to

do.'[3221]3221 And now the sun had passed its meridian, and the

shadows fell longer on the surging crowd. Full of the thoughts of the

great Supper, which was symbolically to link the Passover of the past

with that of the future, and its Sacramental continuation to all time,

He turned to Philip with this question: 'Whence are we to buy bread,

that these may eat?' It was to 'try him,' and show how he would view

and meet what, alike spiritually and temporally, has so often been the

great problem. Perhaps there was something in Philip which made it

specially desirable, that the question should be put to him.[3222]3222

At any rate, the answer of Philip showed that there had been a 'need

be' for it. This - 'two hundred denarii (between six and seven pounds)

worth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one may take a

little,' is the course realism, not of unbelief, but of an absence of

faith which, entirely ignoring any higher possibility, has not even

its hope left in a 'Thou knowest, Lord.'

But there is evidence, also, that the question of Christ worked deeper

thinking and higher good. As we understand it, Philip told it to

Andrew, and they to the others. While Jesus taught and healed, they

must have spoken together of this strange question of the Master. They

knew Him sufficiently to judge, that it implied some purpose on His

part. Did He intend to provide for all that multitude? They counted

them roughly - going along the edge and through the crowd - and

reckoned them by thousands, besides women and children. They thought

of all the means for feeding such a multitude. How much had they of

their own? As we judge by combining the various statements, there was

a lad there who carried the scant, humble provisions of the party -

perhaps a fisher-lad brought for the purpose from the boat.[3223]3223

It would take quite what Philip had reckoned - about two hundred

denarii - if the Master meant them to go and buy victuals for all that

multitude. Probably the common stock - at any rate as computed by

Judas, who carried the bag - did not contain that amount. In any case,

the right and the wise thing was to dismiss the multitude, that they

might go into the towns and villages and buy for themselves victuals,

and find lodgment. For already the bright spring-day was declining,

and what was called 'the first evening' had set in.[3224]3224 For the

Jews reckoned two evenings, although it is not easy to determine the

exact hour when each began and ended. But, in general, the first

evening may be said to have begun when the sun declined, and it was

probably reckoned as lasting to about the ninth hour, or three o'clock

of the afternoon.[3225]3225 Then began the period known as 'between

the evenings,' which would be longer or shorter according to the

season of the year, and which terminated with 'the second evening' -

the time from when the first star appeared to that when the third star

was visible.[3226]3226 With the night began the reckoning of the

following day.

It was the 'first evening' when the disciples, whose anxiety must have

been growing with the progress of time, asked the Lord to dismiss the

people. But it was as they had thought. He would have them give the

people to eat! Were they, then, to go and buy two hundred denarii

worth of loaves? No - they were not to buy, but to give of their own

store! How many loaves had they! Let them go and see.[3227]3227 And

when Andrew went to see what store the fisher-lad carried for them, he

brought back the tidings, 'He hath five barley loaves and two small

fishes,' to which he added, half in disbelief, half in faith's rising

expectancy of impossible possibility: 'But what are they among so

many?'[3228]3228 It is to the fourth Evangelist alone that we owe the

record of this remark, which we instinctively feel gives to the whole

the touch of truth and life. It is to him also that we owe other two

minute traits of deepest interest, and of far greater importance than

at first sight appears.

When we read that these five were barley-loaves, we learn that, no

doubt from voluntary choice, the fare of the Lord and of His followers

was the poorest. Indeed, barley-bread was, almost proverbially, the

meanest. Hence, as the Mishnah puts it, while all other meat-offerings

were of wheat, that brought by the woman accused of adultery was to be

of barley, because (so R. Gamaliel puts it), 'as her deed is that of

animals, so her offering is also of the food of animals.'[3229]3229

The other minute trait in St. John's Gospel consists in the use of a

peculiar word for 'fish' (_y_rion), 'opsarion,' which properly means

what was eaten along with the bread, and specially refers to the

small, and generally dried or pickled fish eaten with bread, like our

'sardines,' or the 'caviar' of Russia, the pickled herrings of Holland

and Germany, or a peculiar kind of small dried fish, eaten with the

bones, in the North of Scotland. Now just as any one who would name

that fish as eaten with bread, would display such minute knowledge of

the habits of the North-east of Scotland as only personal residence

could give, so in regard to the use of this term, which, be it marked,

is peculiar to the Fourth Gospel, Dr. Westcott suggests, that 'it may

have been a familiar Galilean word,' and his conjecture is correct,

for Ophsonin ({hebrew}) derived from the same Greek word (_yon), of

which that used by St. John is the diminutive, means a 'savoury dish,'

while Aphyan ({hebrew}) or Aphits ({hebrew}), is the term for a kind

of small fish, such as sardines. The importance of tracing accurate

local knowledge in the Fourth Gospel warrants our pursuing the subject

further. The Talmud, declares that of all kinds of meat, fish only

becomes more savoury by salting,[3230]3230 and names certain kinds,

specially designated as 'small fishes,'[3231]3231 which might be eaten

without being cooked. Small fishes were recommended for

health;[3232]3232 and a kind of pickle or savoury was also made of

them. Now the Lake of Galilee was particularly rich in these fishes,

and we know that both the salting and pickling of them was a special

industry among its fishermen. For this purpose a small kind of them

were specially selected, which bear the name Terith

({hebrew}).[3233]3233 Now the diminutive used by St. John (_y_rion) of

which our Authorized Version no doubt gives the meaning fairly by

rendering it 'small fishes,' refers, no doubt, to those small fishes

(probably a kind of sardine) of which millions were caught in the

Lake, and which, dried and salted, would form the most common

'savoury' with bread for the fisher-population along the shores.

If the Fourth Gospel in the use of this diminutive displays such

special Lake-knowledge as evidences its Galilean origin, another

touching trait connected with its use may here be mentioned. It has

already been said that the term is used only by St. John, as if to

mark the Lake of Galilee origin of the Fourth Gospel. But only once

again does the expression occur in the Fourth Gospel. On that morning,

when the Risen One manifested Himself by the Lake of Galilee to them

who had all the night toiled in vain, He had Provided for them

miraculously the meal, when on the 'fire of charcoal' they saw the

well-remembered 'little fish' (the opsarion), and, as He bade them

bring of the 'little fish' (the Opsaria) which they had miraculously

caught, Peter drew to shore the net full, not of opsaria, but 'of

great fishes' (_cq_wn meg_lwn). And yet it was not of those 'great

fishes' that He gave them, but 'He took the bread and gave them, and

the opsarion likewise.'[3234]3234 Thus, in infinite humility, the meal

at which the Risen Saviour sat down with His disciples was still of

'bread and small fishes' - even though He gave them, the draught of

large fishes; and so at that last meal He recalled that first

miraculous feeding by the Lake of Galilee. And this also is one of

those undesigned, too often unobserved traits in the narrative, which

yet carry almost irresistible evidence.

There is one proof at least of the implicit faith or rather trust of

the disciples in their Master. They had given Him account of their own

scanty provision, and yet, as He bade them make the people sit down to

the meal, they hesitated not to obey. We can picture it to ourselves,

what is so exquisitely sketched: the expanse of 'grass.'[3235]3235

'green,' and fresh,[3236]3236 'much grass;'[3237]3237 then the people

in their 'companies'[3238]3238 of fifties and hundreds,

reclining,[3239]3239 and looking in their regular divisions, and with

their bright many-coloured dresses, like 'garden-beds'[3240]3240

[3241]3241 on the turf. But One Figure must every eye have been bent.

Around Him stood His Apostles. They had laid before Him the scant

provision made for their own wants, and which was now to feed their

great multitude. As was wont at meals, on the part of the head of the

household, Jesus took the bread, 'blessed'[3242]3242 or, as St. John

puts it, 'gave thanks,'[3243]3243 and 'brake' it. The expression

recalls that connected with the Holy Eucharist, and leaves little

doubt on the mind that, in the Discourse delivered in the Synagogue of

Capernaum,[3244]3244 there is also reference to the Lord's Supper. As

of comparatively secondary importance, yet helping us better to

realise the scene, we recall the Jewish ordinance, that the Head of

the meal, yet if they who sat down to it were not merely guests, but

his children, or his household, then might he speak it, even if he

himself did not partake of the bread which he had broken.[3245]3245

We can scarcely be mistaken as to the words which Jesus spake when 'He

gave thanks.' The Jewish Law[3246]3246 allows the grace at meat to be

said, not only in Hebrew, but in any language, the Jerusalem Talmud

aptly remarking, that it was proper a person should understand to Whom

he was giving thanks ({hebrew}).[3247]3247 Similarly, we have very

distinct information as regards a case like the present. We gather,

that the use of 'savoury' with bread was specially common around the

Lake of Galilee, and the Mishnah lays down the principle, that if

bread and 'savory' were eaten, it would depend which of the two was

the main article of diet, to determine whether 'thanksgiving' should

be said for one or the other. In any case only one benediction was to

be used.[3248]3248 In this case, of course, it would be spoken over

the bread, the 'savory' being merely an addition. There can be little

doubt, therefore, that the words which Jesus spake, whether in

Aramæan, Greek, or Hebrew, were those so well known: 'Blessed art

Thou, Jehovah our God, King of the world, Who causes to come forth

({hebrew}) bread from the earth.' Assuredly it was this threefold

thought: the upward thought (sursum corda), the recognition of the

creative act as regards every piece of bread we eat, and the

thanksgiving, which was realised anew in all its fulness, when, as He

distributed to the disciples, the provision miraculously multiplied in

His Hands. And still they bore it from His Hands from company to

company, laying before each a store. When they were all filled, He

that had provided the meal bade them gather up the fragments before

each company. So doing, each of the twelve had his basket filled. Here

also we have another life-touch. Those 'baskets' (k_finoi), known in

Jewish writings by a similar name (Kephiphah), made of wicker or

willows[3249]3249 ({hebrew}) were in common use, but considered of the

poorest kind.[3250]3250 There is a sublimeness of contrast that passes

description between this feast to the five thousand, besides women and

children and the poor's provision of barley bread and the two small

fishes; and, again, between the quantity left and the coarse wicker

baskets in which it was stored. Nor do we forget to draw mentally the

parallel between this Messianic feast and that banquet of 'the latter

days' which Rabbinism pictured so realistically. But as the wondering

multitude watched, as the disciples gathered from company to company

the fragments into their baskets, the murmur ran through the ranks:

'This is truly the Prophet, 'This is truly the Prophet, "the coming

One" (habba, {hebrew}) into the world.' And so the Baptist's last

inquiry, 'Art Thou the Coming One?'[3251]3251 was fully and publicly

answered, and that by the Jews themselves.

THE ASCENT: FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF

TRANSFIGURATION

CHAPTER XXX.

THE NIGHT OF MIRACLES ON THE LAKE OF GENNESARET

(St. Matt. xiv. 22-36; St. John 15-21.)

THE last question of the Baptist, spoken in public, had been: 'Art

Thou the Coming One, or look we for another?' It had, in part, been

answered, as the murmur had passed through the ranks: 'This One is

truly the Prophet, the Coming One!' So, then, they had no longer to

wait, nor to look for another! And this 'Prophet' was Israel's long

expected Messiah. What this would imply to the people, in the

intensity and longing of the great hope which, for centuries, nay, far

beyond the time of Ezra, had swayed their hearts, it is impossible

fully to conceive. Here, then, was the Great Reality at last before

them. He, on Whose teaching they had hung entranced, was 'the

Prophet,' nay, more, 'the Coming One:' He Who was coming all those

many centuries, and yet had not come till now. Then, also, was He more

than a Prophet - a King: Israel's King, the King of the world. An

irresistible impulse seized the people. They would proclaim Him King,

then and there; and as they knew, probably from previous utterances,

perhaps when similar movements had to be checked, that He would

resist, they would constrain Him to declare Himself, or at least to be

proclaimed by them. Can we wonder at this; or that thoughts of a

Messianic worldly kingdom should have filled, moved, and influenced to

discipleship a Judas; or that, with such a representative of their own

thoughts among the disciples, the rising waves of popular excitement

should have swollen into the mighty billows?

'Jesus therefore, perceiving that they were about to come, and to take

Him by force, that they might make Him King,[3252]3252 withdrew again

into the mountain, Himself alone,' or, as it might be rendered, though

not quite in the modern usage of the expression, 'became an anchorite

again . . . Himself alone.'[3253]3253 This is another of those sublime

contrasts, which render it well-nigh inconceivable to regard this

history otherwise than as true and Divine. Yet another is the manner

in which He stilled the multitude, and the purpose for which He became

the lonely Anchorite on the mountain-top. He withdrew to pray; and He

stilled the people, and sent them, no doubt solemnised, to their

homes, by telling them that He withdrew to pray. And He did pray till

far on, 'when the (second) evening had come,'[3254]3254 and the first

stars shone out in the deep blue sky over the Lake of Galilee, with

the far lights twinkling and trembling on the other side. And yet

another sublime contrast - as He constrained the disciples to enter

the ship, and that ship, which bore those who had been sharers in the

miracle, could not make way against storm and waves, and was at last

driven out of its course. And yet another contrast - as He walked on

the storm-tossed waves and subdued them. And yet another, and another

- for is not all this history one sublime contrast to the seen and the

thought of by men, but withal most true and Divine in the sublimeness

of these contrasts?

For whom and for what He prayed, alone on that mountain, we dare not,

even in deepest reverence, inquire. Yet we think, in connection with

it, of the Passover, the Manna, the Wilderness, the Lost Sheep, the

Holy Supper, the Bread which is His Flesh, and the remnant in the

Baskets to be carried to those afar off, and then also of the attempt

to make Him a King, in all its spiritual unreality, ending in His View

with the betrayal, the denial, and the cry: 'We have no King but

Cæsar.' And as He prayed, the faithful stars in the heavens shone out.

But there on the Lake, where the bark which bore His disciples made

for the other shore, 'a great wind' 'contrary to them' was rising. And

still He was 'alone on the land,' but looking out into the evening

after them, as the ship was 'in the midst of the sea,' and they

toiling and 'distressed in rowing.'

Thus far, to the utmost verge of their need, but not farther. The Lake

is altogether about forty furlongs or stadia (about six miles) wide,

and they had as yet reached little more than half the distance

(twenty-five or thirty furlongs). Already it was 'the fourth watch of

the night.' There was some difference of opinion among the Jews,

whether the night should be divided into three, or (as among the

Romans) into four watches. The latter (which would count the night at

twelve instead of nine hours) was adopted by many.[3255]3255 In any

case it would be what might be termed the morning-watch,[3256]3256

when the well-known Form seemed to be passing them, 'walking upon the

sea.' There can, at least, be no question that such was the

impression, not only of one or another, but that all saw Him. Nor yet

can there be here question of any natural explanation. Once more the

truth of the event must be either absolutely admitted, or absolutely

rejected.[3257]3257 The difficulties of the latter hypothesis, which

truly cuts the knot, would be very formidable. Not only would the

origination of this narrative, as given by two of the Synoptists and

by St. John, be utterly unaccountable - neither meeting Jewish

expectancy, nor yet supposed Old Testament precedent - but, if legend

it be, it seems purposeless and irrational. Moreover, there is this

noticeable about it, as about so many of the records of the miraculous

in the New Testament, that the writers by no means disguise from

themselves or their readers the obvious difficulties involved. In the

present instance they tell us, that they regarded His Form moving on

the water as 'a spirit,' and cried out for fear; and again, that the

impression produced by the whole scene, even on them that had

witnessed the miracle of the previous evening, was one of overwhelming

astonishment. This walking on the water, then, was even to them within

the domain of the truly miraculous, and it affected their minds

equally, perhaps even more than ours, from the fact that in their view

so much, which to us seems miraculous, lay within the sphere of what

might be expected in the course of such a history.

On the other hand, this miracle stands not isolated, but forms one of

a series of similar manifestations. It is closely connected both with

what had passed on the previous evening, and what was to follow; it is

told with a minuteness of detail, and with such marked absence of any

attempt at gloss, adornment, apology, or self-glorification, as to

give the narrative (considered simply as such) the stamp of truth;

while, lastly, it contains much that lifts the story from the merely

miraculous into the domain of the sublime and deeply spiritual. As

regards what may be termed its credibility, this at least may again be

stated, that this and similar instances of 'dominion over the

creature,' are not beyond the range of what God had originally

assigned to man, when He made him a little lower than the angels, and

crowned him with glory and honour, made him to have dominion over the

works of His Hands, and all things were put under his feet.[3258]3258

Indeed, this 'dominion over the sea' seems to exhibit the Divinely

human rather than the humanly Divine aspect of His Person,[3259]3259

if such distinction may be lawfully made. Of the physical possibility

of such a miracle - not to speak of the contradiction in terms which

this implies - no explanation can be attempted, if it were only on the

ground that we are utterly ignorant of the conditions under which it

took place.

This much, however, deserves special notice, that there is one marked

point of difference between the account of this miracle and what will

be found a general characteristic in legendary narratives. In the

latter, the miraculous, however extraordinary, is the expected; it

creates no surprise, and it is never mistaken for something that might

have occurred in the ordinary course of events. For, it is

characteristic of the mythical that the miraculous is not only

introduced in the most realistic manner, but forms the essential

element in the conception of things. This is the very raison d'être of

the myth or legend, when it attaches itself to the real and

historically true. Now the opposite is the case in the present

narrative. Had it been mythical or legendary, we should have expected

that the disciples would have been described as immediately

recognising the Master as He walked on the sea, and worshipping Him.

Instead of this, they 'are troubled' and 'afraid.' 'They supposed it

was an apparition,'[3260]3260 (this in accordance with popular Jewish

notions), and 'cried out for fear.' Even afterwards, when they had

received Him into the ship, 'they were sore amazed in themselves,' and

'understood not,' while those in the ship (in contradistinction to the

disciples), burst forth into an act of worship. This much then is

evident, that the disciples expected not the miraculous; that they

were unprepared for it; that they had explained it on what to them

seemed natural grounds; and that, even when convinced of its reality,

the impression of wonder, which it made, was of the deepest. And this

also follows is a corollary, that, when they recorded it, it was not

in ignorance that they were writing that which sounded strangest, and

which would affect those who should read it with even much greater

wonderment - we had almost written, unbelief - than those who

themselves had witnessed it.

Nor let it be forgotten, that what had just been remarked about this

narrative holds equally true in regard to other miracles recorded in

the New Testament. Thus, even so fundamental an article of the faith

as the resurrection of Christ is described as having come upon the

disciples themselves as a surprise - not only wholly unexpected, but

so incredible, that it required repeated and indisputable evidence to

command their acknowledgment. And nothing can be more plain, than that

St. Paul himself was not only aware of the general resistance which

the announcement of such an event would raise,[3261]3261 but that he

felt to the full the difficulties of what he so firmly

believed,[3262]3262 and made the foundation of all his

preaching.[3263]3263 Indeed, the elaborate exposition of the

historical grounds, on which he had arrived at the conviction of

reality,[3264]3264 affords an insight into the mental difficulties

which it must at first have presented to him. And a similar inference

may be drawn from the reference of St. Peter to the difficulties

connected with the Biblical predictions about the end of the

world.[3265]3265 [3266]3266

It is not necessary to pursue this subject further. Its bearing on the

miracle of Christ's walking on the Sea of Galilee will be sufficiently

manifest. Yet other confirmatory evidence may be gathered from a

closer study of the details of the narrative. When Jesus 'constrained

the disciples to enter into the boat, and to go before Him unto the

other side,'[3267]3267 they must have thought, that His purpose was to

join them by land, since there was no other boat there, save that in

which they crossed the Lake.[3268]3268 And possibly such had been his

intention, till He saw their difficulty, if not danger, from the

contrary wind.[3269]3269 This must have determined Him to come to

their help. And so this miracle also was not a mere display of power,

but, being caused by their need, had a moral object. And when it is

asked, how from the mountain-height by the Lake He could have seen at

night where the ship was labouring so far on the Lake,[3270]3270 it

must surely have been forgotten that the scene is laid quite shortly

before the Passover (the 15th of Nisan), when, of course, the moon

would shine on an unclouded sky, all the more brightly on a windy

spring-night, and light up the waters far across.

We can almost picture to ourselves the weird scene. The Christ is on

that hill-top in solitary converse with His Father - praying after

that miraculous breaking of bread: fully realising all that it implied

to Him of self-surrender, of suffering, and of giving Himself as the

Food of the World, and all that it implied to us of blessing and

nourishment; praying also - with that scene fresh on His mind, of

their seeking to make Him, even by force, their King - that the carnal

might become spiritual reality (as in symbol it would be with the

Breaking of Bread). Then, as He rises from His knees, knowing that,

alas, it could not and would not be so to the many, He looks out over

the Lake after that little company, which embodied and represented all

there yet was of His Church, all that would really feed on the Bread

from Heaven, and own Him their true King. Without presumption, we may

venture to say, that there must have been indescribable sorrow and

longing in His Heart, as His gaze was bent across the track which the

little boat would follow. As we view it, it seems all symbolical: the

night, the moonlight, the little boat, the contrary wind, and then

also the lonely Saviour after prayer looking across to where the

boatmen vainly labour to gain the other shore. As in the clear

moonlight just that piece of water stands out, almost like burnished

silver, with all else in shadows around, the sail-less mast is now

rocking to and fro, without moving forward. They are in difficulty, in

danger: and the Saviour cannot pursue His journey on foot by land; He

must come to their help, though it be across the water. It is needful,

and therefore it shall be upon the water; and so the storm and

unsuccessful toil shall not prevent their reaching the shore, but

shall also be to them for teaching concerning Him and His great power,

and concerning His great deliverance; such teaching as, in another

aspect of it, had been given them in symbol in the miraculous supply

of food, with all that it implied (and not to them only, but to us

also) of precious comfort and assurance, and as will for ever keep the

Church from being overwhelmed by fear in the stormy night on the Lake

of Galilee, when the labour of our oars cannot make way for us.

And they also who were in the boat must have been agitated by peculiar

feelings. Against their will they had been 'constrained' by the Lord

to embark and quit the scene; just as the multitude, under the

influence of the great miracle, were surrounding their Master, with

violent insistence to proclaim him the Messianic King of Israel. Not

only a Judas Iscariot, but all of them, must have been under the

strongest excitement: first of the great miracle, and then of the

popular movement. It was the crisis in the history of the Messiah and

of His Kingdom. Can we wonder, that, when the Lord in very mercy bade

them quit a scene which could only have misled them, they were

reluctant, nay, that it almost needed violence of His part? And yet -

the more we consider it - was it not most truly needful for them, that

they should leave? But, on the other hand, in this respect also, does

there seem a 'need be' for His walking upon the sea, that they might

learn not only His Almighty Power, and (symbolically) that He ruled

the rising waves; but that, in their disappointment at His not being a

King, they might learn that He was a King - only in a far higher,

truer sense than the excited multitude would have proclaimed Him.

Thus we can imagine the feelings with which they had pushed the boat

from the shore, and then eagerly looked back to descry what passed

there. But soon the shadows of night were enwrapping all objects at a

distance, and only the bright moon overhead shone on the track behind

and before. And now the breeze from the other side of the Lake, of

which they may have been unaware when they embarked on the eastern

shore, had freshened into violent, contrary wind. All energies must

have been engaged to keep the boat's head towards the shore.[3271]3271

Even so it seemed as if they could make no progress, when all at once,

in the track that lay behind them, a Figure appeared. As it passed

onwards over the water, seemingly upborne by the waves as they rose,

not disappearing as they fell, but carried on as they rolled, the

silvery moon laid upon the trembling waters the shadows of that Form

as it moved, long and dark, on their track. St. John uses an

expression,[3272]3272 which shows us in the pale light, those in the

boat, intently, fixedly, fearfully, gazing at the Apparition as It

neared still closer and closer. We must remember their previous

excitement, as also the presence, and, no doubt, the superstitious

suggestions of the boatman, when we think how they cried out for fear,

and deemed It an Apparition. And 'He would have passed by

them,'[3273]3273 as He so often does in our case - bringing them,

indeed, deliverance, pointing and smoothing their way, but not giving

them His known Presence, if they had not cried out. But their fear,

which made them almost hesitate to receive Him into the

boat,[3274]3274 even though the outcome of error and superstition,

brought His ready sympathy and comfort, in language which has so

often, and in all ages, converted foolish fears of misapprehension

into gladsome, thankful assurance: 'It is I, be not afraid!'

And they were no longer afraid, though truly His walking upon the

waters might seem more awesome than any 'apparition.' The storm in

their hearts, like that on the Lake, was commanded by His Presence. We

must still bear in mind their former excitement, now greatly

intensified by what they had just witnessed, in order to understand

the request of Peter: 'Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come to Thee on the

water.' They are the words of a man, whom the excitement of the moment

has carried beyond all reflection. And yet this combination of doubt

('if it be Thou'), with presumption ('bid me come on the water'), is

peculiarly characteristic of Peter. He is the Apostle of Hope - and

hope is a combination of doubt and presumption, but also their

transformation. With reverence be it said, Christ could not have left

the request ungranted, even though it was the outcome of yet

unreconciled and untransformed doubt and presumption. He would not

have done so, or doubt would have remained doubt untransformed; and He

could not have done so, without also correcting it, or presumption

would have remained presumption untransformed, which is only upward

growth, without deeper rooting in inward spiritual experience. And so

He bade him come upon the water,[3275]3275 to transform his doubt, but

left him, unassured from without, to his own feelings as he saw the

wind,[3276]3276 to transform his presumption; while by stretching out

His Hand to save him from sinking, and by the words of correction

which He spake, He did actually so point to their transformation in

that hope, of which St. Peter is the special representative, and the

preacher in the Church.

And presently, as they two came into the boat,[3277]3277 the wind

ceased, and immediately the ship was at the land. But 'they that were

in the boat' - apparently in contradistinction to the

disciples,[3278]3278 though the latter must have stood around in

sympathetic reverence - 'worshipped Him, saying, Of a truth Thou art

the Son of God.' The first full public confession this of the fact,

and made not by the disciples, but by others. With the disciples it

would have meant something far deeper. But as from the lips of these

men it seems, like the echo of what had passed between them on that

memorable passage across the Lake. They also must have mingled in the

conversation, as the boat had pushed off from the shore on the

previous evening, when they spake of the miracle of the feeding, and

then of the popular attempt to proclaim Him Messianic King, of which

they knew not yet the final issue, since they had been 'constrained to

get into the boat,' while the Master remained behind. They would speak

of all that He was and had done, and how the very devils had

proclaimed Him to be the 'Son of God,' on that other shore, close by

where the miracle of feeding had taken place. Perhaps, having been

somewhat driven out of their course, they may have passed close to the

very spot, and, as they pointed to it recalled the incident. And this

designation of 'Son of God,' with the worship which followed, would

come much more readily, because with much more superficial meaning, to

the boatmen than to the disciples. But in them, also, the thought was

striking deep root; and presently, by the Mount of Transfiguration,

would it be spoken in the name of all by Peter, not as demon- nor as

man-taught, but as taught of Christ's Father Who is in Heaven.

Yet another question suggests itself. The events of the night are not

recorded by St. Luke - perhaps because they did not come within his

general view-plan of that Life; perhaps from reverence, because

neither he, nor his teacher St. Paul, were within that inner circle,

with which the events of that night were connected rather in the way

of reproof than otherwise. At any rate, even negative criticism cannot

legitimately draw any adverse inference from it, in view of its record

not only by two of the Synoptists, but in the Fourth Gospel. St. Mark

also does not mention the incident concerning St. Peter; and this we

can readily understand from his connection with that Apostle. Of the

two eyewitnesses, St. John and St. Matthew, the former also is silent

on that incident. On any view of the authorship of the Fourth Gospel,

it could not have been from ignorance, either of its occurrence, or

else of its record by St. Matthew. Was it among those 'many other

things which Jesus did,' which were not written by him, since their

complete chronicle would have rendered a Gospel-sketch impossible? Or

did it lie outside that special conception of his Gospel, which as

regards its details, determined the insertion or else the omission of

certain incidents? Or was there some reason for this omission

connected with the special relation of John to Peter? And, lastly, why

was St. Matthew in this instance more detailed than the others, and

alone told it with such circumstantiality? Was it that it had made

such deep impression on his own mind; had he somehow any personal

connection with it; or did he feel, as if this bidding of Peter to

come to Christ out of the ship and on the water had some close inner

analogy with his own call to leave the custom-house and follow Christ?

Such, and other suggestions which may arise can only be put in the

form of questions. Their answer awaits the morning and the other

shore.

THE END OF THE FIRST VOLUME.

EXPLANATORY NOTES AND CORRECTIONS FOR THE FIRST VOLUME

Page 7, note 1: i.e. the mind of the one was settled like men, that of

the others unsettled as women.

Page 12, note 2: 'Diety' = 'Shekhinah.'

Page 35, note 3: See Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. p. 323, note b.

Page 97, note 1. This, of course, is and inference from the whole

history and relation there indicated.

Page 174, note 1a, line 7, read: 'Hath He said, and shall He not do

it?' being the quotation from Numb. xxiii. 19, which is intended as an

answer to the pretension. The rendering of the passage by the learned

Dr. Schwab is untenable.

Page 268, note 3: the quotation is taken from the unmutilated and

sublime citation as given in R. Martini Pugio Fidei, ed. Carpzov. p.

782. Page 271(k). This is the view of Beer, Leben Abr. p. 88.

Page 292: for 'temptations' read 'temptation.' The ten temptations of

Abraham are referred to in Ab. P. 3, and enumerated in Ab. de R. N. 33

and Pirque de R. El. 26. Page 312h . Of course, this is the expression

of a later Rabbi, but it refers to Pharisaic interpretations.

Page 358c. So Lightfoot infers from the passage; but as the Rabbi who

speaks is etymologising and almost punning, the inference should

perhaps not be pressed.

Page 384, note 1: In Vayy. R. 30, the expression refers to the

different condition of Israel after the time described in Hos. iii. 4,

or in that of Hezekiah, or at the deliverance of Mordecai. In Bemid.

R. 11, the expression is connected with their ingathering of

proselytes in fulfilment of Gen. xii. 2.

Page 387, lines 17 and 18. On this subject, however, other opinions

are also entertained. Comp. Sukk. 5 a.

Page 443, as to priest guilty of open sin, the details, which I

refrained from giving, are mentioned in Duschak, Jud. Kultus, p. 270.

Page 444, note 3. This, of course, in regard to an unlearned priest.

See discussion in Duschak, u.s. p. 255.

Page 447(c). Ber. 6 b. Probably this was to many the only ground for

reward, since the discourse was the Pirqa, or on the Halakah. Ib.(e)

Taan. 16 a: though the remark refers to the leader ot the devotions on

fast-days, it is also applied to the preacher by Duschak, p. 285.

Page 505, note 3, see correction of p. 174, note (u.s.).

Page 514, note 2: in Taan. 20 a the story of the miracle is cold which

gave him the name Nicodemus.

Page 536(g). I refer to the thanksgiving of Nechunyah. See also the

prayer put into the mouth of Moses, Ber. 32 a. And although such

prayers as Ber. 16 b, 17 a, are sublime, they are, in my view, not to

be compared with that of Christ in its fulness and breadth.

Page 539(c). sanh. 100 b is, of course, not verbatim worded. This

would be in the second sentence: 'Possibly on the morrow he will not

be, and have been found caring for a world which is not his.'

Page 557b, read in text: the common formula at funerals in Palestine

was, 'Weep with him,' &c.

Page 597, note, line 9 from bottom: for 'our' 'their' and for 'us'

read 'them.'

Page 620, line 4 from bottom, 'The dress of the wife,' &c., read 'The

clothing,' the meaning being that in the alternative between saving

the life of the ignorant and clothing the wife of the learned (if she

had no clothes), the latter is of more importance.

Page 622, margin, delete the second' in .

Book III

--------

THE ASCENT:

FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF

TRANSFIGURATION - continued

CHAPTER XXXI.

THE CAVILS OF THE PHARISEES CONCERNING PURIFICATION, AND THE

TEACHING OF THE

LORD CONCERNING PURITY - THE TRADITIONS CONCERNING 'HAND-WASHING'

AND

'VOWS.'

(St. Matt. xv. 1-20; St. Mark vii. 1-23.)

As we follow the narrative, confirmatory evidence of what had preceded

springs up at almost every step. It is quite in accordance with the

abrupt departure of Jesus from Capernaum, and its motives, that when,

so far from finding rest and privacy at Bethsaida (east of the

Jordan), a greater multitude than ever had there gathered around Him,

which would fain have proclaimed Him King, He resolved on immediate

return to the western shore, with the view of seeking a quieter

retreat, even though it were in 'the coasts of Tyre and

Sidon.'[3279]3279According to St. Mark,[3280]3280 the Master had

directed the disciples to make for the other Bethsaida, or

'Fisherton,' on the western shore of the Lake.[3281]3281 Remembering

how common the corresponding name is in our own country,[3282]3282 and

that fishing was the main industry along the shores of the Lake, we

need not wonder at the existence of more than one Beth-Saida, or

'Fisherton.'[3283]3283 Nor yet does it seem strange, that the site

should be lost of what, probably, except for the fishing, was quite an

unimportant place. By the testimony both of Josephus and the Rabbis,

the shores of Gennesaret were thickly studded with little towns,

villages, and hamlets, which have all perished without leaving a

trace, while even of the largest the ruins are few and inconsiderable.

We would, however, hazard a geographical conjecture. From the fact

that St. Mark[3284]3284 names Bethsaida, and St. John[3285]3285

Capernaum, as the original destination of the boat, we would infer

that Bethsaida was the fishing quarter of, or rather close to,

Capernaum, even as we so often find in our own country a 'Fisherton'

adjacent to larger towns. With this would agree the circumstance, that

no traces of an ancient harbour have been discovered at Tell Hûm, the

site of Capernaum.[3286]3286 Further, it would explain, how Peter and

Andrew, who, according to St. John,[3287]3287 were of Bethsaida, are

described by St. Mark[3288]3288 as having their home in Capernaum. It

also deserves notice, that, as regards the house of St. Peter, St.

Mark, who was so intimately connected with him, names Capernaum, while

St. John, who was his fellow-townsman. names Bethsaida, and that the

reverse difference obtains between the two Evangelists in regard to

the direction of the ship. This also suggests, that in a sense - as

regarded the fishermen - the names were interchangeable, or rather,

that Bethsaida was the 'Fisherton' of Capernaum.[3289]3289

A superficial reader might object that, in the circumstances, we would

scarcely have expected Christ and His disciples to have returned at

once to the immediate neighbourhood of Capernaum, if not to that city

itself. But a fuller knowledge of the circumstances will not only, as

so often, convert the supposed difficulty into most important

confirmatory evidence, but supply some deeply interesting details. The

apparently trivial notice, that (at least) the concluding part of the

Discourses, immediately on the return to Capernaum, was spoken by

Christ 'in Synagogue,'[3290]3290 [3291]3291 enables us not only to

localise this address, but to fix the exact succession of events. If

this Discourse was spoken 'in Synagogue,' it must have been (as will

be shown) on the Jewish Sabbath. Reckoning backwards, we arrive at the

conclusion, that Jesus with His disciples left Capernaum for

Bethsaida-Julias on a Thursday; that the miraculous feeding of the

multitude took place on Thursday evening; the passage of the disciples

to the other side, and the walking of Christ on the sea, as well as

the failure of Peter's faith, in the night of Thursday to Friday; the

passage of the people to Capernaum in search of Jesus,[3292]3292 with

all that followed, on the Friday; and, lastly, the final Discourses of

Christ on the Saturday in Capernaum and in the Synagogue.

Two inferences will appear from this chronological arrangement. First,

when our Lord had retraced His steps from the eastern shore in search

of rest and retirement, it was so close on the Jewish Sabbath

(Friday), that He was almost obliged to return to Capernaum to spend

the holy day there, before undertaking the further journey to 'the

coasts of Tyre and Sidon.' And on the Sabbath no actual danger, either

from Herod Antipas or the Pharisees, need have been apprehended. Thus

(as before indicated), the sudden return to Capernaum, so far from

constituting a difficulty, serves as confirmation of the previous

narrative. Again, we cannot but perceive a peculiar correspondence of

dates. Mark here: The miraculous breaking of Bread at Bethsaida on a

Thursday evening; the breaking of Bread at the Last Supper on a

Thursday evening; the attempt to proclaim Him King, and the betrayal;

Peter's bold assertion, and the failure of his faith, each in the

night from Thursday to Friday; and, lastly, Christ's walking on the

angry, storm-tossed waves, and commanding them, and bringing the boat

that bore His disciples safe to land, and His victory and triumph over

Death and him that had the power of Death.

These, surely, are more than coincidences; and in this respect also

may this history be regarded as symbolic. As we read it, Christ

directed the disciples to steer for Bethsaida, the 'Fisherton' of

Capernaum, But, apart from the latter suggestion, we gather from the

expressions used,[3293]3293 that the boat which bore the disciples had

drifted out of its course - probably owing to the wind - and touched

land, not where they had intended, but at Gennesaret, where they

moored it. There can be no question, that by this term is meant 'the

plain of Gennesaret,' the richness and beauty of which

Josephus[3294]3294 and the Rabbis[3295]3295 describe in such glowing

language. To this day it bears marks of having been the most favoured

spot in this favoured region. Travelling northwards from Tiberias

along the Lake, we follow, for about five or six miles, a narrow ledge

of land shut in by mountains, when we reach the home of the Magdalene,

the ancient Magdala (the modern Mejdel). Right over against us, on the

other side, is Kersa (Gerasa), the scene of the great miracle. On

leaving Magdala the mountains recede, and form an amphitheatric plain,

more than a mile wide, and four or five miles long. This is 'the land

of Gennesaret' (el Ghuweir). We pass across the 'Valley of Doves,'

which intersects it about one mile to the north of Magdala, and pursue

our journey over the well-watered plain, till, after somewhat more

than an hour, we reach its northern boundary, a little beyond Khân

Minyeh. The latter has, in accordance with tradition, been regarded by

some as representing Bethsaida,[3296]3296 but seems both too far from

the Lake, and too much south of Capernaum, to answer the requirements.

No sooner had the well-known boat, which bore Jesus and His disciples,

been run up the gravel-beach in the early morning of that Friday, than

His Presence must have become known throughout the district, all the

more that the boatmen would soon spread the story of the miraculous

occurrences of the preceding evening and night. With Eastern rapidity

the tidings would pass along, and from all the country around the sick

were brought on their pallets, if they might but touch the border of

His garment. Nor could such touch, even though the outcome of an

imperfect faith, be in vain - for He, Whose garment they sought leave

to touch, was the God-Man, the Conqueror of Death, the Source and

Spring of all Life. And so it was where He landed, and all the way up

to Bethsaida and Capernaum.[3297]3297 [3298]3298

In what followed, we can still trace the succession of events, though

there are considerable difficulties as to their precise order. Thus we

are expressly told,[3299]3299 that those from 'the other side' 'came

to Capernaum' on 'the day following' the miraculous feeding, and that

one of the subsequent Discourses, of which the outline is preserved,

was delivered 'in Synagogue.'[3300]3300 As this could only have been

done either on a Sabbath or Feast-Day (in this instance, the

Passover[3301]3301), it follows, that in any case a day must have

intervened between their arrival at Capernaum and the Discourse in

Synagogue. Again, it is almost impossible to believe that it could

have been on the Passover day (15th Nisan).[3302]3302 For we cannot

imagine, that any large number would have left their homes and festive

preparations on the Eve of the Pascha (14th Nisan), not to speak of

the circumstance that in Galilee, differently from Judæa, all labour,

including, of course, that of a journey across the Lake, was

intermitted on the Eve of the Passover.[3303]3303 Similarly, it is

almost impossible to believe, that so many festive pilgrims would have

been assembled till late in the evening preceding the 14th Nisan so

far from Jerusalem as Bethsaida-Julias, since it would have been

impossible after that to reach the city and Temple in time for the

feast. It, therefore, only remains to regard the Synagogue-service at

which Christ preached as that of an ordinary Sabbath, and the arrival

of the multitude as having taken place on Friday in the forenoon.

Again, from the place which the narrative occupies in the Gospels of

St. Matthew and St. Mark, as well as from certain internal evidence,

it seems difficult to doubt, that the reproof of the Pharisees and

Scribes on the subject of 'the unwashed hands,'[3304]3304 was not

administered immediately after the miraculous feeding and the night of

miracles. We cannot, however, feel equally sure, which of the two

preceded the other: the Discourse in Capernaum,[3305]3305 or the

Reproof of the Pharisees.[3306]3306 Several reasons have determined us

to regard the Reproof as having preceded the Discourse. Without

entering on a detailed discussion, the simple reading of the two

sections will lead to the instinctive conclusion, that such a

Discourse could not have been followed by such cavil and such Reproof,

while it seems in the right order of things, that the Reproof which

led to the 'offence' of the Pharisees, and apparently the withdrawal

of some in the outer circle of discipleship,[3307]3307 should have

been followed by the positive teaching of the Discourse, which in turn

resulted in the going back of many who had been in the inner circle of

disciples.[3308]3308

In these circumstances, we venture to suggest the following as the

succession of events. Early on the Friday morning the boat which bore

Jesus and His disciples grated on the sandy beach of the plain of

Gennesaret. As the tidings spread of His arrival and of the miracles

which had so lately been witnessed, the people from the neighbouring

villages and towns flocked around Him, and brought their sick for the

healing touch. So the greater part of the forenoon passed. Meantime,

while they moved, as the concourse of the people by the way would

allow, the first tidings of all this must have reached the

neighbouring Capernaum. This brought immediately on the scene those

Pharisees and Scribes 'who had come from Jerusalem' on purpose to

watch, and, if possible, to compass the destruction on Jesus. As we

conceive it, they met the Lord and His disciples on their way to

Capernaum. Possibly they overtook them, as they rested by the way, and

the disciples, or some of them, were partaking of some food - perhaps,

some of the consecrated Bread of the previous evening. The Reproof of

Christ would be administered there; then the Lord would, not only for

their teaching, but for the purposes immediately to be indicated, turn

to the multitude;[3309]3309 next would follow the remark of the

disciples and the reply of the Lord, spoken, probably, when they were

again on the way;[3310]3310 and, lastly, the final explanation of

Christ, after they had entered the house at Capernaum.[3311]3311 In

all probability a part of what is recorded in St. John vi. 24, &c.

occurred also about the same time; the rest on the Sabbath which

followed.

Although the cavil of the Jerusalem Scribes may have been occasioned

by seeing some of the disciples eating without first having washed

their hands, we cannot banish the impression that it reflected on the

miraculously provided meal of the previous evening, when thousands had

sat down to food without the previous observance of the Rabbinic

ordinance. Neither in that case, nor in the present, had the Master

interposed. He was, therefore, guilty of participation in their

offence. So this was all which these Pharisees and Scribes could see

in the miracle of Christ's feeding the Multitude - that it had not

been done according to Law! Most strange as it may seem, yet in the

past history of the Church, and, perhaps, sometimes also in the

present, this has been the only thing which some men have seen in the

miraculous working of the Christ! Perhaps we should not wonder that

the miracle itself made no deeper impression, since even the disciples

'understood not' (by reasoning) 'about the loaves' - however they may

have accounted for it in a manner which might seem to them reasonable.

But, in another aspect, the objection of the Scribes was not a mere

cavil. In truth, it represented one of the great charges which the

Pharisees brought against Jesus, and which determined them to seek His

destruction.

It has already been shown, that they accounted for the miracles of

Christ as wrought by the power of Satan, whose special representative

- almost incarnation - they declared Jesus to be. This would not only

turn the evidential force of these signs into an argument against

Christ, but vindicate the resistance of the Pharisees to His claims.

The second charge against Jesus was, that He was 'not of God;' that He

was 'a sinner.'[3312]3312 If this could be established, it would, of

course, prove that He was not the Messiah, but a deceiver who misled

the people, and whom it was the duty of the Sanhedrin to unmask and

arrest. The way in which they attempted to establish this, perhaps

persuaded themselves that it was so, was by proving that He sanctioned

in others, and Himself committed, breaches of the traditional law;

which, according to their fundamental principles, involved heavier

guilt than sins against the revealed Law of Moses. The third and last

charge against Jesus, which finally decided the action of the Council,

could only be fully made at the close of His career. It might be

formulated so as to meet the views of either the Pharisees or

Sadducees. To the former it might be presented as a blasphemous claim

to equality with God - the Very Son of the Living God. To the

Sadducees it would appear as a movement on the part of a most

dangerous enthusiast - if honest and self-deceived, all the more

dangerous; one of those pseudo-Messiahs who led away the ignorant,

superstitious, and excitable people; and which, if unchecked, would

result in persecutions and terrible vengeance by the Romans, and in

loss of the last remnants of their national independence. To each of

these three charges, of which we are now watching the opening or

development, there was (from the then standpoint) only one answer:

Faith in His Person. And in our time, also, this is the final answer

to all difficulties and objections. To this faith Jesus was now

leading His disciples, till, fully realised in the great confession of

Peter, it became, and has ever since proved, the Rock on which that

Church is built, against which the very gates of Hades cannot prevail.

It was in support of the second of these charges, that the Scribes now

blamed the Master for allowing His disciples to eat without having

previously washed, or, as St. Mark - indicating, as we shall see, in

the word the origin of the custom - expresses it with graphic

accuracy: 'with common hands.'[3313]3313 Once more we have to mark,

how minutely conversant the Gospel narratives are with Jewish Law and

practice. This will best appear from a brief account of this

'tradition of the elders,'[3314]3314 the more needful that important

differences prevail even among learned Jewish authorities, due

probably to the circumstance that the brief Mishnic Tractate devoted

to the subject[3315]3315 has no Gemara attached to it, and also

largely treats of other matters. At the outset we have this

confirmation of the Gospel language, that this practice is expressly

admitted to have been, not a Law of Moses, but 'a tradition of the

elders.'[3316]3316 Still, and perhaps on this very account, it was so

strictly enjoined, that to neglect it was like being guilty of gross

carnal defilement. Its omission would lead to temporal

destruction,[3317]3317 or, at least, to poverty.[3318]3318 Bread eaten

with unwashen hands was as if it had been filth.[3319]3319 Indeed, a

Rabbi who had held this command in contempt was actually buried in

excommunication.[3320]3320 Thus, from their point of view, the charge

of the Scribes against the disciples, so far from being exaggerated,

is most moderately worded by the Evangelists. In fact, although at one

time it had only been one of the marks of a Pharisee, yet at a later

period to wash before eating was regarded as affording the ready means

of recognising a Jew.[3321]3321 [3322]3322

It is somewhat more difficult to account for the origin of the

ordinance. So far as indicated, it seems to have been first enjoined

in order to ensure that sacred offerings should not be eaten in

defilement. When once it became an ordinance of the elders, this was,

of course, regarded as sufficient ground for obedience.[3323]3323

Presently, Scriptural support was sought for it. Some based it on the

original ordinance of purification in Lev. xv. 11;[3324]3324 while

others saw in the words[3325]3325 'Sanctify yourselves,' the command

to wash before meat; in the command, 'Be ye holy,' that of washing

after meat; while the final clause, 'for I am the Lord your God,' was

regarded as enjoining 'the grace at meat.'[3326]3326 For, soon it was

not merely a washing before, but also after meals. The former alone

was, however, regarded as 'a commandment' (Mitsvah), the other only as

'a duty' (Chobhah), which some, indeed, explained on sanitary grounds,

as there might be left about the hands what might prove injurious to

the eyes.[3327]3327 [3328]3328 Accordingly, soldiers might, in the

urgency of campaigning, neglect the washing before, but they ought to

be careful about that after meat. By-and-by, the more rigorous

actually washed between the courses, although this was declared to be

purely voluntary.[3329]3329 This washing before meals is regarded by

some as referred to in Talmudic writings by the expression 'the first

waters' (Mayim rishonim), while what is called 'the second'

(sheniyim), or 'the other,' 'later,' or 'afterwaters' (Mayim

acharonim), is supposed to represent the washing after meals.

But there is another and more important aspect of the expression,

which leads us to describe the rite itself. The distinctive

designation for it is Netilath Yadayim,[3330]3330 literally, the

lifting of the hands; while for the washing before meat the term Meshi

or Mesha[3331]3331 is also used, which literally means 'to rub.' Both

these terms point to the manner of the rite. The first question here

was, whether 'second tithe,' prepared first-fruits (Terumah), or even

common food (Chullin), or else, 'holy' i.e. sacrificial food, was to

be partaken of. In the latter case a complete immersion of the hands

('baptism,' Tebhilath Yadayim), and not merely a Netilath, or

'uplifting,' was prescribed.[3332]3332 The latter was really an

affusion. As the purifications were so frequent, and care had to be

taken that the water had not been used for other purposes, or

something fallen into it that might discolour or defile it, large

vessels or jars were generally kept for the purpose. These might be of

any material, although stone is specially mentioned.[3333]3333 It was

the practice to draw water out of these with what was called a natla,

antila, or antelaya,[3334]3334 very often of glass, which must hold

(at least) a quarter of a log[3335]3335 - a measure equal to one and a

half 'egg-shells.' For, no less quantity than this might be used for

affusion. The water was poured on both hands, which must be free of

anything covering them, such as gravel, mortar, &c. The hands were

lifted up, so as to make the water run to the wrist, in order to

ensure that the whole hand was washed, and that the water polluted by

the hand did not again run down the fingers. Similarly, each hand was

rubbed with the other (the first), provided the hand that rubbed had

been affused: otherwise, the rubbing might be done against the head,

or even against a wall. But there was one point on which special

stress was laid. In the 'first affusion,' which was all that

originally was required when the hands were Levitically 'defiled,' the

water had to run down to the wrist[3336]3336 ({hebrew}, or {hebrew} -

lappereq, or ad happereq). If the water remained short of the wrist

(chuts lappereq), the hands were not clean.[3337]3337 Accordingly, the

words of St. Mark[3338]3338 can only mean that the Pharisees eat not

'except they wash their hands to the wrist.'[3339]3339

Allusion has already been made to what are called 'the first' and 'the

second,' or 'other' 'waters.' But, in their original meaning, these

terms referred to something else than washing before and after meals.

The hands were deemed capable of contracting Levitical defilement,

which, in certain cases, might even render the whole body 'unclean.'

If the hands were 'defiled,' two affusions were required: the first,

or 'first waters' (mayim rishonim) to remove the defilement, and the

'second,' or 'after waters' (mayim sheniyim or acharonim) to wash away

the waters that had contracted the defilement of the hands.

Accordingly, on the affusion of the first waters the hands were

elevated, and the water made to run down at the wrist, while at the

second waters the hands were depressed, so that the water might run

off by the finger points and tips. By-and-by, it became the practice

to have two affusions, whenever Terumah (prepared first-fruits) was to

be eaten, and at last even when ordinary food (Chullin) was partaken

of. The modern Jews have three affusions, and accompany the rite with

a special benediction.

This idea of the 'defilement of the hands' received a very curious

application. According to one of the eighteen decrees, which, as we

shall presently show, date before the time of Christ, the Roll of the

Pentateuch in the Temple defiled all kinds of meat that touched it.

The alleged reason for this decree was, that the priests were wont to

keep the Terumah (preserved first-fruits) close to the Roll of the

Law, on which account the latter was injured by mice. The Rabbinic

ordinance was intended to avert this danger.[3340]3340 [3341]3341 To

increase this precaution, it was next laid down as a principle, that

all that renders the Terumah unfit, also defiles the hands.[3342]3342

Hence, the Holy Scriptures defiled not only the food but the hands

that touched them, and this not merely in the Temple, but anywhere,

while it was also explained that the Holy Scriptures included the

whole of the inspired writings - the Law, Prophets, and Hagiographa.

This gave rise to interesting discussions, whether the Song of

Solomon, Ecclesiastes, or Esther were to be regarded as 'defiling the

hands,' that is, as part of the Canon. The ultimate decision was in

favour of these books: 'all the holy writings defile the hands; the

Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes defile the hands.'[3343]3343 Nay, so

far were sequences carried, that even a small portion of the

Scriptures was declared to defile the hands if it contained

eighty-five letters, because the smallest 'section' (Parashah) in the

Law[3344]3344 consisted of exactly that number. Even the Phylacteries,

because they contained portions of the sacred text, the very leather

straps by which they were bound to the head and arm - nay, the blank

margins around the text of the Scriptures, or at the beginning and end

of sections, were declared to defile the hands.[3345]3345 [3346]3346

From this exposition it will be understood what importance the Scribes

attached to the rite which the disciples had neglected. Yet at a later

period Pharisaism, with characteristic ingenuity, found a way of

evading even this obligation, by laying down what we would call the

Popish (or semi-Popish) principle of 'intention.' It was ruled, that

if anyone had performed the rite of handwashing in the morning, 'with

intention' that it should apply to the meals of the whole day, this

was (with certain precautions) valid.[3347]3347 But at the time of

which we write the original ordinance was quite new. This touches one

of the most important, but also most intricate questions in the

history of Jewish dogmas. Jewish tradition traced, indeed, the command

of washing the hands before eating - at least of sacrificial offerings

- to Solomon,[3348]3348 in acknowledgment of which 'the voice from

heaven' (Bath-Qol) had been heard to utter Prov. xxiii. 15, and xxvii.

11. But the earliest trace of this custom occurs in a portion of the

Sibylline Books, which dates from about 160 b.c.,[3349]3349 where we

find an allusion to the practice of continually washing the hands, in

connection with prayer and thanksgiving.[3350]3350 It was reserved for

Hillel and Shammai, the two great rival teachers and heroes of Jewish

traditionalism, immediately before Christ, to fix the Rabbinic

ordinance about the washing of hands (Netilath Yadayim), as previously

described. This was one of the few points on which they were

agreed,[3351]3351 and hence emphatically 'a tradition of the Elders,'

since these two teachers bear, in Rabbinic writings, each the

designation of 'the Elder.'[3352]3352 Then followed a period of

developing traditionalism, and hatred of all that was Gentile. The

tradition of the Elders was not yet so established as to command

absolute and universal obedience, while the disputes of Hillel and

Shammai, who seemed almost on principle to have taken divergent views

on every question, must have disturbed the minds of many. We have an

account of a stormy meeting between the two Schools, attended even

with bloodshed. The story is so confusedly, and so differently told in

the Jerusalem[3353]3353 and in the Babylon Talmud,[3354]3354 that it

is difficult to form a clear view of what really occurred. Thus much,

however, appears - that the Shammaites had a majority of votes, and

that 'eighteen decrees' {hebrew} were passed in which the two Schools

agreed, while on other eighteen questions (perhaps a round number) the

Shammaites carried their views by a majority, and yet other eighteen

remained undecided. Each of the Schools spoke of that day according to

its party-results. The Shammaites (such as Rabbi Eliezer) extolled it

as that on which the measure of the Law had been filled up to the

full,[3355]3355 while the Hillelites (like Rabbi Joshua) deplored,

that on that day water had been poured into a vessel full of oil, by

which some of the more precious fluid had been split. In general, the

tendency of these eighteen decrees was of the most violently

anti-Gentile, intolerant, and exclusive character. Yet such value was

attached to them, that, while any other decree of the sages might be

altered by a more grave, learned, and authoritative assembly, these

eighteen decrees might not under any circumstances, be

modified.[3356]3356 But, besides these eighteen decrees, the two

Schools on that day[3357]3357 agreed in solemnly re-enacting 'the

decrees about the Book (the copy of the Law), and the hands'

({hebrew}). The Babylon Talmud[3358]3358 notes that the latter decree,

though first made by Hillel and Shammai, 'the Elders,' was not

universally carried out until re-enacted by their colleges. It is

important to notice, that this 'Decree' dates from the time just

before, and was finally carried into force in the very days of Christ.

This fully accounts for the zeal which the Scribes displayed - and

explains 'the extreme minuteness of details' with which St. Mark

'calls attention' to this Pharisaic practice.[3359]3359 For, it was an

express Rabbinic principle[3360]3360 that, if an ordinance had been

only recently re-enacted ({hebrew}), it might not be called in

question or 'invalidated ({hebrew}).'[3361]3361 Thus it will be seen,

that the language employed by the Evangelist affords most valuable

indirect confirmation of the trustworthiness of his Gospel, as not

only showing intimate familiarity with the minutiæ of Jewish

'tradition,' but giving prominence to what was then a present

controversy - and all this the more, that it needs intimate knowledge

of that Law even fully to understand the language of the Evangelist.

After this full exposition, it can only be necessary to refer in

briefest manner to those other observances which orthodox Judaism had

'received to hold.' They connect themselves with those eighteen

decrees, intended to separate the Jew from all contact with Gentiles.

Any contact with a heathen, even the touch of his dress, might involve

such defilement, that on coming from the market the orthodox Jew would

have to immerse. Only those who know the complicated arrangements

about the defilements of vessels that were in any part, however small,

hollow, as these are described in the Mishnah (Tractate Kelim), can

form an adequate idea of the painful minuteness with which every

little detail is treated. Earthen vessels that had contracted impurity

were to be broken; those of wood, horn, glass, or brass immersed;

while, if vessels were bought of Gentiles, they were (as the case

might be) to be immersed, put into boiling water, purged with fire, or

at least polished.[3362]3362

Let us now try to realise the attitude of Christ in regard to these

ordinances about purification, and seek to understand the reason of

His bearing. That, in replying to the charge of the Scribes against

His disciples, He neither vindicated their conduct, nor apologised for

their breach of the Rabbinic ordinances, implied at least an attitude

of indifference towards traditionalism. This is the more noticeable,

since, as we know, the ordinances of the Scribes were declared more

precious,[3363]3363 [3364]3364 and of more binding importance than

those of Holy Scripture itself.[3365]3365 But, even so, the question

might arise, why Christ should have provoked such hostility by placing

Himself in marked antagonism to what, after all, was indifferent in

itself. The answer to this inquiry will require a disclosure of that

aspect of Rabbinism which, from its painfulness, has hitherto been

avoided. Yet it is necessary not only in itself, but as showing the

infinite distance between Christ and the teaching of the Synagogue. It

has already been told, how Rabbinism, in the madness of its

self-exaltation, represented God as busying Himself by day with the

study of the Scriptures, and by night with that of the

Mishnah;[3366]3366 and how, in the heavenly Sanhedrin, over which the

Almighty presided, the Rabbis sat in the order of their greatness, and

the Halakhah was discussed, and decisions taken in accordance with

it.[3367]3367 Terrible as this sounds, it is not nearly all.

Anthropomorphism of the coarsest kind is carried beyond the verge of

profanity, when God is represented as spending the last three hours of

every day in playing with Leviathan,[3368]3368 and it is discussed,

how, since the destruction of Jerusalem, God no longer laughs, but

weeps, and that, in a secret place of His own, according to Jer. xiii.

17.[3369]3369 Nay, Jer. xxv. 30 is profanely misinterpreted as

implying that, in His grief over the destruction of the Temple, the

Almighty roars like a lion in each of the three watches of the

night.[3370]3370 The two tears which He drops into the sea are the

cause of earthquakes; although other, though not less coarsely

realistic, explanations are offered of this phenomenon.[3371]3371

Sentiments like these, which occur in different Rabbinic writings,

cannot be explained away by any ingenuity of allegorical

interpretation. There are others, equally painful, as regards the

anger of the Almighty, which, as kindling specially in the morning,

when the sun-worshippers offer their prayers, renders it even

dangerous for an individual Israelite to say certain prayers on the

morning of New Year's Day, on which the throne is set for

judgment.[3372]3372 Such realistic anthropomorphism, combined with the

extravagant ideas of the eternal and heavenly reality of Rabbinism and

Rabbinic ordinances, help us to understand, how the Almighty was

actually represented as saying prayers. This is proved from Is. lvi.

7. Sublime through the language of these prayers is, we cannot but

notice that the all covering mercy, for which He is represented as

pleading, is extended only to Israel.[3373]3373 It is even more

terrible to read of God wearing the Tallith,[3374]3374 or that He puts

on the Phylacteries, which is deduced from Is. lxii. 8. That this also

is connected with the vain-glorious boasting of Israel, appears from

the passage supposed to be enclosed in these Phylacteries. We know

that in the ordinary Phylacteries these are: Exod. xiii. 1-10; 10-16;

Deut. vi. 4-10; xi. 13-22. In the Divine Phylacteries they were: 1

Chron. xvii. 21; Deut. iv. 7-8; xxxiii. 29; iv. 34; xxvi.

19.[3375]3375 Only one other point must be mentioned as connected with

Purifications. To these also the Almighty is supposed to submit. Thus

He was purified by Aaron, when He had contracted defilement by

descending into Egypt.[3376]3376 This is deduced from Lev. xvi. 16.

Similarly, He immersed in a bath of fire,[3377]3377 after the

defilement of the burial of Moses.

These painful details, most reluctantly given, are certainly not

intended to raise or strengthen ignorant prejudices against Israel, to

whom 'blindness in part' has truly happened; far less to encourage the

wicked spirit of contempt and persecution which is characteristic, not

of believing, but of negative theology. But they will explain, how

Jesus could not have assumed merely an attitude of indifference

towards traditionalism. For, even if such sentiments were represented

as a later development, they are the outcome of a direction, of which

that of Jesus was the very opposite, and to which it was antagonistic.

But, if Jesus was not sent of God - not the Messiah - whence this

wonderful contrast of highest spirituality in what He taught of God as

our Father, and of His Kingdom as that over the hearts of all men? The

attitude of antagonism to traditionalism was never more pronounced

than in what He said in reply to the charge of neglect of the

ordinance about 'the washing of hands.' Here it must be remembered,

that it was an admitted Rabbinic principle that, while the ordinances

of Scripture required no confirmation, those of the Scribes needed

such,[3378]3378 and that no Halakhah (traditional law) might

contradict Scripture.[3379]3379 When Christ, therefore, next proceeded

to show, that in a very important point - nay, in 'many such like

things' - the Halakhah was utterly incompatible with Scripture, that,

indeed, they made 'void the Word of God' by their traditions which

they had received,[3380]3380 He dealt the heaviest blow to

traditionalism. Rabbinism stood self-condemned; on its own showing, it

was to be rejected as incompatible with the Word of God.

It is not so easy to understand, why the Lord should, out of 'many

such things,' have selected in illustration the Rabbinic ordinance

concerning vows, as in certain circumstances, contravening the fifth

commandment. Of course, the 'Ten Words' were the Holy of Holies of the

Law; nor was there any obligation more rigidly observed - indeed,

carried in practice almost to the verge of absurdity[3381]3381 - than

that of honour to parents. In both respects, then, this was a

specially vulnerable point, and it might well be argued that, if in

this Law Rabbinic ordinances came into conflict with the demands of

God's Word, the essential contrariety between them must, indeed, be

great. Still, we feel as if this were not all. Was there any special

instance in view, in which the Rabbinic law about votive offerings had

led to such abuse? Or was it only, that at this festive season the

Galilean pilgrims would carry with them to Jerusalem their votive

offerings? Or, could the Rabbinic ordinances about 'the sanctification

of the hands' (Yadayim) have recalled to the Lord another Rabbinic

application of the word 'hand' (yad) in connection with votive

offerings? It is at least sufficiently curious to find mention here,

and it will afford the opportunity of briefly explaining, what to a

candid reader may seem almost inexplicable in the Jewish legal

practice to which Christ refers.

At the outset it must be admitted, that Rabbinism did not encourage

the practice of promiscuous vowing. As we view it, it belongs, at

best, to a lower and legal standpoint. In this respect Rabbi Akiba put

it concisely, in one of his truest sayings: 'Vows are a hedge to

abstinence.'[3382]3382 On the other hand, if regarded as a kind of

return for benefits received, or as a promise attaching to our

prayers, a vow - unless it form part of our absolute and entire

self-surrender - partakes either of work-righteousness, or appears

almost a kind of religious gambling. And so the Jewish proverb has it:

'In the hour of need a vow; in time of ease excess.'[3383]3383 Towards

such work-righteousness and religious gambling the Eastern, and

especially the Rabbinic Jew, would be particularly inclined. But even

the Rabbis saw that its encouragement would lead to the profanation of

what was holy; to rash, idle, and wrong vows; and to the worst and

most demoralising kind of perjury, as inconvenient consequences made

themselves felt. Of many sayings, condemnatory of the practice, one

will suffice to mark the general feeling: 'He who makes a vow, even if

he keeps it, deserves the name of wicked.'[3384]3384 Nevertheless, the

practice must have attained terrible proportions, whether as regards

the number of vows, the lightness with which they were made, or the

kind of things which became their object. The larger part of the

Mishnic Tractate on 'Vows' (Nedarim, in eleven chapters) describes

what expressions were to be regarded as equivalent to vows, and what

would either legally invalidate and annul a vow, or leave it binding.

And here we learn, that those who were of full age, and not in a

position of dependence (such as wives) would make almost any kind of

vows, such as that they would not lie down to sleep, not speak to

their wives or children, not have intercourse with their brethren, and

even things more wrong or foolish - all of which were solemnly treated

as binding on the conscience. Similarly, it was not necessary to use

the express words of vowing. Not only the word 'Qorban' [Korban],

'given to God', but any similar expression, such as Qonakh, or

Qonam[3385]3385 (the latter also a Phoenician expression, and probably

an equivalent for Qeyam, 'let it be established') would suffice; the

mention of anything laid upon the altar (though not of the altar

itself). such as the wood, or the fire, would constitute a

vow,[3386]3386 nay, the repetition of the form which generally

followed on the votive Qonam or Qorban had binding force, even though

not preceded by these terms. Thus, if a man said: 'That I eat or taste

of such a thing,' it constituted a vow, which bound him not to eat or

taste it, because the common formula was: 'Qorban (or Qonam) that I

eat or drink, or do such a thing,' and the omission of the votive word

did not invalidate a vow, if it were otherwise regularly

expressed.[3387]3387

It is in explaining this strange provision, intended both to uphold

the solemnity of vows, and to discourage the rash use of words, that

the Talmud[3388]3388 makes use of the word 'hand' in a connection

which we have supposed might, by association of ideas, have suggested

to Christ the contrast between what the Bible and what the Rabbis

regarded as 'sanctified hands,' and hence between the commands of God

and the traditions of the Elders. For the Talmud explains that, when a

man simply says: 'That (or if) I eat or taste such a thing,' it is

imputed as a vow, and he may not eat or taste of it, 'because the hand

is on the Qorban'[3389]3389 - the mere touch of Qorban had sanctified

it, and put it beyond his reach, just as if it had been laid on the

altar itself. Here, then, was a contrast. According to the Rabbis, the

touch of 'a common' hand defiled God's good gift of meat, while the

touch of 'a sanctified' hand in rash or wicked words might render it

impossible to give anything to a parent, and so involve the grossest

breach of the Fifth Commandment! Such, according to Rabbinic Law, was

the 'common' and such the 'sanctifying' touch of the hands - and did

such traditionalism not truly 'make void the Word of God'?

A few further particulars may serve to set this in clearer light. It

must not be thought that the pronunciation of the votive word

'Qorban,' although meaning 'a gift,' or 'given to God,' necessarily

dedicated a thing to the Temple. The meaning might simply be, and

generally was, that it was to be regarded like Qorban - that is, that

in regard to the person or persons named, the thing termed was to be

considered as if it were Qorban, laid on the altar, and put entirely

out of their reach. For, although included under the one name, there

were really two kinds of vows: those of consecration to God, and those

of personal obligation[3390]3390 - and the latter were the most

frequent.

To continue. The legal distinction between a vow, an oath, and 'the

ban,' are clearly marked both in reason and in Jewish Law. The oath

was an absolute, the vow a conditional undertaking - their difference

being marked even by this, that the language of a vow ran thus: 'That'

or 'if' 'I or another do such a thing,' 'if I eat;'[3391]3391 while

that of the oath was a simple affirmation or negation,[3392]3392 'I

shall not eat.'[3393]3393 On the other hand, the 'ban' might refer to

one of three things: those dedicated for the use of the priesthood,

those dedicated to God, or else to a sentence pronounced by the

Sanhedrin.[3394]3394 In any case it was not lawful to 'ban' the whole

of one's property, nor even one class of one's property (such as all

one's sheep), nor yet what could not, in the fullest sense, be called

one's property, such as a child, a Hebrew slave, or a purchased field,

which had to be restored in the Year of Jubilee; while an inherited

field, if banned, would go in perpetuity for the use of the

priesthood. Similarly, the Law limited vows. Those intended to incite

to an act (as on the part of one who sold a thing), or by way of

exaggeration, or in cases of mistake, and, lastly, vows which

circumstances rendered impossible, were declared null. To these four

classes the Mishnah added those made to escape murder, robbery, and

the exactions of the publican. If a vow was regarded as rash or wrong,

attempts were made[3395]3395 to open a door for repentance.[3396]3396

Absolutions from a vow might be obtained before a 'sage,' or, in his

absence, before three laymen,[3397]3397 when all obligations became

null and void. At the same time the Mishnah[3398]3398 admits, that

this power of absolving from vows was a tradition hanging, as it were,

in the air,[3399]3399 since it received little (or, as Maimonides

puts it, no) support from Scripture.[3400]3400

There can be no doubt, that the words of Christ referred to such vows

of personal obligation. By these a person might bind himself in regard

to men or things, or else put that which was another's out of his own

reach, or that which was his own out of the reach of another, and this

as completely as if the thing or things had been Qorban, a gift given

to God. Thus, by simply saying, 'Qorban,' or 'Qorban, that by which I

might be profited by thee,' a person bound himself never to touch,

taste, or have anything that belonged to the person so addressed.

Similarly, by saying 'Qorban, that by which thou mightest be profited

by me,' he would prevent the person so addressed from ever deriving

any benefit from that which belonged to him. And so stringent was the

ordinance that (almost in the words of Christ) it is expressly stated

that such a vow was binding, even if what was vowed involved a breach

of the Law.[3401]3401 It cannot be denied that such vows, in regard to

parents, would be binding, and that they were actually made.[3402]3402

Indeed, the question is discussed in the Mishnah in so many words,

whether 'honour of father and mother'[3403]3403 constituted a ground

for invalidating a vow, and decided in the negative against a solitary

dissenting voice.[3404]3404 And if doubt should still exist, a case is

related in the Mishnah,[3405]3405 in which a father was thus shut out

by the vow of his son from anything by which he might be profited by

him ({hebrew}).[3406]3406 Thus the charge brought by Christ is in

fullest accordance with the facts of the case. More than this, the

manner in which it is put by St. Mark shows the most intimate

knowledge of Jewish customs and law. For, the seemingly inappropriate

addition to our Lord's mention of the Fifth Commandment of the words:

'He that revileth father or mother, he shall (let him) surely

die,'[3407]3407 is not only explained but vindicated by the common

usage of the Rabbis,[3408]3408 to mention along with a command the

penalty attaching to its breach, so as to indicate the importance

which Scripture attached to it. On the other hand, the words of St.

Mark: 'Qorban (that is to say, gift (viz., to God)) that by which thou

mightest be profited by me,' are a most exact transcription into Greek

of the common formula of vowing, as given in the Mishnah and Talmud

({hebrew}).[3409]3409

But Christ did not merely show the hypocrisy of the system of

traditionalism in conjoining in the name of religion the greatest

outward punctiliousness with the grossest breach of real duty. Never,

alas! was that aspect of prophecy, which in the present saw the

future, more clearly vindicated than as the words of Isaiah to Israel

now appeared in their final fulfilment: 'This people honoureth Me with

their lips, but their heart is far from Me. Howbeit, in vain do they

worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.'[3410]3410

But in thus setting forth for the first time the real character of

traditionalism, and setting Himself in open opposition to its

fundamental principles, the Christ enunciated also for the first time

the fundamental principle of His own interpretation of the Law. That

Law was not a system of externalism, in which outward things affected

the inner man. It was moral and addressed itself to man as a moral

being - to his heart and conscience. As the spring of all moral action

was within, so the mode of affecting it would be inward. Not from

without inwards, but from within outwards: such was the principle of

the new Kingdom, as setting forth the Law in its fulness and

fulfilling it. 'There is nothing from without the[3411]3411 man, that,

entering into him, can defile him; but the things which proceed out of

the man, those are they that defile the man.'[3412]3412 Not only

negatively, but positively, was this the fundamental principle of

Christian practice in direct contrast to that of Pharisaic Judaism. It

is in this essential contrariety of principle, rather than in any

details, that the unspeakable difference between Christ and all

contemporary teachers appears. Nor is even this all. For, the

principle laid down by Christ concerning that which entereth from

without and that which cometh from within, covers, in its full

application, not only the principle of Christian liberty in regard to

the Mosaic Law, but touches far deeper and permanent questions,

affecting not only the Jew, but all men and to all times.

As we read it, the discussion, to which such full reference has been

made, had taken place between the Scribes and the Lord, while the

multitude perhaps stood aside. But when enunciating the grand

principle of what constituted real defilement, 'He called to Him the

multitude.'[3413]3413 It was probably while pursuing their way to

Capernaum, when this conversation had taken place, that His disciples

afterwards reported, that the Pharisees had been offended by that

saying of His to the multitude. Even this implies the weakness of the

disciples: that they were not only influenced by the good or evil

opinion of these religious leaders of the people, but in some measure

sympathised with their views. All this is quite natural, and as

bringing before us real, not imaginary persons, so far evidential of

the narrative. The answer which the Lord gave the disciples bore a

twofold aspect: that of solemn warning concerning the inevitable fate

of every plant which God had not planted, and that of warning

concerning the character and issue of Pharisaic teaching, as being the

leadership of the blind by the blind,[3414]3414 which must end in ruin

to both.

But even so the words of Christ are represented in the Gospel as

sounding strange and difficult to the disciples - so truthful and

natural is the narrative. But they were earnest, genuine men; and when

they reached the home in Capernaum, Peter, as the most courageous of

them, broke the reserve - half of fear and half of reverence - which,

despite their necessary familiarity, seems to have subsisted between

the Master and His disciples. And the existence of such reverential

reserve in such circumstances appears, the more it is considered, yet

another evidence of Christ's Divine Character, just as the implied

allusion to it in the narrative is another undesigned proof of its

truthfulness. And so Peter would seek for himself and his

fellow-disciples an explanation of what still seemed to him only

parabolic in the Master's teachings. He received it in the fullest

manner. There was, indeed, one part even in the teaching of the Lord,

which accorded with the higher views of the Rabbis. Those sins which

Christ set before them as sins of the outward and inward

man,[3415]3415 and of what connects the two: our relation to others,

were the outcome of evil thoughts. And this, at least, the Rabbis also

taught; explaining, with much detail, how the heart was alike the

source of strength and of weakness, of good and of evil thoughts,

loved and hated, envied, lusted and deceived, proving each statement

from Scripture.[3416]3416 But never before could they have realised,

that anything entering from without could not defile a man. Least of

all could they perceive the final inference which St. Mark long

afterwards derived from this teaching of the Lord: 'This He said,

making all meats clean.'[3417]3417 [3418]3418

Yet another time had Peter to learn that lesson, when his resistance

to the teaching of the vision of the sheet let down from heaven was

silenced by this: 'What God hath cleansed, make not thou

common.'[3419]3419 Not only the spirit of legalism, but the very terms

'common' (in reference to the unwashen hands) and 'making clean' are

the same. Nor can we wonder at this, if the vision of Peter was real,

and not, as negative criticism would have it, invented so as to make

an imaginary Peter - Apostle of the Jews - speak and act like Paul. On

that hypothesis, the correspondence of thought and expression would

seem, indeed, inexplicable; on the former, the Peter, who has had that

vision, is telling through St. Mark the teaching that underlay it all,

and, as he looked back upon it, drawing from it the inference which he

understood not at the time: 'This He said, making all meats clean.'

A most difficult lesson this for a Jew, and for one like Peter, nay,

for us all, to learn. And still a third time had Peter to learn it,

when, in his fear of the Judaisers from Jerusalem, he made that common

which God had made clean, had care of the unwashen hands, but forgot

that the Lord had made clean all meats. Terrible, indeed, must have

been that contention which followed between Paul and Peter. Eighteen

centuries have passed, and that fatal strife is still the ground of

theological contention against the truth.[3420]3420 Eighteen

centuries, and within the Church also the strife still continues.

Brethren sharply contend and are separated, because they will insist

on that as of necessity which should be treated as of indifference:

because of the not eating with unwashen hands, forgetful that He has

made all meats clean to him who is inwardly and spiritually cleansed.

CHAPTER XXXII.

THE GREAT CRISIS IN POPULAR FEELING - THE LAST DISCOURSES IN THE

SYNAGOGUE

OF CAPERNAUM - CHRIST THE BREAD OF LIFE - 'WILL YE ALSO GO AWAY?'

(St. John vi. 22-71.)[3421]3421

THE narrative now returns to those who, on the previous evening, had,

after the miraculous meal, been 'sent away' to their homes. We

remember, that this had been after an abortive attempt on their part

to take Jesus by force and make Him their Messiah-King. We can

understand that the effectual resistance of Jesus to their purpose not

only weakened, but in great measure neutralised, the effect of the

miracle which they had witnessed. In fact, we look upon this check as

the first turning of the tide of popular enthusiasm. Let us bear in

mind what ideas and expectations of an altogether external character

those men connected with the Messiah of their dreams. At last, by some

miracle more notable even than the giving of the Manna in the

wilderness, enthusiasm has been raised to the highest pitch, and

thousands were determined to give up their pilgrimage to the Passover,

and then and there proclaim the Galilean Teacher Israel's King. If He

were the Messiah, such was His rightful title. Why then did He so

strenuously and effectually resist it? In ignorance of His real views

concerning the Kingship, they would naturally conclude that it must

have been from fear, from misgiving, from want of belief in Himself.

At any rate, He could not be the Messiah, Who would not be Israel's

King. Enthusiasm of this kind, once repressed, could never be kindled

again. Henceforth there was continuous misunderstanding, doubt and

defection among former adherents, growing into opposition and hatred

unto death. Even to those who took not this position, Jesus, His Words

and Works, were henceforth a constant mystery.[3422]3422 And so it

came, that the morning after the miraculous meal found the vast

majority of those who had been fed, either in their homes or on their

pilgrim-way to the Passover at Jerusalem. Only comparatively few came

back to seek Him, where they had eaten bread at His Hand. And even to

them, as the after-conversation shows, Jesus was a mystery. They could

not disbelieve, and yet they could not believe; and they sought both

'a sign' to guide, and an explanation to give them its understanding.

Yet out of them was there such selection of grace, that all that the

Father had given would reach Him, and that they who, by a personal act

of believing choice and by determination of conviction, would come,

should in no wise be rejected of Him.

It is this view of the mental and moral state of those who, on the

morning after the meal, came to seek Jesus, which alone explains the

question and answers of the interview at Capernaum. As we read it:

'the day following the multitude which stood on the other (the

eastern) side of the sea' 'saw that Jesus was not there, neither His

disciples.'[3423]3423 But of two facts they were cognizant. They knew

that, on the evening before, only one boat had come over, bringing

Jesus and His disciples; and that Jesus had not returned in it with

His disciples, for they had seen them depart, while Jesus remained to

dismiss the people. In these circumstances they probably imagined,

that Christ had returned on foot by land, being, of course, ignorant

of the miracle of that night. But the wind which had been contrary to

the disciples, had also driven over to the eastern shore a number of

fishing-boats from Tiberias (and this is one of the undesigned

confirmations of the narrative). These they now hired, and came to

Capernaum, making inquiry for Jesus. Whether on that Friday afternoon

they went to meet Him on His way from Gennesaret (which the wording of

St. John vi. 25 makes likely), or awaited His arrival at Capernaum, is

of little importance. Similarly, it is difficult to determine whether

the conversation and outlined address of Christ took place on one or

partly on several occasions: on the Friday afternoon or Sabbath

morning, or only on the Sabbath. All that we know for certain is, that

the last part (at any rate[3424]3424) was spoken 'in Synagogue, as He

taught in Capernaum.'[3425]3425 It has been well observed, that 'there

are evident breaks after verse 40 and verse 51.'[3426]3426 Probably

the succession of events may have been that part of what is here

recorded by St. John[3427]3427 had taken place when those from across

the Lake had first met Jesus;[3428]3428 part on the way to, and

entering, the Synagogue;[3429]3429 and part as what He spoke in His

Discourse,[3430]3430 and then after the defection of some of His

former disciples.[3431]3431 But we can only suggest such an

arrangement, since it would have been quite consistent with Jewish

practice, that the greater part should have taken place in the

Synagogue itself, the Jewish questions and objections representing

either an irregular running commentary on His Words, or expressions

during breaks in, or at the conclusion of, His teaching.

This, however, is a primary requirement, that, what Christ is reported

to have spoken, should appear suited to His hearers: such as would

appeal to what they knew, such also as they could understand. This

must be kept in view, even while admitting that the Evangelist wrote

his Gospel in the light of much later and fuller knowledge, and for

the instruction of the Christian Church, and that there may be breaks

and omissions in the reported, as compared with the original

Discourse, which, if supplied, would make its understanding much

easier to a Jew. On the other hand, we have to bear in mind all the

circumstances of the case. The Discourse in question was delivered in

the city, which had been the scene of so many of Christ's great

miracles, and the centre of His teaching, and in the Synagogue, built

by the good Centurion, and of which Jairus was the chief ruler. Here

we have the outward and inward conditions for even the most advanced

teaching of Christ. Again, it was delivered under twofold moral

conditions, to which we may expect the Discourse of Christ to be

adapted. For, first, it was after that miraculous feeding which had

raised the popular enthusiasm to the highest pitch, and also after

that chilling disappointment of their Judaistic hopes in Christ's

utmost resistance to His Messianic proclamation. They now came

'seeking for Jesus,' in every sense of the word. They knew not what to

make of those, to them, contradictory and irreconcilable facts; they

came, because they did eat of the loaves, without seeing in them

'signs.'[3432]3432 And therefore they came for such a 'sign' as they

could perceive, and for such teaching in interpretation of it as they

could understand. They were outwardly - by what had happened -

prepared for the very highest teaching, to which the preceding events

had led up, and therefore they must receive such, if any. But they

were not inwardly prepared for it, and therefore they could not

understand it. Secondly, and in connection with it, we must remember

that two high points had been reached - by the people, that Jesus was

the Messiah-King; by the ship's company, that He was the Son of God.

However imperfectly these truths may have been apprehended, yet the

teaching of Christ, if it was to be progressive, must start from them

and then point onwards and upwards. In this expectation we shall not

be disappointed. And if, by the side of all this, we shall find

allusions to peculiarly Jewish thoughts and views, these will not only

confirm the Evangelic narrative, but furnish additional evidence of

the Jewish authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

1. The question:[3433]3433 'Rabbi, when camest Thou hither?' with

which they from the eastern shore greeted Jesus, seems to imply that

they were perplexed about, and that some perhaps had heard a vague

rumour of the miracle of His return to the western shore. It was the

beginning of that unhealthy craving for the miraculous which the Lord

had so sharply to reprove. In His own words: they sought Him not

because they 'saw signs,' but because they 'ate of the loaves,' and,

in their coarse love for the miraculous, 'were filled.'[3434]3434 What

brought them, was not that they had discerned either the higher

meaning of that miracle, or the Son of God, but those carnal Judaistic

expectancies which had led them to proclaim Him King. What they waited

for, was a Kingdom of God - not in righteousness, joy, and peace in

the Holy Ghost, but in meat and drink - a kingdom with miraculous

wilderness-banquets to Israel, and coarse miraculous triumphs over the

Gentiles. Not to speak of the fabulous Messianic banquet which a

sensuous realism expected, or of the achievements for which it looked,

every figure in which prophets had clothed the brightness of those

days was first literalised, and then exaggerated, till the most

glorious poetic descriptions became the most repulsively incongruous

caricatures of spiritual Messianic expectancy. The fruit-trees were

every day, or at least every week or two, to yield their riches, the

fields their harvests;[3435]3435 the grain was to stand like palm

trees, and to be reaped and winnowed without labour.[3436]3436 Similar

blessings were to visit the vine; ordinary trees would bear like fruit

trees, and every produce, of every clime, would be found in Palestine

in such abundance and luxuriance as only the wildest imagination could

conceive.

Such were the carnal thoughts about the Messiah and His Kingdom of

those who sought Jesus because they 'ate of the loaves, and were

filled.' What a contrast between them and the Christ, as He pointed

them from the search for such meat to 'work for the meat which He

would give them,' not a merely Jewish Messiah, but as 'the son of

Man.' And yet, in uttering this strange truth, Jesus could appeal to

something they knew when He added, 'for Him the Father hath sealed,

even God.' The words, which seem almost inexplicable in this

connection, become clear when we remember that this was a well-known

Jewish expression. According to the Rabbis, 'the seal of God was Truth

(AeMeTH),' the three letters of which this word is composed in Hebrew

({hebrew}) being, as was significantly pointed out, respectively the

first, the middle, and the last letters of the alphabet.[3437]3437

Thus the words of Christ would convey to His hearers that for the real

meat, which would endure to eternal life - for the better Messianic

banquet - they must come to Him, because God had impressed upon Him

His own seal of truth, and so authenticated His Teaching and Mission.

In passing, we mark this as a Jewish allusion, which only a Jewish

writer (not an Ephesian Gospel) would have recorded. But it is by no

means the only one. It almost seems like a sudden gleam of light - as

if they were putting their hand to this Divine Seal, when they now ask

Him what they must do, in order to work the Works of God? Yet

strangely refracted seems this ray of light, when they connect the

Works of God with their own doing. And Christ directed them, as

before, only more clearly, to Himself. To work the Works of God they

must not do, but believe in Him Whom God had sent. Their twofold error

consisted in imagining, that they could work the Works of God, and

this by some doing of their own. On the other hand, Christ would have

taught them that these Works of God were independent of man, and that

they would be achieved through man's faith in the Mission of the

Christ.

2. As it impresses itself on our minds, what now follows[3438]3438

took place at a somewhat different time - perhaps on the way to the

Synagogue. It is a remarkable circumstance, that among the ruins of

the Synagogue of Capernaum the lintel has been discovered, and that it

bears the device of a pot of manna, ornamented with a flowing pattern

of vine leaves and clusters of grapes.[3439]3439 Here then were the

outward emblems, which would connect themselves with the Lord's

teaching on that day. The miraculous feeding of the multitude in the

'desert place' the evening before, and the Messianic thoughts which

clustered around it, would naturally suggest to their minds

remembrance of the manna. That manna, which was Angels' food,

distilled (as they imagined) from the upper light, 'the dew from

above'[3440]3440 - miraculous food, of all manner of taste, and suited

to every age, according to the wish or condition of him who see ate

it,[3441]3441 but bitterness to Gentile palates - they expected the

Messiah to bring again from heaven. For, all that the first deliverer

Moses had done, the second - Messiah - would also do.[3442]3442 And

here, over their Synagogue, was the pot of manna - symbol of what God

had done, earnest of what the Messiah would do: that pot of manna,

which was now among the things hidden, but which Elijah, when he came,

would restore again!

Here, then, was a real sign. In their view the events of yesterday

must lead up to some such sign, if they had any real meaning. They had

been told to believe on Him, as the One authenticated by God with the

seal of Truth, and Who would give them meat to eternal life. By what

sign would Christ corroborate His assertion, that they might see and

believe? What work would He do to vindicate His claim? Their fathers

had eaten manna in the wilderness. To understand the reasoning of the

Jews, implied but not fully expressed, as also the answer of Jesus, it

is necessary to bear in mind (what forms another evidence of the

Jewish authorship of the Fourth Gospel), that it was the oft and most

anciently expressed opinion that, although God had given them this

bread out of heaven, yet it was given through the merits of Moses, and

ceased with his death.[3443]3443 This the Jews had probably in view,

when they asked: 'What workest Thou?'; and this was the meaning of

Christ's emphatic assertion, that it was not Moses who gave Israel

that bread. And then by what, with all reverence, may still be

designated a peculiarly Jewish turn of reasoning - such as only those

familiar with Jewish literature can fully appreciate (and which none

but a Jewish reporter would have inserted in his Gospel) - the Saviour

makes quite different, yet to them familiar, application of the manna.

Moses had not given it - his merits had not procured it - but His

Father gave them the true bread out of heaven. 'For,' as He explained,

'the bread of God is that[3444]3444 which cometh down from heaven, and

giveth life unto the world.' Again, this very Rabbinic tradition,

which described in such glowing language the wonders of that manna,

also further explained its other and real meaning to be, that if

Wisdom said, 'Eat of my bread and drink of my wine,'[3445]3445 it

indicated that the manna and the miraculous water-supply were the

sequence of Israel's receiving the Law and the Commandments[3446]3446

- for the real bread from heaven was the Law.[3447]3447 [3448]3448

It was an appeal which the Jews understood, and to which they could

not but respond. Yet the mood was brief. As Jesus, in answer to the

appeal that He would evermore give them this bread, once more directed

them to Himself - from works of men to the Works of God and to faith -

the passing gleam of spiritual hope had already died out, for they had

seen Him and 'yet did not believe.'

With these words of mingled sadness and judgment, Jesus turned away

from His questioners. The solemn sayings which now followed[3449]3449

could not have been spoken to, and they would not have been understood

by, the multitude. And accordingly we find that, when the conversation

of the Jews is once more introduced,[3450]3450 it takes up the thread

where it had been broken off, when Jesus spake of Himself as the Bread

Which had come down from heaven. Had they heard what, in our view,

Jesus spake only to His disciples, their objections would have been to

more than merely the incongruity of Christ's claim to have come down

from heaven.[3451]3451

3. Regarding these words of Christ, then, as addressed to the

disciples, there is really nothing in them beyond their standpoint,

though they open views of the far horizon. They had the experience of

the raising of the young man at Nain, and there, at Capernaum, of

Jairus' daughter. Besides, believing that Jesus was the Messiah, it

might perhaps not be quite strange nor new to them as Jews - although

not commonly received - that He would at the end of the world raise

the pious dead.[3452]3452 Indeed, one of the names given to the

Messiah - that of Yinnon, according to Ps. lxxii. 17[3453]3453 - has

by some been derived from this very expectancy.[3454]3454 Again, He

had said, that it was not any Law, but His Person, that was the bread

which came down from heaven, and gave life, not to Jews only, but unto

the world - and they had seen Him and believed not. But none the less

would the loving purpose of God be accomplished in the totality of His

true people, and its joyous reality be experienced by every individual

among them: 'All that (the total number, p_n _) which the Father

giveth Me shall come unto Me (shall reach Me[3455]3455), and him that

cometh unto Me (the coming one to Me) I will not cast out outside.'

What follows is merely the carrying out in all directions, and to its

fullest consequences, of this twofold fundamental principle. The

totality of the God-given would really reach Him, despite all

hindrances, for the object of His Coming was to do the Will of His

Father; and those who came would not be cast outside, for the Will of

Him that had sent Him, and which He had come to do, was that of 'the

all which He has given' Him, He 'should not lose anything out of this,

but raise it up in the last day.' Again, the totality - the all -

would reach Him, since it was the Will of Him that sent Him 'that

everyone (p_v) who intently looketh[3456]3456 at the Son, and

believeth on Him, should have eternal life;' and the coming ones would

not be cast outside, since this was His undertaking and promise as the

Christ in regard to each: 'And raise him up will I at the last

day.'[3457]3457

Although these wonderful statements reached in their full meaning far

beyond the present horizon of His disciples, and even to the utmost

bounds of later revelation and Christian knowledge, there is nothing

in them which could have seemed absolutely strange or unintelligible

to those who heard them. Given belief in the Messiahship of Jesus and

His Mission by the Father; given experience of what He had done, and

perhaps, to a certain extent, Jewish expectancy of what the Messiah

would do in the last day; and all this directed or corrected by the

knowledge concerning His work which His teaching had imparted, and the

words were intelligible and most suitable, even though they would not

convey to them all that they mean to us. If so seemingly incongruous

an illustration might be used, they looked through a telescope that

was not yet drawn out, and saw the same objects, through quite

diminutively and far otherwise than we, as gradually the hand of Time

has drawn out fully that through which both they and we, who believe,

intently gaze on the Son.

4. What now follows[3458]3458 is again spoken to 'the Jews,' and may

have occurred just as they were entering the Synagogue. To those

spiritually unenlightened, the point of difficulty seemed, how Christ

could claim to be the Bread come down from heaven. Making the largest

allowance, His known parentage and early history[3459]3459 forbade

anything like a literal interpretation of His Words. But this

inability to understand, ever brings out the highest teaching of

Christ. We note the analogous fact, and even the analogous teaching,

in the case of Nicodemus.[3460]3460 [3461]3461 Only, his was the

misunderstanding of ignorance, theirs of wilful resistance to His

Manifestation; and so the tone towards them was other than to the

Rabbi.

Yet we also mark, that what Jesus now spake to 'the Jews' was the same

in substance, though different in application, from what He had just

uttered to the disciples. This, not merely in regard to the Messianic

prediction of the Resurrection, but even in what He pronounced as the

judgment on their murmuring. The words: 'No man can come to Me, except

the Father Which hath sent Me draw him,' present only the converse

aspect of those to the disciples: 'All that which the Father giveth Me

shall come unto Me, and him that cometh unto Me I will in no wise cast

out.' For, far from being a judgment on, it would have been an excuse

of, Jewish unbelief, and, indeed, entirely discordant with all

Christ's teaching, if the inability to come were regarded as other

than personal and moral, springing from man's ignorance and opposition

to spiritual things. No man can come to the Christ - such is the

condition of the human mind and heart, that coming to Christ as a

disciple is, not an outward, but an inward, not a physical, but a

moral impossibility - except the Father 'draw him.' And this, again,

not in the sense of any constraint, but in that of the personal,

moral, loving influence and revelation, to which Christ afterwards

refers when He saith: 'And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will

draw all men unto Myself.'[3462]3462

Nor did Jesus, even while uttering these high, entirely un-Jewish

truths, forget that He was speaking them to Jews. The appeal to their

own Prophets was the more telling, that Jewish tradition also applied

these two prophecies (Is. liv. 13; Jer. xxxi. 34) to the teaching by

God in the Messianic Age.[3463]3463 [3464]3464 But the explanation of

the manner and issue of God's teaching was new: 'Everyone that hath

heard from the Father, and learned, cometh unto Me.' And this, not by

some external or realistic contact with God, such as they regarded

that of Moses in the past, or expected for themselves in the latter

days; only 'He Which is from God, He hath seen the Father.' But even

this might sound general and without exclusive reference to Christ.

So, also, might this statement seem: 'He that believeth[3465]3465 hath

eternal life.' Not so the final application, in which the subject was

carried to its ultimate bearing, and all that might have seemed

general or mysterious plainly set forth. The Personality of Christ was

the Bread of Life: 'I am the Bread of Life.'[3466]3466 The Manna had

not been bread of life, for those who ate it had died, their carcasses

had fallen in the wilderness. Not so in regard to this, the true Bread

from heaven. To share in that Food was to have everlasting life, a

life which the sin and death of unbelief and judgment would not cut

short, as it had that of them who had eaten the Manna and died in the

wilderness. It was another and a better Bread which came from heaven

in Christ, and another, better, and deathless life which was connected

with it: 'the Bread that I will give is My Flesh,[3467]3467 for the

life of the world.'

5. These words, so deeply significant to us, as pointing out the true

meaning of all His teaching, must, indeed, have sounded most

mysterious. Yet the fact that they strove about their meaning shows,

that they must have had some glimmer of apprehension that they bore on

His self-surrender, or, as they might view it, His martyrdom. This

last point is set forth in the concluding Discourse,[3468]3468 which

we know to have been delivered in the Synagogue, whether before,

during, or after, His regular Sabbath address. It was not a mere

martyrdom for the life of the world, in which all who benefitted by it

would share - but personal fellowship with Him. Eating the Flesh and

drinking the Blood of the Son of Man, such was the necessary condition

of securing eternal life. It is impossible to mistake the primary

reference of these words to our personal application of His Death and

Passion to the deepest need and hunger of our souls; most difficult,

also, to resist the feeling that, secondarily,[3469]3469 they referred

to that Holy Feast which shows forth that Death and Passion, and is to

all time its remembrance, symbol, seal, and fellowship. In this, also,

has the hand of History drawn out the telescope; and as we gaze

through it, every sentence and word sheds light upon the Cross and

light from the Cross, carrying to us this twofold meaning: His Death,

and its Celebration in the great Christian Sacrament.

6. But to them that heard it, nay even to many of His disciples, this

was an hard saying. Who could bear it? For it was a thorough

disenchantment of all their Judaic illusions, an entire upturning of

all their Messianic thoughts, and that, not merely to those whose

views were grossly carnal, but even to many who had hitherto been

drawn closer to Him. The 'meat' and 'drink' from heaven which had the

Divine seal of 'truth' were, according to Christ's teaching, not 'the

Law,' nor yet Israel's privileges, but fellowship with the Person of

Jesus in that state of humbleness ('the Son of Joseph,'[3470]3470),

nay, or martyrdom, which His words seemed to indicate, 'My Flesh is

the true[3471]3471 meat, and My Blood is the true drink;'[3472]3472

and what even this fellowship secured, consisted only in abiding in

Him and He in them;[3473]3473 or, as they would understand it, in

inner communion with Him, and in sharing His condition and views.

Truly, this was a totally different Messiah and Messianic Kingdom from

what they either conceived or wished.

Though they spake it not, this was the rock of offence over which they

stumbled and fell. And Jesus read their thoughts. How unfit were they

to receive all that was yet to happen in connection with the Christ -

how unprepared for it! If they stumbled at this, what when they came

to contemplate[3474]3474 the far more mysterious and un-Jewish facts

of the Messiah's Crucifixion and Ascension![3475]3475 Truly, not

outward following, but only inward and spiritual life-quickening could

be of profit - even in the case of those who heard the very Words of

Christ, which were spirit and life. Thus it again appeared, and most

fully, that, morally speaking, it was absolutely impossible to come to

Him, even if His Words were heard, except under the gracious influence

from above.[3476]3476

And so this was the great crisis in the History of the Christ. We have

traced the gradual growth and development of the popular movement,

till the murder of the Baptist stirred popular feeling to its inmost

depth. With his death it seemed as if the Messianic hope, awakened by

his preaching and testimony to Christ, were fading from view. It was a

terrible disappointment, not easily borne. Now must it be decided,

whether Jesus was really the Messiah. His Works, notwithstanding what

the Pharisees said, seemed to prove it. Then let it appear; let it

come, stroke upon stroke - each louder and more effective than the

other - till the land rang with the shout of victory and the world

itself re-echoed it. And so it seemed. That miraculous feeding - that

wilderness-cry of Hosanna to the Galilean King-Messiah from thousands

of Galilean voices - what were they but its beginning? All the greater

was the disappointment: first, in the repression of the movement - so

to speak, the retreat of the Messiah, His voluntary abdication,

rather, His defeat; then, next day, the incongruousness of a King,

Whose few unlearned followers, in their ignorance and un-Jewish

neglect of most sacred ordinances, outraged every Jewish feeling, and

whose conduct was even vindicated by their Master in a general attack

on all traditionalism, that basis of Judaism - as it might be

represented, to the contempt of religion and even of common

truthfulness in the denunciation of solemn vows! This was not the

Messiah Whom the many - nay, Whom almost any - would own.[3477]3477

Here, then, we are at the parting of the two ways; and, just because

it was the hour of decision, did Christ so clearly set forth the

highest truths concerning Himself, in opposition to the views which

the multitude entertained about the Messiah. The result was yet

another and a sorer defection. 'Upon this many of His disciples went

back, and walked no more with Him.'[3478]3478 Nay, the searching trial

reached even unto the hearts of the Twelve. Would they also go away?

It was an anticipation of Gethsemane - its first experience. But one

thing kept them true. It was the experience of the past. This was the

basis of their present faith and allegiance. They could not go back to

their old past; they must cleave to Him. So Peter spake it in name of

them all: 'Lord, to whom shall we go? Words of Eternal Life hast

Thou!' Nay, and more than this, as the result of what they had

learned: 'And we have believed and know that Thou art the Holy One of

God.'[3479]3479 [3480]3480 It is thus, also, that many of us, whose

thoughts may have been sorely tossed, and whose foundations terribly

assailed, may have found our first resting-place in the assured,

unassailable spiritual experience of the past. Whither can we go for

Words of Eternal Life, if not to Christ? If He fails us, then all hope

of the Eternal is gone. But He has the Words of Eternal life - and we

believed when they first came to us; nay, we know that He is the Holy

One of God. And this conveys all that faith needs for further

learning. The rest will He show, when He is transfigured in our sight.

But of these Twelve Christ knew one to be 'a devil' - like that Angel,

fallen from highest height to lowest depth.[3481]3481 The apostasy of

Judas had already commenced in his heart. And, the greater the popular

expectancy and disappointment had been, the greater the reaction and

the enmity that followed. The hour of decision was past, and the hand

on the dial pointed to the hour of His Death.

THE ASCENT:

FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF TRANSFIGURATION.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

JESUS AND THE SYRO-PHOENICIAN WOMAN

(St. Matt. xv. 21-28; St. Mark vii. 24-30.)

THE purpose of Christ to withdraw His disciples from the excitement of

Galilee, and from what might follow the execution of the Baptist, had

been interrupted by the events at Bethsaida-Julias, but it was not

changed. On the contrary, it must have been intensified. That wild,

popular outburst, which had almost forced upon Him a Jewish

Messiah-Kingship; the discussion with the Jerusalem Scribes about the

washing of hands on the following day; the Discourses of the Sabbath,

and the spreading disaffection, defection, and opposition which were

its consequences - all pointed more than ever to the necessity of a

break in the publicity of His Work, and to withdrawal from that part

of Galilee. The nearness of the Sabbath, and the circumstance that the

Capernaum-boat lay moored on the shore of Bethsaida, had obliged Him,

when withdrawing from that neighbourhood, to return to Capernaum. And

there the Sabbath had to be spent - in what manner we know. But as

soon as its sacred rest was past, the journey was resumed. For the

reasons already explained, it extended much further than any other,

and into regions which, we may venture to suggest, would not have been

traversed but for the peculiar circumstances of the moment.

A comparatively short journey would bring Jesus and His companions

from Capernaum 'into the parts,' or, as St. Mark more specifically

calls them, 'the borders of Tyre and Sidon.' At that time this

district extended, north of Galilee,[3482]3482 from the Mediterranean

to the Jordan. But the event about to be related occurred, as all

circumstances show, not within the territory of Tyre and Sidon, but on

its borders, and within the limits of the Land of Israel. If any doubt

could attach to the objects which determined Christ's journey to those

parts, it would be removed by the circumstance that St.

Matthew[3483]3483 tells us, He 'withdrew'[3484]3484 thither, while St.

Mark notes that He 'entered into an house, and would have no man know

it.' That house in which Jesus sought shelter and privacy would, of

course, be a Jewish home; and, that it was within the borders of

Israel, is further evidenced by the notice of St. Matthew, that 'the

Canaanitish woman' who sought His help 'came out from those borders' -

that is, from out the Tyro-Sidonian district - into that Galilean

border where Jesus was.

The whole circumstances seem to point to more than a night's rest in

that distant home. Possibly, the two first Passover-days may have been

spent here. If the Saviour had left Capernaum on the Sabbath evening,

or the Sunday morning, He may have reached that home on the borders

before the Paschal Eve, and the Monday and Tuesday[3485]3485 may have

been the festive Paschal days, on which sacred rest was enjoined. This

would also give an adequate motive for such a sojourn in that house,

as seems required by the narrative of St. Mark. According to that

Evangelist, 'Jesus would have no man know' His Presence in that place,

'but He could not be hid.' Manifestly, this could not apply to the

rest of one night in a house. According to the same Evangelist, the

fame of His Presence spread into the neighbouring district of Tyre and

Sidon, and reached the mother of the demonised child, upon which she

went from her home into Galilee to apply for help to Jesus. All this

implies a stay of two or three days. And with this also agrees the

after-complaint of the disciples: 'Send her away, for she crieth after

us.'[3486]3486 As the Saviour apparently received the woman in the

house,[3487]3487 it seems that she must have followed some of the

disciples, entreating their help or intercession in a manner that

attracted the attention which, according to the will of Jesus, they

would fain have avoided, before, in her despair, she ventured into the

Presence of Christ within the house.

All this resolves into a higher harmony those small seeming

discrepancies, which negative criticism had tried to magnify into

contradictions. It also adds graphic details to the story. She who now

sought His help was, as St. Matthew calls her, from the Jewish

standpoint, 'a Canaanitish[3488]3488 woman,' by which term a Jew would

designate a native of Phoenicia, or, as St. Mark calls her, a

Syro-Phoenician (to distinguish her country from Lybo-Phoenicia), and

'a Greek' - that is, a heathen. But, we can understand how she who, as

Bengel says, made the misery of her little child her own, would, on

hearing of the Christ and His mighty deed, seek His help with the most

intense earnestness, and that, in so doing, she would approach Him

with lowliest reverence, falling at His Feet.[3489]3489 But what in

the circumstances seems so peculiar, and, in our view, furnishes the

explanation of the Lord's bearing towards this woman, is her mode of

addressing Him: 'O Lord, Thou Son of David!' This was the most

distinctively Jewish appellation of the Messiah; and yet it is

emphatically stated of her, that she was a heathen. Tradition has

preserved a few reported sayings of Christ, of which that about to be

quoted seems, at least, quite Christ-like. It is reported that,

'having seen a man working on the Sabbath, He said: "O man, if indeed

thou knowest what thou doest, thou are blessed; but if thou knowest

not, thou are cursed, and art a transgressor of the Law."'[3490]3490

The same principle applied to the address of this woman - only that,

in what followed, Christ imparted to her the knowledge needful to make

her blessed.

Spoken by a heathen, these words were an appeal, not to the Messiah of

Israel, but to an Israelitish Messiah - for David had never reigned

over her or her people. The title might be most rightfully used, if

the promises to David were fully and spiritually apprehended - not

otherwise. If used without that knowledge, it was an address by a

stranger to a Jewish Messiah, Whose works were only miracles, and not

also and primarily signs. Now this was exactly the error of the Jews

which Jesus had encountered and combated, alike when He resisted the

attempt to make Him King, in His reply to the Jerusalem Scribes, and

in His Discourses at Capernaum. To have granted her the help she so

entreated, would have been, as it were, to reverse the whole of His

Teaching, and to make His works of healing merely works of power. For,

it will not be contended that this heathen woman had full spiritual

knowledge of the world-wide bearing of the Davidic promises, or of the

world embracing designation of the Messiah as the Son of David. In her

mouth, then, it meant something to which Christ could not have

yielded. And yet He could not refuse her petition. And so He first

taught her, in such manner as she could understand - that which she

needed to know, before she could approach Him in such manner - the

relation of the heathen to the Jewish world, and of both to the

Messiah, and then He gave her what she asked.

It is this, we feel convinced, which explains all. It could not have

been, that from His human standpoint He first kept silence, His deep

tenderness and sympathy forbidding Him to speak, while the normal

limitation of His Mission forbade Him to act as she sought.[3491]3491

Such limitations could not have existed in His mind; nor can we

suppose such an utter separation of His Human from His Divine

consciousness in His Messianic acting. And we recoil from the opposite

explanation, which supposes Christ to have either tried the faith of

the woman, or else spoken with a view to drawing it out. We shrink

from the idea of anything like an after-thought, even for a good

purpose, on the part of the Divine Saviour. All such afterthoughts

are, to our thinking, incompatible with His Divine Purity and absolute

rectitude. God does not make us good by a device - and that is a very

wrong view of trials, or of delayed answers to prayer, which men

sometimes take. Nor can we imagine, that the Lord would have made such

cruel trial of the poor agonised woman, or played on her feelings,

when the issue would have been so unspeakable terrible, if in her

weakness she had failed. There is nothing analogous in the case of

this poor heathen coming to petition, and being tried by being told

that she could not be heard, because she belonged to the dogs, not the

children, and the trial of Abraham, who was a hero of faith, and had

long walked with God. In any case, on any of the views just combated,

the Words of Jesus would bear a needless and inconceivable harshness,

which grates on all our feelings concerning Him. The Lord does not

afflict willingly, nor try needlessly, nor disguise His loving

thoughts and purposes, in order to bring about some effect in us. He

needs not such means; and, with reverence be it said, we cannot

believe that He ever uses them.

But, viewed as the teaching of Christ to this heathen concerning

Israel's Messiah, all becomes clear, even in the very brief reports of

the Evangelists, of which that by St. Matthew reads like that of one

present, that of St. Mark rather like that of one who relates what he

has heard from another (St. Peter). She had spoken, but Jesus had

answered her not a word. When the disciples - in some measure,

probably, still sharing the views of this heathen, that he was the

Jewish Messiah - without, indeed, interceding for her, asked that she

might be sent away, because she was troublesome to them, He replied,

that His Mission was only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

This was absolutely true, as regarded His Work while upon earth; and

true, in every sense, as we keep in view the world-wide bearing of the

Davidic reign and promises, and the real relation between Israel and

the world. Thus baffled, as it might seem, she cried no longer 'Son of

David,' but, 'Lord, help me.' It was then that the special teaching

came in the manner she could understand. If it were as 'the Son of

David' that He was entreated - if the heathen woman as such applied to

the Jewish Messiah as such, what, in the Jewish view, were the

heathens but 'dogs,' and what would be fellowship with them, but to

cast to the dogs - house-dogs,[3492]3492 it may be - what should have

been the children's bread? And, certainly, no expression more common

in the mouth of the Jews, than that which designated the heathens as

dogs.[3493]3493 [3494]3494 Most harsh as it was, as the outcome of

national pride and Jewish self-assertion, yet in a sense it was true,

that those within were the children, and those 'without'

'dogs.'[3495]3495 Only, who were they within and who they without?

What made 'a child,' whose was the bread - and what characterised 'the

dog,' that was 'without'?

Two lessons did she learn with that instinct-like rapidity which

Christ's personal Presence - and it alone - seemed ever and again to

call forth, just as the fire which fell from heaven consumed the

sacrifice of Elijah. 'Yea, Lord,' it is as Thou sayest: heathenism

stands related to Judaism as the house-dogs to the children, and it

were not meet to rob the children of their bread in order to give it

to dogs. But Thine own words show, that such would not now be the

case. If they are house-dogs, then they are the Master's, and under

His table, and when He breaks the bread to the children, in the

breaking of it the crumbs must fall all around. As St. Matthew puts

it: 'The dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their Master's table;'

as St. Mark puts it: 'The dogs under the table eat of the children's

crumbs.' Both versions present different aspects of the same truth.

Heathenism may be like the dogs, when compared with the children's

place and privileges; but He is their Master still, and they under His

table; and when He breaks the bread there is enough and to spare for

them - even under the table they eat of the children's crumbs.

But in so saying she was no longer 'under the table,' but had sat down

at the table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and was partaker of the

children's bread. He was no longer to her the Jewish Messiah, but

truly 'the Son of David.' She now understood what she prayed, and she

was a daughter of Abraham. And what had taught her all this was faith

in His Person and Work, as not only just enough for the Jews, but

enough and to spare for all - children at the table and dogs under it;

that in and with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David, all nations were

blessed in Israel's King and Messiah. And so it was, that the Lord

said it: 'O woman, great is thy faith: be it done unto thee even as

thou wilt.' Or, as St. Mark puts it, not quoting the very sound of the

Lord's words, but their impression upon Peter: 'For this saying go thy

way; the devil is gone out of thy daughter.'[3496]3496 'And her

daughter was healed from that hour.'[3497]3497 'And she went away unto

her house, and found her daughter prostrate [indeed] upon the bed, and

[but] the demon gone out.'

To us there is in this history even more than the solemn interest of

Christ's compassion and mighty Messianic working, or the lessons of

His teaching. We view it in connection with the scenes of the previous

few days, and see how thoroughly it accords with them in spirit, thus

recognising the deep internal unity of Christ's Words and Works, where

least, perhaps, we might have looked for such harmony. And again we

view it in its deeper bearing upon, and lessons to, all times. To how

many, not only of all nations and conditions, but in all states of

heart and mind, nay, in the very lowest depths of conscious guilt and

alienation from God, must this have brought unspeakable comfort, the

comfort of truth, and the comfort of His Teaching. Be it so, an

outcast, 'dog;' not at the table, but under the table. Still we are at

His Feet; it is our Master's Table; He is our Master; and, as He

breaks the children's bread, it is of necessity that 'the children's

crumbs' fall to us, enough, quite enough, and to spare. Never can we

be outside His reach, nor of that of His gracious care, and of

sufficient provision to eternal life.

Yet this lesson also must we learn, that as 'heathens' we may not call

on Him as 'David's Son,' till we know why we so call Him. If there can

be no despair, no being cast out by Him, no absolute distance that

hopelessly separates from His Person and Provision, there must be no

presumption, no forgetfulness of the right relation, no expectancy of

magic-miracles, no viewing of Christ as a Jewish Messiah. We must

learn it, and painfully, first by His silence, then by this, that He

is only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, what we are and

where we are - that we may be prepared for the grace of God and the

gift of grace. All men - Jews and Gentiles, 'children' and 'dogs' -

are as before Christ and God equally undeserving and equally sinners,

but those who have fallen deep can only learn that they are sinners by

learning that they are great sinners, and will only taste of the

children's bread when they have felt, 'Yea, Lord,' 'for even the dogs'

'under the table eat of the children's crumbs,' 'which fall from their

Master's table.'

CHAPTER XXXIV.

A GROUP OF MIRACLES AMONG A SEMI-HEATHEN POPULATION

(St. Matt. xv. 29-31; St. Mark vii 31-37; St. Mark viii. 22-26; St.

Matt. xi. 27-31.)

If even the brief stay of Jesus in that friendly Jewish home by the

borders of Tyre could not remain unknown, the fame of the healing of

the Syro-Phoenician maiden would soon have rendered impossible that

privacy and retirement, which had been the chief object of His leaving

Capernaum. Accordingly, when the two Paschal days were ended, He

resumed His journey, extending it far beyond any previously

undertaken, perhaps beyond what had been originally intended. The

borders of Palestine proper, though not of what the Rabbis reckoned as

belonging to it,[3498]3498 were passed. Making a long circuit through

the territory of Sidon,[3499]3499 He descended - probably through one

of the passes of the Hermon range - into the country of the Tetrarch

Philip. Thence He continued 'through the midst of the borders of

Decapolis,' till He once more reached the eastern, or south-eastern,

shore of the Lake of Galilee. It will be remembered that the

Decapolis, or confederacy of 'the Ten Cities,'[3500]3500 was wedged

in between the Tetrarchies of Philip and Antipas. It embraced ten

cities, although that was not always their number, and their names are

variously enumerated. Of these cities Hippos, on the southeastern

shore of the Lake, was the most northern, and Philadelphia, the

ancient Rabbath-Ammon, the most southern. Scythopolis, the ancient

Beth-Shean, with its district, was the only one of them on the western

bank of the Jordan. This extensive 'Ten Cities' district was

essentially heathen territory. Their ancient monuments show, in which

of them Zeus, Astarte, and Athene, or else Artemis, Hercules,

Dionysos, Demeter, or other Grecian divinities, were

worshipped.[3501]3501 Their political constitution was that of the

free Greek cities. They were subject only to the Governor of Syria,

and formed part of Coele-Syria, in contradistinction to

Syro-Phoenicia. Their privileges dated from the time of Pompey, from

which also they afterwards reckoned their era.

It is important to keep in view that, although Jesus was now within

the territory of ancient Israel, the district and all the surroundings

were essentially heathen, although in closest proximity to, and

intermingling with, that which was purely Jewish. St.

Matthew[3502]3502 gives only a general description of Christ's

activity there, concluding with a notice of the impression produced on

those who witnessed His mighty deeds, as leading them to glorify 'the

God of Israel.' This, of course, confirms the impression that the

scene is laid among a population chiefly heathen, and agrees with the

more minute notice of the locality in the Gospel of St. Mark. One

special instance of miraculous healing is recorded in the latter, not

only from its intrinsic interest, but perhaps, also, as in some

respects typical.

1. Among those brought to Him was one deaf, whose speech had, probably

in consequence of this, been so affected as practically to deprive him

of its power.[3503]3503 This circumstance, and that he is not spoken

of as so afflicted from his birth, leads us to infer that the

affection was - as not unfrequently - the result of disease, and not

congenital. Remembering, that alike the subject of the miracle and

they who brought him were heathens, but in constant and close contact

with Jews, what follows is vividly true to life. The entreaty to 'lay

His Hand upon him' was heathen, and yet semi-Jewish also. Quite

peculiar it is, when the Lord took him aside from the multitude; and

again that, in healing him, 'He spat,' applying it directly to the

diseased organ. We read of the direct application of saliva only here

and in the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida.[3504]3504 [3505]3505

We are disposed to regard this as peculiar to the healing of Gentiles.

Peculiar, also, is the term expressive of burden on the mind, when,

'looking up to heaven, He sighed.'[3506]3506 Peculiar, also, is the

'thrusting'[3507]3507 of His Fingers into the man's ears, and the

touch of his tongue. Only the upward look to Heaven and the command

'Ephphatha' - 'be opened' - seem the same as in His every day wonders

of healing. But we mark that all here seems much more elaborate than

in Israel. The reason of this must, of course, be sought in the moral

condition of the person healed. Certain characteristics about the

action of the Lord may, perhaps, help us to understand it better.

There is an accumulation of means, yet each and all inadequate to

effect the purpose, but all connected with His Person. This elaborate

use of such means would banish the idea of magic; it would arouse the

attention, and fix it upon Christ, as using these means, which were

all connected with His own person; while, lastly, the sighing, and the

word of absolute command, would all have here their special

significance.

Let us try to realize the scene. They have heard of Him as the

wonder-worker, these heathens in the land so near to, and yet so far

from, Israel; and they have brought to Him 'the lame, blind, dumb,

maimed,[3508]3508 and many others,' and laid them at His Feet. Oh,

what wonder! All disease vanishes in presence of Heaven's Own Life

Incarnate. Tongues long weighted are loosed, limbs maimed or bent by

disease[3509]3509 are restored to health, the lame are stretched

straight; the film of disease and the paralysis of nerve-impotence

pass from eyes long insensible to the light. It is a new era - Israel

conquers the heathen world, not by force, but by love; not by outward

means, but by the manifestation of life-power from above. Truly, this

is the Messianic conquest and reign: 'and they glorified the God of

Israel.'

From amongst this mass of misery we single out and follow

one,[3510]3510 whom the Saviour takes aside, that it may not merely be

the breath of heaven's spring passing over them all, that wooeth him

to new life, but that He may touch and handle him, and so give health

to soul and body. The man is to be alone with Christ and the

disciples. It is not magic; means are used, and such as might not seem

wholly strange to the man. And quite a number of means! He thrust His

Fingers into his deaf ears, as if to make a way for the sound: He spat

on his tongue, using a means of healing accepted in popular opinion of

Jew and Gentile;[3511]3511 [3512]3512 He touched his tongue. Each act

seemed a fresh incitement to his faith - and all connected itself with

the Person of Christ. As yet there was not breath of life in it all.

But when the man's eyes followed those of the Saviour to heaven, he

would understand whence He expected, whence came to Him the power -

Who had sent Him, and Whose He was. And as he followed the movement of

Christ's lips, as he groaned under the felt burden He had come to

remove, the sufferer would look up expectant. Once more the Saviour's

lips parted to speak the word of command: 'Be opened'[3513]3513 - and

straightway the gladsome sound would pass into 'his

hearing,'[3514]3514 and the bond that seemed to have held his tongue

was loosed. He was in a new world, into which He had put him that had

spoken that one Word; He, Who had been burdened under the load which

He had lifted up to His Father; to Whom all the means that had been

used had pointed, and with Whose Person they had been connected.

It was in vain to enjoin silence. Wider and wider spread the unbidden

fame, till it was caught up in this one hymn of praise, which has

remained to all time the jubilee of our experience of Christ as the

Divine Healer: 'He hath done all things well, He maketh even the deaf

to hear, and the dumb to speak.' This Jewish word, Ephphatha, spoken

to the Gentile Church by Him, Who, looking up to heaven, sighed under

the burden, even while He uplifted it, has opened the hearing and

loosed the bond of speech. Most significantly was it spoken in the

language of the Jews; and this also does it teach, that Jesus must

always have spoken the Jews' language. For, if ever, to a Grecian in

Grecian territory would He have spoken in Greek, not in the Jews'

language, if the former and not the latter had been that of which He

made use in His Words and Working.

2. Another miracle is recorded by St. Mark,[3515]3515 as wrought by

Jesus in these parts, and, as we infer, on a heathen.[3516]3516 All

the circumstances are kindred to those just related. It was in

Bethsaida-Julias, that one blind was brought unto Him, with the

entreaty that He would touch him, - just as in the case of the deaf

and dumb. Here, also, the Saviour took him aside - 'led him out of the

village' - and 'spat on his eyes, and put His Hands upon him.' We mark

not only the similarity of the means employed, but the same, and even

greater elaborateness in the use of them, since a twofold touch is

recorded before the man saw clearly.[3517]3517 On any theory - even

that which would regard the Gospel-narratives as spurious - this trait

must have been intended to mark a special purpose, since this is the

only instance in which a miraculous cure was performed gradually, and

not at once and completely. So far as we can judge, the object was, by

a gradual process of healing, to disabuse the man of any idea of

magical cure, while at the same time the process of healing again

markedly centered in the Person of Jesus. With this also agrees (as in

the case of the deaf and dumb) the use of spittle in the healing. We

may here recall, that the use of saliva was a well-known Jewish remedy

for affections of the eyes.[3518]3518 It was thus that the celebrated

Rabbi Meir relieved one of his fair hearers, when her husband, in his

anger at her long detention by the Rabbi's sermons, had ordered her to

spit in the preacher's face. Pretending to suffer from his eyes, the

Rabbi contrived that the woman publicly spat in his eyes, thus

enabling her to obey her husband's command.[3519]3519 The anecdote at

least proves, that the application of saliva was popularly regarded as

a remedy for affections of the eyes.

Thus in this instance also, as in that of the deaf and dumb, there was

the use of means, Jewish means, means manifestly insufficient (since

their first application was only partially successful), and a

multiplication of means - yet all centering in, and proceeding from,

His Person. As further analogies between the two, we mark that the

blindness does not seem to have been congenital,[3520]3520 but the

consequence of disease, and that silence was enjoined after the

healing.[3521]3521 Lastly, the confusedness of his sight, when first

restored to him, surely conveyed, not only to him but to us all, both

a spiritual lesson and a spiritual warning.

3. Yet a third miracle of healing requires to be here considered,

although related by St. Matthew in quite another connection.[3522]3522

But we have learned enough of the structure of the First Gospel to

know, that its arrangement is determined by the plan of the writer

rather than by the chronological succession of events.[3523]3523 The

manner in which the Lord healed the two blind men, the injunction of

silence, and the notice that none the less they spread His fame in all

that land,[3524]3524 seem to imply that He was not on the ordinary

scene of His labours in Galilee. Nor can we fail to mark an internal

analogy between this and the other two miracles enacted amidst a

chiefly Grecian population. And, strange though it may sound, the cry

with which the two blind men who sought His help followed Him, 'Son of

David, have mercy on us,' comes, as might be expected, more frequently

from Gentile than from Jewish lips. It was, of course, pre-eminently

the Jewish designation of the Messiah, the basis of all Jewish thought

of Him. But, perhaps on that very ground, it would express in Israel

rather the homage of popular conviction, than, as in this case, the

cry for help in bodily disease. Besides, Jesus had not as yet been

hailed as the Messiah, except by His most intimate disciples; and,

even by them, chiefly in the joy of their highest spiritual

attainments. He was the Rabbi, Teacher, Wonder-worker, Son of Man,

even Son of God; but the idea of the Davidic Kingdom as implying

spiritual and Divine, not outwardly royal rule, lay as yet on the

utmost edge of the horizon, covered by the golden mist of the Sun of

Righteousness in His rising. On the other hand, we can understand, how

to Gentiles, who resided in Palestine, the Messiah of Israel would

chiefly stand out as 'the Son of David.' It was the most ready, and,

at the same time, the most universal, form in which the great Jewish

hope could be viewed by them. It presented to their minds the most

marked contrast to Israel's present fallen state, and it recalled the

Golden Age of Israel's past, and that, as only the symbol of a far

wider and more glorious reign, the fulfilment of what to David had

only been promises.[3525]3525

Peculiar to this history is the testing question of Christ, whether

they really believed what their petition implied, that He was able to

restore their sight; and, again, His stern, almost passionate,

insistence[3526]3526 on their silence as to the mode of their cure.

Only on one other occasion do we read of the same insistence. It is,

when the leper had expressed the same absolute faith in Christ's

ability to heal if He willed it, and Jesus had, as in the case of

those two blind men, conferred the benefit by the touch of His

Hand.[3527]3527 In both these cases, it is remarkable that, along with

strongest faith of those who came to Him, there was rather an implied

than an expressed petition on their part. The leper who knelt before

Him only said: 'Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean;' and the

two blind men: 'Have mercy on us, Thou Son of David.' Thus it is the

highest and most realising faith, which is most absolute in its trust

and most reticent as regards the details of its request.

But as regards the two blind men (and the healed leper also), it is

almost impossible not to connect Christ's peculiar insistence on their

silence with their advanced faith. They had owned Jesus as 'the Son of

David,' and that, not in the Judaic sense (as by the Syro-Phoenician

woman[3528]3528), but as able to do all things, even to open by His

touch the eyes of the blind. And it had been done to them, as it

always is - according to their faith. But a profession of faith so

wide-reaching as theirs, and sealed by the attainment of what it

sought, yet scarcely dared to ask, must not be publicly proclaimed. It

would, and in point of fact did, bring to Him crowds which, unable

spiritually to understand the meaning of such a confession, would only

embarrass and hinder, and whose presence and homage would have to be

avoided as much, if not more, than that of open enemies.[3529]3529 For

confession of the mouth must ever be the outcome of heart-belief, and

the acclamations of an excited Jewish crowd were as incongruous to the

real Character of the Christ, and as obstructive to the progress of

His Kingdom, as is the outward homage of a world which has not

heart-belief in His Power, nor heart-experience of His ability and

willingness to cleanse the leper and to open the eyes of the blind.

Yet the leprosy of Israel and the blindness of the Gentile world are

equally removed by the touch of His Hand at the cry of faith.

The question has been needlessly discussed,[3530]3530 whether they

were to praise or blame, who, despite the Saviour's words, spread His

fame. We scarcely know what, or how much, they disobeyed. They could

not but speak of His Person; and theirs was, perhaps, not yet that

higher silence which is content simply to sit at His Feet.

CHAPTER XXXV.

THE TWO SABBATH-CONTROVERSIES - THE PLUCKING OF THE EARS OF CORN

BY THE

DISCIPLES, AND THE HEALING OF THE MAN WITH THE WITHERED HAND

(St. Matt. xii. 1-21; St. Mark ii. 23-iii. 6; St. Luke vi. 1-11.)

IN grouping together the three miracles of healing described in the

last chapter, we do not wish to convey that it is certain they had

taken place in precisely that order. Nor do we feel sure, that they

preceded what is about to be related. In the absence of exact data,

the succession of events and their location must be matter of

combination. From their position in the Evangelic narratives, and the

manner in which all concerned speak and act, we inferred, that they

took place at that particular period and east of the Jordan, in the

Decapolis or else in the territory of Philip. They differ from the

events about to be related by the absence of the Jerusalem Scribes,

who hung on the footsteps of Jesus. While the Saviour tarried on the

borders of Tyre, and thence passed through the territory of Sidon into

the Decapolis and to the southern and eastern shores of the Lake of

Galilee, they were in Jerusalem at the Passover. But after the two

festive days, which would require their attendance in the Temple, they

seem to have returned to their hateful task. It would not be difficult

for them to discover the scene of such mighty works as His.

Accordingly, we now find them once more confronting Christ. And the

events about to be related are chronologically distinguished from

those that had preceded, by this presence and opposition of the

Pharisaic party. The contest now becomes more decided and sharp, and

we are rapidly nearing the period when He, Who had hitherto been

chiefly preaching the Kingdom, and healing body and soul, will,

through the hostility of the leaders of Israel, enter on the second,

or prevailingly negative stage of His Work, in which, according to the

prophetic description, 'they compassed' Him 'about like bees,' but

'are quenched as the fire of thorns.'

Where fundamental principles were so directly contrary, the occasion

for conflict could not be long wanting. Indeed, all that Jesus taught

must have seemed to these Pharisees strangely un-Jewish in cast and

direction, even if not in form and words. But chiefly would this be

the case in regard to that on which, of all else, the Pharisees laid

most stress, the observance of the Sabbath. On no other subject is

Rabbinic teaching more painfully minute and more manifestly

incongruous to its professed object. For, if we rightly apprehend what

underlay the complicated and intolerably burdensome laws and rules of

Pharisaic Sabbath-observance, it was to secure, negatively, absolute

rest from all labour, and, positively, to make the Sabbath a delight.

The Mishnah includes Sabbath-desecration among those most heinous

crimes for which a man was to be stoned.[3531]3531 This, then, was

their first care: by a series of complicated ordinances to make a

breach of the Sabbath-rest impossible. How far this was carried, we

shall presently see. The next object was, in a similarly external

manner, to make the Sabbath a delight. A special Sabbath dress, the

best that could be procured; the choicest food, even though a man had

to work for it all the week, or public charity were to supply

it[3532]3532 - such were some of the means by which the day was to be

honoured and men to find pleasure therein. The strangest stories are

told, how, by the purchase of the most expensive dishes, the pious

poor had gained unspeakable merit, and obtained, even on earth,

Heaven's manifest reward. And yet, by the side of these and similar

strange and sad misdirections of piety, we come also upon that which

is touching, beautiful, and even spiritual. On the Sabbath there must

be no mourning, for to the Sabbath applies this saying:[3533]3533 'The

blessing of the Lord, it maketh rich, and He addeth no sorrow with

it.' Quite alone was the Sabbath among the measures of time. Every

other day had been paired with its fellow: not so the Sabbath. And so

any festival, even the Day of Atonement, might be transferred to

another day: not so the observance of the Sabbath. Nay, when the

Sabbath complained before God, that of all days it alone stood

solitary, God had wedded it to Israel; and this holy union God had

bidden His people 'remember,'[3534]3534 when it stood before the

Mount. Even the tortures of Gehenna were intermitted on that holy,

happy day.[3535]3535

The terribly exaggerated views on the Sabbath entertained by the

Rabbis, and the endless burdensome rules with which they encumbered

everything connected with its sanctity, are fully set forth in another

place.[3536]3536 The Jewish Law, as there summarised, sufficiently

explains the controversies in which the Pharisaic party now engaged

with Jesus. Of these the first was when, going through the cornfields

on the Sabbath, His disciples began to pluck and eat the ears of corn.

Not, indeed, that this was the first Sabbath-controversy forced upon

Christ.[3537]3537 But it was the first time that Jesus allowed, and

afterwards Himself did, in presence of the Pharisees, what was

contrary to Jewish notions, and that, in express and unmistakable

terms, He vindicated His position in regard to the Sabbath. This also

indicates that we have now reached a further stage in the history of

our Lord's teaching.

This, however, is not the only reason for placing this event so late

in the personal history of Christ. St. Matthew inserts it at a

different period from the other two Synoptists; and although St. Mark

and St. Luke introduce it amidst the same surroundings, the

connection, in which it is told in all the three Gospels, shows that

it is placed out of the historical order, with the view of grouping

together what would exhibit Christ's relation to the Pharisees and

their teaching. Accordingly, this first Sabbath-controversy is

immediately followed by that connected with the healing of the man

with the withered hand. From St. Matthew and St. Mark it might,

indeed, appear as if this had occurred on the same day as the plucking

of the ears of corn, but St. Luke corrects any possible

misunderstanding, by telling us that it happened 'on another Sabbath'

- perhaps that following the walk through the cornfields.

Dismissing the idea of inferring the precise time of these two events

from their place in the Evangelic record, we have not much difficulty

in finding the needful historical data for our present inquiry. The

first and most obvious is, that the harvest was still standing -

whether that of barley or of wheat. The former began immediately after

the Passover, the latter after the Feast of Pentecost; the

presentation of the wave-omer of barley making the beginning of the

one, that of the two wave-loaves that of the other.[3538]3538 Here

another historical notice comes to our aid. St. Luke describes the

Sabbath of this occurrence as 'the second-first' - an expression so

peculiar that it cannot be regarded as an interpolation,[3539]3539 but

as designedly chosen by the Evangelist to indicate something well

understood in Palestine at the time. Bearing in mind the limited

number of Sabbaths between the commencement of the barley and the end

of the wheat-harvest, our inquiry is here much narrowed. In Rabbinic

writings the term 'second-first' is not applied to any Sabbath. But we

know that the fifty days between the Feast of Passover and that of

Pentecost were counted from the presentation of the wave-omer on the

Second Paschal Day, at the first, second, third day, &c., after the

'Omer.' Thus the 'second-first' Sabbath might be either 'the first

Sabbath after the second day,' which was that of the presentation of

the Omer, or else the second Sabbath after this first day of

reckoning, or 'Sephirah,' as it was called ({hebrew}). To us the first

of these dates seems most in accord with the manner in which St. Luke

would describe to Gentile readers the Sabbath which was 'the first

after the second,' or, Sephirah-day.[3540]3540

Assuming, then, that it was probably the first - possibly, the second

- Sabbath after the 'reckoning,' or second Paschal Day, on which the

disciples plucked the ears of corn, we have still to ascertain whether

it was in the first or second Passover of Christ's Ministry.[3541]3541

The reasons against placing it between the first Passover and

Pentecost are of the strongest character. Not to speak of the

circumstance that such advanced teaching on the part of Christ, and

such advanced knowledge on the part of His disciples, indicate a later

period, our Lord did not call His twelve Apostles till long after the

Feast of Pentecost, viz. after His return from the so-called 'Unknown

Feast,'[3542]3542 which, as shown in another place,[3543]3543 must

have been either that of 'Wood-Gathering,' in the end of the summer,

or else New Year's Day, in the beginning of autumn. Thus, as by 'the

disciples' we must in this connection understand, in the first place,

'the Apostles,' the event could not have occurred between the first

Passover and Pentecost of the Lord's Ministry.

The same result is reached by another process of reasoning. After the

first Passover[3544]3544 our Lord, with such of His disciples as had

then gathered to Him, tarried for some time - no doubt for several

weeks - in Judæa.[3545]3545 The wheat was ripe for harvesting, when he

passed through Samaria.[3546]3546 And, on His return to Galilee, His

disciples seem to have gone back to their homes and occupations, since

it was some time afterwards when even His most intimate disciples -

Peter, Andrew, James, and John - were called a second time.[3547]3547

Chronologically, therefore, there is no room for this event between

the first Passover and Pentecost.[3548]3548 Lastly, we have here to

bear in mind, that, on His first appearance in Galilee, the Pharisees

had not yet taken up this position of determined hostility to Him. On

the other hand, all agrees with the circumstance, that the active

hostility of the Pharisees and Christ's separation from the ordinances

of the Synagogue commenced with His visit to Jerusalem in the early

autumn of that year.[3549]3549 If, therefore, we have to place the

plucking of the ears of corn after the Feast recorded in St. John v.,

as can scarcely be doubted, it must have taken place, not between the

first, but between the Second Passover and Pentecost of Christ's

Public Ministry.

Another point deserves notice. The different 'setting'

(chronologically speaking) in which the three Gospels present the

event about to be related, illustrates that the object of the

Evangelists was to present the events in the History of the Christ in

their succession, not of time, but of bearing upon final results.

This, because they do not attempt a Biography of Jesus, which, from

their point of view, would have been almost blasphemy, but a History

of the Kingdom which He brought; and because they write it, so to

speak, not by adjectives (expressive of qualities), nor

adverbially,[3550]3550 but by substantives. Lastly, it will be noted

that the three Evangelists relate the event about to be considered (as

so many others), not, indeed, with variations,[3551]3551 but with

differences of detail, showing the independence of their narratives,

which, as we shall see, really supplement each other.

We are now in a position to examine the narrative itself. It was on

the Sabbath after the Second Paschal Day that Christ and His disciples

passed[3552]3552 - probably by a field-path - through cornfields, when

His disciples, being hungry,[3553]3553 as they went,[3554]3554 plucked

ears of corn and ate them, having rubbed off the husks in their

hands.[3555]3555 On any ordinary day this would have been

lawful,[3556]3556 but on the Sabbath it involved, according to

Rabbinic statutes, at least two sins. For, according to the Talmud,

what was really one labour, would, if made up of several acts, each of

them forbidden, amount to several acts of labour, each involving sin,

punishment, and a sin-offering.[3557]3557 [3558]3558 This so-called

'division' of labour applied only to infringement of the Sabbath-rest

- not of that of feast-days.[3559]3559 Now in this case there were at

least two such acts involved: that of plucking the ears of corn,

ranged under the sin of reaping, and that of rubbing them, which might

be ranged under sifting in a sieve, threshing, sifting out fruit,

grinding, or fanning. The following Talmudic passage bears on this:

'In case a woman rolls wheat to remove the husks, it is considered as

sifting; if she rubs the heads of wheat, it is regarded as threshing;

if she cleans off the side-adherences, it is sifting out fruit; if she

bruises the ears, it is grinding; if she throws them up in her hand,

it is winnowing.'[3560]3560 One instance will suffice to show the

externalism of all these ordinances. If a man wished to move a sheaf

on his field, which of course implied labour, he had only to lay upon

it a spoon that was in his common use, when, in order to remove the

spoon, he might also remove the sheaf on which it lay![3561]3561 And

yet it was forbidden to stop with a little wax the hole in a cask by

which the fluid was running out,[3562]3562 or to wipe a wound!

Holding views like these, the Pharisees, who witnessed the conduct of

the disciples, would naturally harshly condemn, what they must have

regarded as gross desecration of the Sabbath. Yet it was clearly not a

breach of the Biblical, but of the Rabbinic Law. Not only to show them

their error, but to lay down principles which would for ever apply to

this difficult question, was the object of Christ's reply. Unlike the

others of the Ten Commandments, the Sabbath Law has in it two

elements; the moral and the ceremonial: the eternal, and that which is

subject to time and place; the inward and spiritual, and the outward

(the one as the mode of realizing the other). In their distinction and

separation lies the difficulty of the subject. In its spiritual and

eternal element, the Sabbath Law embodied the two thoughts of rest for

worship, and worship which pointed to rest. The keeping of the seventh

day, and the Jewish mode of its observance, were the temporal and

outward form in which these eternal principles were presented. Even

Rabbinism, in some measure, perceived this. It was a principle, that

danger to life superseded the Sabbath Law,[3563]3563 and indeed all

other obligations.[3564]3564 Among the curious Scriptural and other

arguments by which this principle was supported, that which probably

would most appeal to common sense was derived from Lev. xviii. 5. It

was argued, that a man was to keep the commandments that he might

live, certainly not, that by so doing he might die.[3565]3565 In other

words, the outward mode of observation was subordinate to the object

of the observance. Yet this other and kindred principle did Rabbinism

lay down, that every positive commandment superseded the Sabbath-rest.

This was the ultimate vindication of work in the Temple, although

certainly not its explanation. Lastly, we should in this connection,

include this important canon, laid down by the Rabbis: 'a single

Rabbinic prohibition is not to be heeded, where a graver matter is in

question.'[3566]3566

All these points must be kept in view for the proper understanding of

the words of Christ to the Scribes. For, while going far beyond the

times and notions of His questioners, His reasoning must have been

within their comprehension. Hence the first argument of our Lord, as

recorded by all the Synoptists, was taken from Biblical History. When,

on his flight from Saul, David had, 'when an hungered,' eaten of the

shewbread, and given it to his followers,[3567]3567 although, by the

letter of the Levitical Law,[3568]3568 it was only to be eaten by the

priests, Jewish tradition vindicated his conduct on the plea that

'danger to life' superseded the Sabbath-Law, and hence, all laws

connected with it,[3569]3569 while, to show David's zeal for the

Sabbath-Law, the legend was added, that he had reproved the priests of

Nob, who had been baking the shewbread on the Sabbath.[3570]3570 To

the first argument of Christ, St. Matthew adds this as His second,

that the priests, in their services in the Temple, necessarily broke

the Sabbath-Law without thereby incurring guilt. It is curious, that

the Talmud discusses this very point, and that, by way of

illustration, it introduces an argument from Lev. xxii. 10: 'There

shall no stranger eat of things consecrated.' This, of course,

embodies the principle underlying the prohibition of the shewbread to

all who were not priests.[3571]3571 Without entering further on it,

the discussion at least shows, that the Rabbis were by no means clear

on the rationale of Sabbath-work in the Temple.

In truth, the reason why David was blameless in eating the shewbread

was the same as that which made the Sabbath-labour of the priests

lawful. The Sabbath-Law was not one merely of rest, but of rest for

worship. The Service of the Lord was the object in view. The priests

worked on the Sabbath, because this service was the object of the

Sabbath; and David was allowed to eat of the shewbread, not because

there was danger to life from starvation, but because he pleaded that

he was on the service of the Lord and needed this provision. The

disciples, when following the Lord, were similarly on the service of

the Lord; ministering to Him was more than ministering in the Temple,

for He was greater than the Temple. If the Pharisees had believed

this, they would not have questioned their conduct, nor in so doing

have themselves infringed that higher Law which enjoined mercy, not

sacrifice.

To this St. Mark adds as corollary: 'The Sabbath was made for man, and

not man for the Sabbath.' It is remarkable, that a similar argument is

used by the Rabbis. When insisting that the Sabbath Law should be set

aside to avoid danger to life, it is urged: 'the Sabbath is handed

over to you; not, ye are handed over to the Sabbath.'[3572]3572

Lastly, the three Evangelists record this as the final outcome of His

teaching on this subject, that 'the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath

also.' The Service of God, and the Service of the Temple, by universal

consent superseded the Sabbath-Law. But Christ was greater than the

Temple, and His Service more truly that of God, and higher than that

of the outward Temple, and the Sabbath was intended for man, to serve

God: therefore Christ and His Service were superior to the

Sabbath-Law. Thus much would be intelligible to these Pharisees,

although they would not receive it, because they believed not on Him

as the Sent of God.[3573]3573

But to us the words mean more than this. They preach not only that the

Service of Christ is that of God, but that, even more than in the

Temple, all of work or of liberty is lawful which this service

requires. We are free while we are doing anything for Christ; God

loves mercy, and demands not sacrifice; His sacrifice is the service

of Christ, in heart, and life, and work. We are not free to do

anything we please; but we are free to do anything needful or helpful,

while we are doing any service to Christ. He is the Lord of the

Sabbath, Whom we serve in and through the Sabbath. And even this is

significant, that, when designating Himself Lord of the Sabbath, it is

as 'the Son of Man.' It shows, that the narrow Judaistic form

regarding the day and the manner of observance is enlarged into the

wider Law, which applies to all humanity. Under the New Testament the

Sabbath has, as the Church, become Catholic, and its Lord is Christ as

the Son of Man, to Whom the body Catholic offers the acceptable

service of heart and life.

The question as between Christ and the Pharisees was not, however, to

end here. 'On another Sabbath' - probably that following - He was in

their Synagogue. Whether or not the Pharisees had brought 'the man

with the withered hand' on purpose, or placed him in a conspicuous

position, or otherwise raised the question, certain it is that their

secret object was to commit Christ to some word or deed, which would

lay Him open to the capital charge of breaking the Sabbath-law. It

does not appear, whether the man with the withered hand was

consciously or unconsciously their tool. But in this they judged

rightly: that Christ would not witness disease without removing it -

or, as we might express it, that disease could not continue in the

Presence of Him, Who was the Life. He read their inward thoughts of

evil, and yet he proceeded to do the good which He purposed. So God,

in His majestic greatness, carries out the purpose which He has fixed

- which we call the law of nature - whoever and whatever stand in the

way; and so God, in His sovereign goodness, adapts it to the good of

His creatures, notwithstanding their evil thoughts.

So much unclearness prevails as to the Jewish views about healing on

the Sabbath, that some connected information on the subject seems

needful. We have already seen, that in their view only actual danger

to life warranted a breach of the Sabbath-Law. But this opened a large

field for discussion. Thus, according to some, disease of the

ear,[3574]3574 according to some throat-disease,[3575]3575 while,

according to others, such a disease as angina,[3576]3576 involved

danger, and superseded the Sabbath-Law. All applications to the

outside of the body were forbidden on the Sabbath. As regarded

internal remedies, such substances as were used in health, but had

also a remedial effect, might be taken[3577]3577 although here also

there was a way of evading the Law.[3578]3578 A person suffering from

toothache might not gargle his mouth with vinegar, but he might use an

ordinary toothbrush and dip it in vinegar.[3579]3579 The Gemara here

adds, that gargling was lawful, if the substance was afterwards

swallowed. It further explains, that affections extending from the

lips, or else from the throat, inwards, may be attended to, being

regarded as dangerous. Quite a number of these are enumerated,

showing, that either the Rabbis were very lax in applying their canon

about mortal diseases, or else that they reckoned in their number not

a few which we would not regard as such.[3580]3580 External lesions

also might be attended to, if they involved danger to life.[3581]3581

Similarly, medical aid might be called in, if a person had swallowed a

piece of glass; a splinter might be removed from the eye, and even a

thorn from the body.[3582]3582

But although the man with the withered hand could not be classed with

those dangerously ill, it could not have been difficult to silence the

Rabbis on their own admissions. Clearly, their principle implied, that

it was lawful on the Sabbath to do that which would save life or

prevent death. To have taught otherwise, would virtually have involved

murder. But if so, did it not also, in strictly logical sequence,

imply this far wider principle, that it must be lawful to do good on

the Sabbath? For, evidently, the omission of such good would have

involved the doing of evil. Could this be the proper observance of

God's holy day? There was no answer to such an argument; St. Mark

expressly records that they dared not attempt a reply.[3583]3583 On

the other hand, St. Matthew, while alluding to this terribly telling

challenge,[3584]3584 records yet another and a personal argument. It

seems that Christ publicly appealed to them: If any poor man among

them, who had one sheep, were in danger of losing it through having

fallen into a pit, would he not lift it out? To be sure, the Rabbinic

Law ordered that food and drink should be lowered to it, or else that

some means should be furnished by which it might either be kept up in

the pit, or enabled to come out of it.[3585]3585 But even the Talmud

discusses cases in which it was lawful to lift an animal out of a pit

on a Sabbath.[3586]3586 There could be no doubt, at any rate, that

even if the Law was, at the time of Christ, as stringent as in the

Talmud, a man would have found some device, by which to recover the

solitary sheep which constituted his possession. And was not the life

of a human being to be more accounted of? Surely, then, on the

Sabbath-day it was lawful to do good? Yes - to do good, and to neglect

it, would have been to do evil. Nay, according to their own admission,

should not a man, on the Sabbath, save life? or should he, by omitting

it, kill?

We can now imagine the scene in that Synagogue. The place is crowded.

Christ probably occupies a prominent position as leading the prayers

or teaching: a position whence He can see, and be seen by all. Here,

eagerly bending forward, are the dark faces of the Pharisees,

expressive of curiosity, malice, cunning. They are looking round at a

man whose right hand is withered,[3587]3587 perhaps putting him

forward, drawing attention to him, loudly whispering, 'Is it lawful to

heal on the Sabbath-day?' The Lord takes up the challenge. He bids the

man stand forth - right in the midst of them, where they might all see

and hear. By one of those telling appeals, which go straight to the

conscience, He puts the analogous case of a poor man who was in danger

of losing his only sheep on the Sabbath: would he not rescue it; and

was not a man better than a sheep? Nay, did they not themselves enjoin

a breach of the Sabbath-Law to save human life? Then, must He not do

so; might He not do good rather than evil?

They were speechless. But a strange mixture of feeling was in the

Saviour's heart - strange to us, though it is but what Holy Scripture

always tells us of the manner in which God views sin and the sinner,

using terms, which, in their combination, seem grandly incompatible:

'And when He had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved

at the hardening of their heart.' It was but for a moment, and then,

with life-giving power, He bade the man stretch forth his hand.

Withered it was no longer, when the Word had been spoken, and a new

sap, a fresh life had streamed into it, as, following the Saviour's

Eye and Word, he slowly stretched it forth. And as He stretched it

forth, his hand was restored.[3588]3588 The Saviour had broken their

Sabbath-Law, and yet He had not broken it, for neither by remedy, nor

touch, nor outward application had He healed him. He had broken the

Sabbath-rest, as God breaks it, when He sends, or sustains, or

restores life, or does good: all unseen and unheard, without touch or

outward application, by the Word of His Power, by the Presence of His

Life.

But who after this will say, that it was Paul who first introduced

into the Church either the idea that the Sabbath-Law in its Jewish

form was no longer binding, or this, that the narrow forms of Judaism

were burst by the new wine of that Kingdom, which is that of the Son

of Man?

They had all seen it, this miracle of almost new creation. As He did

it, He had been filled with sadness: as they saw it, 'they were filled

with madness.'[3589]3589 So their hearts were hardened. They could not

gainsay, but they went forth and took counsel with the Herodians

against Him, how they might destroy Him. Presumably, then, He was

within, or quite close by, the dominions of Herod, east of the Jordan.

And the Lord withdrew once more, as it seems to us, into Gentile

territory, probably that of the Decapolis. For, as He went about

healing all, that needed it, in that great multitude that followed His

steps, yet enjoining silence on them, this prophecy of Isaiah blazed

into fulfilment: 'Behold My Servant, Whom I have chosen, My Beloved,

in Whom My soul is well-pleased: I will put My Spirit upon Him, and He

shall declare judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive nor cry

aloud, neither shall any hear His Voice in the streets. A bruised reed

shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench, till He send

forth judgment unto victory. And in His Name shall the Gentiles

trust.'

And in His Name shall the Gentiles trust. Far out into the silence of

those solitary upland hills of the Gentile world did the call, unheard

and unheeded in Israel, travel. He had other sheep which were not of

that fold. And down those hills, from the far-off lands, does the

sound of the bells, as it comes nearer and nearer, tell that those

other sheep, which are not of this fold, are gathering at His call to

the Good Shepherd; and through these centuries, still louder and more

manifold becomes this sound of nearing bells, till they shall all be

gathered into one: one flock, one fold, one Shepherd.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

THE FEEDING OF THE FOUR THOUSAND - TO DALMANUTHA - 'THE SIGN FROM

HEAVEN' -

JOURNEY TO CÆSAREA PHILIPPI - WHAT IS THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES

AND

SADDUCEES?

(St. Matt. xv. 32-xvi. 12; St. Mark viii. 1-21.)

THEY might well gather to Jesus in their thousands, with their wants

of body and soul, these sheep wandering without a shepherd; for His

Ministry in that district, as formerly in Galilee, was about to draw

to a close. And here it is remarkable, that each time His prolonged

stay and Ministry in a district were brought to a close with some

supper, so to speak, some festive entertainment on his part. The

Galilean Ministry had closed with the feeding of the five thousand,

the guests being mostly from Capernaum and the towns around, as far as

Bethsaida (Julias), many in the number probably on their way to the

Paschal feast at Jerusalem.[3590]3590 But now at the second provision

for the four thousand, with which His Decapolis Ministry closed, the

guests were not strictly Jews, but semi-Gentile inhabitants of that

district and its neighbourhood. Lastly, his Judæan Ministry closed

with the Last Supper. At the first 'Supper,' the Jewish guests would

fain have proclaimed Him Messiah-King; at the second, as 'the Son of

Man,' He gave food to those Gentile multitudes which having been with

Him those days, and consumed all their victuals during their stay with

him, He could not send away fasting, lest they should faint by the

way. And on the last occasion, as the true Priest and Sacrifice, He

fed His own with the true Paschal Feast, ere He sent them forth alone

into the wilderness. Thus these three 'Suppers' seem connected, each

leading up, as it were, to the other.

There can, at any rate, be little doubt that this second feeding of

the multitude took place in the Gentile Decapolis, and that those who

sat down to the meal were chiefly the inhabitants of that

district.[3591]3591 If it be lawful, departing from strict history, to

study the symbolism of this event, as compared with the previous

feeding of the five thousand who were Jews, somewhat singular

differences will present themselves to the mind. On the former

occasion there were five thousand fed with five loaves, when twelve

baskets of fragments were left. On the second occasion, four thousand

were fed from seven loaves, and seven baskets of fragments collected.

It is at least curious, that the number five in the provision for the

Jews is that of the Pentateuch, just as the number twelve corresponds

to that of the tribes and of the Apostles. On the other hand, in the

feeding of the Gentiles we mark the number four, which is the

signature of the world, and seven, which is that of the Sanctuary. We

would not by any means press it, as if these were, in the telling of

the narrative, designed coincidences; but, just because they are

undesigned, we value them, feeling that there is more of undesigned

symbolism in all God's manifestations - in nature, in history, and in

grace - than meets the eye of those who observe the merely phenomenal.

Nay, does it not almost seem, as if all things were cast in the mould

of heavenly realities, and all earth's 'shewbread' 'Bread of His

Presence'?

On all general points the narratives of the two-fold miraculous

feeding run so parallel, that it is not necessary again to consider

this event in detail. But the attendant circumstances are so

different, that only the most reckless negative criticism could

insist, that one and the same event had been presented by the

Evangelists as two separate occasions.[3592]3592 The broad lines of

difference as to the number of persons, the provision, and the

quantity of fragments left, cannot be overlooked. Besides, on the

former occasion the repast was provided in the evening for those who

had gone after Christ, and listened to Him all day, but who, in their

eager haste, had come without victuals, when He would not dismiss them

faint and hungry, because they had been so busy for the Bread of Life

that they had forgotten that of earth. But on this second occasion, of

the feeding of the Gentiles, the multitude had been three days with

Him, and what sustenance they had brought must have failed, when, in

His compassion, the Saviour would not send them to their homes

fasting, lest they should faint by the way. This could not have

befallen those Gentiles, who had come to the Christ for food to their

souls. And, it must be kept in view, that Christ dismissed them, not,

as before, because they would have made Him their King, but because

Himself was about to depart from the place; and that, sending them to

their homes, He could not send them to faint by the way. Yet another

marked difference lies even in the designation of 'the baskets' in

which the fragments left were gathered. At the first feeding, there

were, as the Greek word shows, the small wicker-baskets which each of

the Twelve would carry in his hand. At the second feeding they were

the large baskets, in which provisions, chiefly bread, were stored or

carried for longer voyages.[3593]3593 For, on the first occasion, when

they passed into Israelitish territory - and, as they might think,

left their home for a very brief time - there was not the same need to

make provision for storing necessaries as on the second, when they

were on a lengthened journey, and passing through, or tarrying in

Gentile territory.

But the most noteworthy difference seems to us this - that on the

first occasion, they who were fed were Jews - on the second, Gentiles.

There is an exquisite little trait in the narrative which affords

striking, though utterly undesigned, evidence of it. In referring to

the blessing which Jesus spake over the first meal, it was

noted,[3594]3594 that, in strict accordance with Jewish custom, He

only rendered thanks once, over the bread. But no such custom would

rule His conduct when dispensing the food to the Gentiles; and,

indeed, His speaking the blessing only over the bread, while He was

silent when distributing the fishes, would probably have given rise to

misunderstanding. Accordingly, we find it expressly stated that He not

only gave thanks over the bread, but also spake the blessing over the

fishes.[3595]3595 Nor should we, when marking such undesigned

evidences, omit to notice, that on the first occasion, which was

immediately before the Passover, the guests were, as three of the

Evangelists expressly state, ranged on 'the grass,'[3596]3596 while,

on the present occasion, which must have been several weeks later,

when in the East the grass would be burnt up, we are told by the two

Evangelists that they sat on 'the ground.'[3597]3597 Even the

difficulty, raised by some, as to the strange repetition of the

disciples' reply, the outcome, in part, of non-expectancy, and, hence,

non-belief, and yet in part also of such doubt as tends towards faith:

'Whence should we have, in a solitary place,[3598]3598 so many loaves

as to fill so great a multitude?' seems to us only confirmatory of the

narrative, so psychologically true is it. There is no need for the

ingenious apology,[3599]3599 that, in the remembrance and tradition of

the first and second feeding, the similarity of the two events had led

to greater similarity in their narration than the actual circumstances

would perhaps have warranted. Interesting thoughts are here suggested

by the remark,[3600]3600 that it is not easy to transport ourselves

into the position and feelings of those who had witnessed such a

miracle as that of the first feeding of the multitude. 'We think of

the Power as inherent, and, therefore, permanent. To them it might

seem intermittent - a gift that came and went.' And this might seem

borne out by the fact that, ever since, their wants had been supplied

in the ordinary way, and that, even on the first occasion, they had

been directed to gather up the fragments of the heaven-supplied meal.

But more than this requires to be said. First, we must here once more

remind ourselves, that the former provision was for Jews, and the

disciples might, from their standpoint, well doubt, or at least not

assume, that the same miracle would supply the need of the Gentiles,

and the same board be surrounded by Jew and Gentile. But, further, the

repetition of the same question by the disciples really indicated only

a sense of their own inability, and not a doubt of the Saviour's power

of supply, since on this occasion it was not, as on the former,

accompanied by a request on their part, to send the multitude away.

Thus the very repetition of the question might be a humble reference

to the past, of which they dared not, in the circumstances, ask the

repetition.

Yet, even if it were otherwise, the strange forgetfulness of Christ's

late miracle on the part of the disciples, and their strange

repetition of the self-same question which had once - and, as it might

seem to us, for ever - been answered by wondrous deed, need not

surprise us. To them the miraculous on the part of Christ must ever

have been the new, or else it would have ceased to be the miraculous.

Nor did they ever fully realise it, till after His Resurrection they

understood, and worshipped Him as God Incarnate. And it is only

realising faith of this, which it was intended gradually to evolve

during Christ's Ministry on earth, that enables us to apprehend the

Divine Help as, so to speak, incarnate and ever actually present in

Christ. And yet even thus, how often we do, who have so believed in

Him, forget the Divine provision which has come to us so lately, and

repeat, though perhaps not with the same doubt, yet with the same want

of certainty, the questions with which we had at first met the

Saviour's challenge of our faith. And even at the last it is met, as

by the prophet, in sight of the apparently impossible, by: 'Lord, Thou

knowest.'[3601]3601 More frequently, alas! is it met by nonbelief,

misbelief, disbelief, or doubt, engendered by misunderstanding or

forgetfulness of that which past experience, as well as the knowledge

of Him, should long ago have indelibly written on our minds.

On the occasion referred to in the preceding narrative, those who had

lately taken counsel together against Jesus - the Pharisees and the

Herodians, or, to put it otherwise, the Pharisees and Sadducees - were

not present. For, those who, politically speaking, were 'Herodians,'

might also, though perhaps not religiously speaking, yet from the

Jewish standpoint of St. Matthew, be designated as, or else include,

Sadducees.[3602]3602 But they were soon to reappear on the scene, as

Jesus came close to the Jewish territory of Herod. We suppose the

feeding of the multitude to have taken place in the Decapolis, and

probably on, or close to, the Eastern shore of the Lake of Galilee. As

Jesus sent away the multitude whom He had fed, He took ship with His

disciples, and 'came into the borders of Magadan,'[3603]3603

[3604]3604 or, as St. Mark puts it, 'the parts of Dalmanutha.' 'The

borders of Magadan' must evidently refer to the same district as 'the

parts of Dalmanutha.' The one may mark the extreme point of the

district southwards, the other northwards - or else, the points

west[3605]3605 and east - in the locality where He and His disciples

landed. This is, of course, only a suggestion, since neither

'Magadan,' nor 'Dalmanutha,' has been identified. This only we infer,

that the place was close to, yet not within the boundary of, strictly

Jewish territory; since on His arrival there the Pharisees are said to

'come forth'[3606]3606 - a word 'which implies, that they resided

elsewhere,'[3607]3607 though, of course, in the neighbourhood.

Accordingly, we would seek Magadan south of the Lake of Tiberias, and

near to the borders of Galilee, but within the Decapolis. Several

sites bear at present somewhat similar names. In regard to the strange

and un-Jewish name of Dalmanutha, such utterly unlikely conjectures

have been made, that one based on etymology may be hazarded. If we

take from Dalmanutha the Aramaic termination -utha, and regard the

initial de as a prefix, we have the word Laman, Limin, or Liminah

({hebrew}, {hebrew}, {hebrew} = lim_n), which, in Rabbinic Hebrew,

means a bay, or port, and Dalmanutha might have been the place of a

small bay. Possibly, it was the name given to the bay close to the

ancient Tarichæa, the modern Kerak, so terribly famous for a

sea-fight, or rather a horrible butchery of poor fugitives, when

Tarichæa was taken by the Romans in the great Jewish war. Close by,

the Lake forms a bay (Laman), and if, as a modern writer

asserts,[3608]3608 the fortress of Tarichæa was surrounded by a ditch

fed by the Jordan and the Lake, so that the fortress could be

converted into an island, we see additional reason for the designation

of Lamanutha.[3609]3609

It was from the Jewish territory of Galilee, close by, that the

Pharisees now came 'with the Sadducees' tempting Him with questions,

and desiring that His claims should be put to the ultimate arbitrament

of 'a sign from heaven.' We can quite understand such a challenge on

the part of Sadducees, who would disbelieve the heavenly Mission of

Christ, or, indeed, to use a modern term, any supra-naturalistic

connection between heaven and earth. But, in the mouth of the

Pharisees also, it had a special meaning. Certain supposed miracles

had been either witnessed by, or testified to them, as done by Christ.

As they now represented it - since Christ laid claims which, in their

view, were inconsistent with the doctrine received in Israel, preached

a Kingdom quite other than that of Jewish expectancy - was at issue

with all Jewish customs - more than this, was a breaker of the Law, in

its most important commandments, as they understood them - it followed

that, according to Deut. xiii., He was a false prophet, who was not to

be listened to. Then, also, must the miracles which He did have been

wrought by the power of Beelzebul, 'the lord of idolatrous worship,'

the very prince of devils. But had there been real signs, and might it

not all have been an illusion? Let Him show them 'a sign,'[3610]3610

and let that sign come direct from heaven!

Two striking instances from Rabbinic literature will show, that this

demand of the Pharisees was in accordance with their notions and

practice. We read that, when a certain Rabbi was asked by his

disciples about the time of Messiah's Coming, he replied: 'I am afraid

that you will also ask me for a sign.' When they promised they would

not do so, he told them that the gate of Rome would fall and be

rebuilt, and fall again, when there would not be time to restore it,

ere the Son of David came. On this they pressed him, despite his

remonstrance, for 'a sign,' when this was given them - that the waters

which issued from the cave of Pamias were turned into blood.[3611]3611

[3612]3612 Again, as regards 'a sign from heaven,' it is said that

Rabbi Eliezer, when his teaching was challenged, successively appealed

to certain 'signs.' First, a locust-tree moved at his bidding one

hundred, or, according to some, four hundred cubits. Next, the

channels of water were made to flow backwards; then the walls of the

Academy leaned forward, and were only arrested at the bidding of

another Rabbi. Lastly, Eliezer exclaimed: 'If the Law is as I teach,

let it be proved from heaven!' when a voice fell from the sky (the

Bath Qol): 'What have ye to do with Rabbi Eliezer, for the Halakhah is

as he teaches?'[3613]3613

It was, therefore, no strange thing, when the Pharisees asked of Jesus

'a sign from heaven,' to attest His claims and teaching. The answer

which He gave was among the most solemn which the leaders of Israel

could have heard, and He spake it in deep sorrow of spirit.[3614]3614

They had asked Him virtually for some sign of His Messiahship; some

striking vindication from heaven of His claims. It would be given them

only too soon. We have already seen,[3615]3615 that there was a Coming

of Christ in His Kingdom - a vindication of His kingly claim before

His apostate rebellious subjects, when they who would not have Him to

reign over them, but betrayed and crucified Him, would have their

commonwealth and city, their polity and Temple, destroyed. By the

lurid light of the flames of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary were the

words on the cross to be read again. God would vindicate His claims by

laying low the pride of their rebellion. The burning of Jerusalem was

God's answer to the Jews' cry, 'Away with Him - we have no king but

Cæsar;' the thousands of crosses on which the Romans hanged their

captives, the terrible counterpart of the Cross on Golgotha.

It was to this, that Jesus referred in His reply to the Pharisees and

'Sadducean' Herodians. How strange! Men could discern by the

appearance of the sky whether the day would be fair or

stormy.[3616]3616 And yet, when all the signs of the gathering storm,

that would destroy their city and people, were clearly visible, they,

the leaders of the people, failed to perceive them! Israel asked for

'a sign'! No sign should be given the doomed land and city other than

that which had been given to Nineveh: 'the sign of Jonah.'[3617]3617

The only sign to Nineveh was Jonah's solemn warning of near judgment,

and his call to repentance - and the only sign now, or rather 'unto

this generation no sign,'[3618]3618 was the warning cry of judgment

and the loving call to repentance.[3619]3619

It was but a natural, almost necessary, sequence, that 'He left them

and departed.' Once more the ship, which bore Him and His disciples,

spread its sails towards the coast of Bethsaida-Julias. He was on His

way to the utmost limit of the land, to Cæsarea Philippi, in pursuit

of His purpose to delay the final conflict. For the great crisis must

begin, as it would end, in Jerusalem, and at the Feast; it would begin

at the Feast of Tabernacles,[3620]3620 and it would end at the

following Passover. But by the way, the disciples themselves showed

how little even they, who had so long and closely followed Christ,

understood His teaching, and how prone to misapprehension their

spiritual dulness rendered them. Yet it was not so gross and

altogether incomprehensible, as the common reading of what happened

would imply.

When the Lord touched the other shore, His mind and heart were still

full of the scene from which He had lately passed. For truly, on this

demand for a sign did the future of Israel seem to hang. Perhaps it is

not presumptuous to suppose, that the journey across the Lake had been

made in silence on His part, so deeply were mind and heart engrossed

with the fate of His own royal city. And now, when they landed, they

carried ashore the empty provision-baskets; for, as, with his usual

attention to details, St. Mark notes, they had only brought one loaf

of bread with them. In fact, in the excitement and hurry 'they forgot

to take bread' with them. Whether or not something connected with this

arrested the attention of Christ, He at last broke the silence,

speaking that which was so much on His mind. He warned them, as

greatly they needed it, of the leaven with which Pharisees and

Sadducees had, each in their own manner, leavened, and so

corrupted,[3621]3621 the holy bread of Scripture truth. The disciples,

aware that in their hurry and excitement they had forgotten bread,

misunderstood these words of Christ, although not in the utterly

unaccountable manner which commentators generally suppose: as implying

'a caution against procuring bread from His enemies.' It is well-nigh

impossible, that the disciples could have understood the warning of

Christ as meaning any such thing - even irrespective of the

consideration, that a prohibition to buy bread from either the

Pharisees or Sadducees would have involved an impossibility. The

misunderstanding of the disciples was, if unwarrantable, at least

rational. They thought the words of Christ implied, that in His view

they had not forgotten to bring bread, but purposely omitted to do so,

in order, like the Pharisees and Sadducees, to 'seek of Him a sign' of

His Divine Messiahship - nay, to oblige Him to show such - that of

miraculous provision in their want. The mere suspicion showed what was

in their minds, and pointed to their danger. This explains how, in His

reply, Jesus reproved them, not for utter want of discernment, but

only for 'little faith.' It was their lack of faith - the very leaven

of the Pharisees and Sadducees - which had suggested such a thought.

Again, if the experience of the past - their own twice-repeated

question, and the practical answer which it had received in the

miraculous provision of not only enough, but to spare - had taught

them anything, it should have been to believe, that the needful

provision of their wants by Christ was not 'a sign,' such as the

Pharisees had asked, but what faith might ever expect from Christ,

when following after, or waiting upon, Him. Then understood they

truly, that it was not of the leaven of bread that He had bidden them

beware - that His mysterious words bore no reference to bread, nor to

their supposed omission to bring it for the purpose of eliciting a

sign from Him, but pointed to the far more real danger of 'the

teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees,' which had underlain the

demand for a sign from heaven.

Here, as always, Christ rather suggests than gives the interpretation

of His meaning. And this is the law of His teaching. Our modern

Pharisees and Sadducees, also, too often ask of him a sign from heaven

in evidence of His claims. And we also too often misunderstand His

warning to us concerning their leaven. Seeing the scanty store in our

basket, our little faith is busy with thoughts about possible signs in

multiplying the one loaf which we have, forgetful that, where Christ

is, faith may ever expect all that is needful, and that our care

should only be in regard to the teaching which might leaven and

corrupt that on which our souls are fed.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

THE GREAT CONFESSION - THE GREAT COMMISSION - THE GREAT INSTRUCTION

- THE

GREAT TEMPTATION - THE GREAT DECISION.

(St. Matt. xvi. 13-28; St. Mark viii. 27, ix. 1; St. Luke ix. 18-27.)

If we are right in identifying the little bay - Dalmanutha - with the

neighbourhood of Tarichæa, yet another link of strange coincidence

connects the prophetic warning spoken there with its fulfilment. From

Dalmanutha our Lord passed across the Lake to Cæsarea Philippi. From

Cæsarea Philippi did Vespasian pass through Tiberias to Tarichæa, when

the town and people were destroyed, and the blood of the fugitives

reddened the Lake, and their bodies choked its waters. Even amidst the

horrors of the last Jewish war, few spectacles could have been so

sickening as that of the wild stand at Tarichæa, ending with the

butchery of 6,500 on land and sea, and lastly, the vile treachery by

which they, to whom mercy had been promised, were lured into the

circus at Tiberias, when the weak and old, to the number of about

1,200, were slaughtered, and the rest - upwards of 30,400 - sold into

slavery.[3622]3622 [3623]3623 Well might He, Who foresaw and foretold

that terrible end, standing on that spot, deeply sigh in spirit as He

spake to them who asked 'a sign,' and yet saw not what even ordinary

discernment might have perceived of the red and lowering sky overhead.

From Dalmanutha, across the Lake, then by the plain where so lately

the five thousand had been fed, and near to Bethsaida, would the road

of Christ and His disciples lead to the capital of the Tetrarch

Philip, the ancient Paneas, or, as it was then called, Cæsarea

Philippi, the modern Banias. Two days' journey would accomplish the

whole distance. There would be no need of taking the route now usually

followed, by Safed. Straight northwards from the Lake of Galilee, a

distance of about ten miles, leads the road to the uppermost

Jordan-Lake, that now called Huleh, the ancient Merom.[3624]3624 As we

ascend from the shores of Gennesaret, we have a receding view of the

whole Lake and the Jordan-valley beyond. Before us rise hills; over

them, to the west, are the heights of Safed; beyond them swells the

undulating plain between the two ranges of Anti-Libanus; far off is

Hermon, with its twin snow-clad heads ('the Hermons'),[3625]3625 and,

in the dim far background, majestic Lebanon. It is scarcely likely,

that Jesus and His disciples skirted the almost impenetrable marsh and

jungle by Lake Merom. It was there, that Joshua had fought the last

and decisive battle against Jabin and his confederates, by which

Northern Palestine was gained to Israel.[3626]3626 We turn north of

the Lake, and west to Kedes, the Kedesh Naphtali of the Bible, the

home of Barak. We have now passed from the limestone of Central

Palestine into the dark basalt formation. How splendidly that ancient

Priest-City of Refuge lay! In the rich heritage of Naphtali,[3627]3627

Kedesh was one of the fairest spots. As we climb the steep hill above

the marshes of Merom, we have before us one of the richest plains of

about two thousand acres. We next pass through olive-groves and up a

gentle slope. On a knoll before us, at the foot of which gushes a

copious spring, lies the ancient Kedesh.

The scenery is very similar, as we travel on towards Cæsarea Philippi.

About an hour and a half farther, we strike the ancient Roman road. We

are now amidst vines and mulberry-trees. Passing through a narrow rich

valley, we ascend through a rocky wilderness of hills, where the

woodbine luxuriantly trails around the plane trees. On the height

there is a glorious view back to Lake Merom and the Jordan-valley;

forward, to the snowy peaks of Hermon; east, to height on height, and

west, to peaks now only crowned with ruins. We still continued along

the height, then descended a steep slope, leaving, on our left, the

ancient Abel Beth Maachah,[3628]3628 the modern Abil. Another hour,

and we are in a plain where all the springs of the Jordan unite. The

view from here is splendid, and the soil most rich, the wheat crops

being quite ripe in the beginning of May. Half an hour more, and we

cross a bridge over the bright blue waters of the Jordan, or rather of

the Hasbany, which, under a very wilderness of oleanders, honeysuckle,

clematis, and wild rose, rush among huge boulders, between walls of

basalt. We leave aside, at a distance of about half an hour to the

east, the ancient Dan (the modern Tell-Kady), even more glorious in

its beauty and richness than what we have passed. Dan lies on a hill

above the plain. On the western side of it, under overhanging thickets

of oleander and other trees, and amidst masses of basalt boulders,

rise what are called 'the lower springs' of Jordan, issuing as a

stream from a basin sixty paces wide, and from a smaller source close

by. The 'lower springs' supply the largest proportion of what forms

the Jordan. And from Dan olive-groves and oak-glades slope up to

Banias, or Cæsarea Philippi.

The situation of the ancient Cæsarea Philippi (1,147 feet above the

sea) is, indeed, magnificent. Nestling amid three valleys on a terrace

in the angle of Hermon, it is almost shut out from view by cliffs and

woods. 'Everywhere there is a wild medley of cascades, mulberry trees,

fig-trees, dashing torrents, festoons of vines, bubbling fountains,

reeds, and ruins, and the mingled music of birds and

waters.'[3629]3629 The vegetation and fertility all around are

extraordinary. The modern village of Banias is within the walls of the

old fortifications, and the ruins show that it must anciently have

extended far southwards. But the most remarkable points remain to be

described. The western side of a steep mountain, crowned by the ruins

of an ancient castle, forms an abrupt rock-wall. Here, from out an

immense cavern, bursts a river. These are 'the upper sources' of the

Jordan. This cave, an ancient heathen sanctuary of Pan, gave its

earliest name of Paneas to the town. Here Herod, when receiving the

tetrarchy from Augustus, built a temple in his honour. On the rocky

wall close by, votive niches may still be traced, one of them bearing

the Greek inscription, 'Priest of Pan.' When Herod's son, Philip,

received the tetrarchy, he enlarged and greatly beautified the ancient

Paneas, and called it in honour of the Emperor, Cæsarea Philippi. The

castle-mount (about 1,000 feet above Paneas), takes nearly an hour to

ascend, and is separated by a deep valley from the flank of Mount

Hermon. The castle itself (about two miles from Banias) is one of the

best preserved ruins, its immense bevelled structure resembling the

ancient forts of Jerusalem, and showing its age. It followed the

irregularities of the mountain, and was about 1,000 feet long by 200

wide. The eastern and higher part formed, as in Machaerus, a citadel

within the castle. In some parts the rock rises higher than the walls.

The views, sheer down the precipitous sides of the mountain, into the

valleys and far away, are magnificent.

It seems worth while, even at such length, to describe the scenery

along this journey, and the look and situation of Cæsarea, when we

recall the importance of the events enacted there, or in the immediate

neighbourhood. It was into this chiefly Gentile district, that the

Lord now withdrew with His disciples after that last and decisive

question of the Pharisees. It was here that, as His question, like

Moses' rod, struck their hearts, there leaped from the lips of Peter

the living, life-spreading waters of his confession. It may have been,

that this rock-wall below the castle, from under which sprang Jordan,

or the rock on which the castle stood, supplied the material

suggestion for Christ's words: 'Thou art Peter, and on this rock will

I build My Church.'[3630]3630 In Cæsarea, or its immediate

neighbourhood,[3631]3631 did the Lord spend, with His disciples, six

days after this confession; and here, close by, on one of the heights

of snowy Hermon, was the scene of the Transfiguration, the light of

which shone for ever into the hearts of the disciples on their dark

and tangled path;[3632]3632 nay, far beyond that - beyond life and

death - beyond the grave and the judgment, to the perfect brightness

of the Resurrection-day.

As we think of it, there seems nothing strange in it, but all most

wise and most gracious, that such events should have taken place far

away from Galilee and Israel, in the lonely grandeur of the shadows of

Hermon, and even amongst a chiefly Gentile population. Not in Judæa,

nor even in Galilee - but far away from the Temple, the Synagogue, the

Priests, Pharisees and Scribes, was the first confession of the Church

made, and on this confession its first foundations laid. Even this

spoke of near judgment and doom to what had once been God's chosen

congregation. And all that happened, though Divinely shaped as regards

the end, followed in a natural and orderly succession of events. Let

us briefly recall the circumstances, which in the previous chapters

have been described in detail.

It had been needful to leave Capernaum. The Galilean Ministry of the

Christ was ended, and, alike the active persecutions of the Pharisees

from Jerusalem, the inquiries of Herod, whose hands, stained with the

blood of the Baptist, were tremblingly searching for his greater

Successor, and the growing indecision and unfitness of the people - as

well as the state of the disciples - pointed to the need for leaving

Galilee. Then followed 'the Last Supper' to Israel on the eastern

shore of Lake Gennesaret, when they would have made Him a King. He

must now withdraw quite away, out of the boundaries of Israel. Then

came that miraculous night-journey, the brief Sabbath-stay at

Capernaum by the way, the journey through Tyrian and Sidonian

territory, and round to the Decapolis, the teaching and healing there,

the gathering of the multitude to Him, together with that 'Supper,'

which closed His Ministry there, and, finally, the withdrawal to

Tarichæa, where His Apostles, as fishermen of the Lake, may have had

business-connections, since the place was the great central depot for

selling and preparing the fish for export.

In that distant and obscure corner, on the boundary-line between Jew

and Gentile, had that greatest crisis in the history of the world

occurred, which sealed the doom of Israel, and in their place

substituted the Gentiles as citizens of the Kingdom. And, in this

respect also, it is most significant, that the confession of the

Church likewise took place in territory chiefly inhabited by Gentiles,

and the Transfiguration on Mount Hermon. That crisis had been the

public challenge of the Pharisees and Sadducees, that Jesus should

legitimate His claims to the Messiahship by a sign from heaven. It is

not too much to assert, that neither His questioners, nor even His

disciples, understood the answer of Jesus, nor yet perceived the

meaning of His 'sign.' To the Pharisees Jesus would seem to have been

defeated, and to stand self-convicted of having made Divine claims

which, when challenged, He could not substantiate. He had hitherto

elected(as they, who understood not His teaching, would judge) to

prove Himself the Messiah by the miracles which He had wrought - and

now, when met on His own ground, He had publicly declined, or at least

evaded, the challenge. He had conspicuously - almost self-confessedly

- failed! At least, so it would appear to those who could not

understand His reply and 'sigh.' We note that a similar final

challenge was addressed to Jesus by the High-Priest, when he adjured

Him to say, whether He was what He claimed. His answer then was an

assertion - not a proof; and, unsupported as it seemed, His

questioners would only regard it as blasphemy.

But what of the disciples, who (as we have seen) would probably

understand 'the sign' of Christ little better than the Pharisees? That

what might seem Christ's failure, in not daring to meet the challenge

of His questioners, must have left some impression on them, is not

only natural, but appears even from Christ's warning of the leaven -

that is, of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Indeed, that

this unmet challenge and virtual defeat of Jesus did make lasting and

deepest impression in His disfavour, is evident from the later

challenge of His own relatives to go and meet the Pharisees at

headquarters in Judæa, and to show openly, if He could, by His works,

that He was the Messiah.[3633]3633 All the more remarkable appears

Christ's dealing with His disciples, His demand on, and training of

their faith. It must be remembered, that His last 'hard' sayings at

Capernaum had led to the defection of many, who till then had been His

disciples.[3634]3634 Undoubtedly this had already tried their faith,

as appears from the question of Christ: 'Will ye also go

away?'[3635]3635 It was this wise and gracious dealing with them -

this putting the one disappointment of doubt, engendered by what they

could not understand, against their whole past experience in following

Him, which enabled them to overcome. And it is this which also enables

us to answer the doubt, perhaps engendered by inability to understand

seemingly unintelligible, hard sayings of Christ, such as that to the

disciples about giving them His Flesh to eat, or about His being the

Living Bread from heaven. And, this alternative being put to them:

would they, could they, after their experience of Him, go away from

Him, they overcame, as we overcome, through what almost sounds like a

cry of despair, yet is a shout of victory: 'Lord, to whom shall we go?

Thou hast the words of eternal life.'

And all that followed only renewed and deepened the trial of faith,

which had commenced at Capernaum. We shall, perhaps, best understand

it when following the progress of this trial in him who, at last, made

shipwreck of his faith: Judas Iscariot. Without attempting to gaze

into the mysterious abyss of the Satanic element in his apostasy, we

may trace his course in its psychological development. We must not

regard Judas as a monster, but as one with passions like ourselves.

True, there was one terrible master-passion in his soul -

covetousness; but that was only the downward, lower aspect of what

seems, and to many really is, that which leads to the higher and

better - ambition. It had been thoughts of Israel's King which had

first set his imagination on fire, and brought him to follow the

Messiah. Gradually, increasingly, came the disenchantment. It was

quite another Kingdom, that of Christ; quite another Kingship than

what had set Judas aglow. This feeling was deepened as events

proceeded. His confidence must have been terribly shaken when the

Baptist was beheaded. What a contrast to the time when his voice had

bent the thousands of Israel, as trees in the wind! So this had been

nothing - and the Baptist must be written off, not as for, but as

really against, Christ. Then came the next disappointment, when Jesus

would not be made King. Why not - if He were King? And so on, step by

step, till the final depth was reached, when Jesus would not, or could

not - which was it? - meet the public challenge of the Pharisees. We

take it, that it was then that the leaven pervaded and leavened Judas

in heart and soul.

We repeat it, that what so, and permanently, penetrated Judas, could

not (as Christ's warning shows) have left the others wholly

unaffected. The very presence of Judas with them must have had its

influence. And how did Christ deal with it? There was, first, the

silent sail across the Lake, and then the warning which put them on

their guard, lest the little leaven should corrupt the bread of the

Sanctuary, on which they had learned to live. The littleness of their

faith must be corrected; it must grow and become strong. And so we can

understand what follows. It was after solitary prayer - no doubt for

them[3636]3636 - that, with reference to the challenge of the

Pharisees, 'the leaven' that threatened them, He now gathered up all

their experience of the past by putting to them the question, what

men, the people who had watched His Works and heard His Words,

regarded Him as being. Even on them some conviction had been wrought

by their observance of Him. It marked Him out (as the disciples said)

as different from all around, nay, from all ordinary men: like the

Baptist, or Elijah, or as if He were one of the old prophets alive

again. But, if even the multitude had gathered such knowledge of Him,

what was their experience, who had always been with Him? Answered he,

who most truly represented the Church, because he combined with the

most advanced experience of the three most intimate disciples the

utmost boldness of confession: 'Thou art the Christ!'

And so in part was this 'leaven' of the Pharisees purged! Yet not

wholly. For then it was, that Christ spake to them of His sufferings

and death, and that the resistance of Peter showed how deeply that

leaven had penetrated. And then followed the grand contrast presented

by Christ, between minding the things of men and those of God, with

the warning which it implied. and the monition as to the necessity of

bearing the cross of contempt, and the absolute call to do so, as

addressed to those who would be His disciples. Here, then, the contest

about 'the sign,' or rather the challenge about the Messiahship, was

carried from the mental into the moral sphere, and so decided. Six

days more of quiet waiting and growth of faith, and it was met,

rewarded, crowned, and perfected by the sight on the Mount of

Transfiguration; yet, even so, perceived only as through the heaviness

of sleep.

Thus far for the general arrangement of these events. We shall now be

prepared better to understand the details. It was certainly not for

personal reasons, but to call attention to the impression made even on

the popular mind, to correct its defects, and to raise the minds of

the Apostles to far higher thoughts, that He asked them about the

opinions of men concerning Himself. Their difference proved not only

their incompetence to form a right view, but also how many-sided

Christ's teaching must have been. We are probably correct in

supposing, that popular opinion did not point to Christ as literally

the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the other prophets who had

long been dead. For, although the literal reappearance of Elijah, and

probably also of Jeremiah,[3637]3637 was expected, the Pharisees did

not teach, nor the Jews believe in, a transmigration of souls.

Besides, no one looked for the return of any of the other old

prophets, nor could any one have seriously imagined, that Jesus was,

literally, John the Baptist, since all knew them to have been

contemporaries.[3638]3638 Rather would it mean, that some saw in Him

the continuation of the work of John, as heralding and preparing the

way of the Messiah, or, if they did not believe in John, of that of

Elijah; while to others He seemed a second Jeremiah, denouncing woe on

Israel,[3639]3639 and calling to tardy repentance; or else one of

those old prophets, who had spoken either of the near judgment or of

the coming glory. But, however men differed on these points, in this

all agreed, that they regarded Him not as an ordinary man or teacher,

but His Mission as straight from heaven; and, alas, in this also, that

they did not view Him as the Messiah. Thus far, then, there was

already retrogression in popular opinion, and thus far had the

Pharisees already succeeded.

There is a significant emphasis in the words, with which Jesus turned

from the opinion of 'the multitudes' to elicit the faith of the

disciples: 'But you, whom do you say that I am?' It is the more

marked, as the former question was equally emphasised by the use of

the article (in the original): 'Who do the men say that I

am?'[3640]3640 In that moment it leaped, by the power of God, to the

lips of Peter: 'Thou art the Christ (the Messiah), the Son of the

Living God.'[3641]3641 St. Chrysostom has beautifully designated Peter

as 'the mouth of the Apostles' - and we recall, in this connection,

the words of St. Paul as casting light on the representative character

of Peter's confession as that of the Church, and hence on the meaning

of Christ's reply, and its equally representative application: 'With

the mouth confession is made unto salvation.'[3642]3642 The words of

the confession are given somewhat differently by the three

Evangelists. From our standpoint, the briefest form (that of St.

Mark): 'Thou art the Christ,' means quite as much as the fullest (that

of St. Matthew): 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God.' We

can thus understand, how the latter might be truthfully adopted, and,

indeed, would be the most truthful, accurate, and suitable in a Gospel

primarily written for the Jews. And here we notice, that the most

exact form of the words seems that in the Gospel of St. Luke: 'The

Christ of God.'

In saying this, so far from weakening, we strengthen the import of

this glorious confession. For first, we must keep in view, that the

confession: 'Thou art the Messiah' is also that: 'Thou art the Son of

the Living God.' If, according to the Gospels, we believe that Jesus

was the true Messiah, promised to the fathers - 'the Messiah of God' -

we cannot but believe that He is 'the Son of the Living God.'

Scripture and reason equally point to this conclusion from the

premisses. But, further, we must view such a confession, even though

made in the power of God, in its historical connection. The words must

have been such as Peter could have uttered, and the disciples

acquiesced in, at the time. Moreover, they should mark a distinct

connection with, and yet progress upon, the past. All these conditions

are fulfilled by the view here taken. The full knowledge, in the sense

of really understanding, that He was the Son of the Living God, came

to the disciples only after the Resurrection.[3643]3643 Previously to

the confession of Peter, the ship's company, that had witnessed His

walking on the water, had owned: 'Of a truth Thou art the Son of

God,'[3644]3644 but not in the sense in which a well-informed,

believing Jew would hail Him as the Messiah, and 'the Son of the

Living God,' designating both His Office and His Nature - and these

two in their combination. Again, Peter himself had made a confession

of Christ, when, after his discourse at Capernaum, so many of His

disciples had forsaken Him. It had been: 'We have believed, and know

that Thou art the Holy One of God.'[3645]3645 [3646]3646 The mere

mention of these words shows both their internal connection with those

of his last and crowning confession: 'Thou art the Christ of God,' and

the immense progress made.

The more closely we view it, the loftier appears the height of this

confession. We think of it as an advance on Peter's past; we think of

it in its remembered contrast to the late challenge of the Pharisees,

and as so soon following on the felt danger of their leaven. And we

think of it, also, in its almost immeasurable distance from the

appreciative opinion of the better disposed among the people. In the

words of this confession Peter has consciously reached the firm ground

of Messianic acknowledgment. All else is implied in this, and would

follow from it. It is the first real confession of the Church. We can

understand, how it followed after solitary prayer by Christ[3647]3647

- we can scarcely doubt, for that very revelation by the Father, which

He afterwards joyously recognised in the words of Peter.

The reply of the Saviour is only recorded by St. Matthew. Its omission

by St. Mark might be explained on the ground that St. Peter himself

had furnished the information. But its absence there and in the Gospel

of St. Luke[3648]3648 proves (as Beza remarks), that it could never

have been intended as the foundation of so important a doctrine as

that of the permanent supremacy of St. Peter. But even if it were

such, it would not follow that this supremacy devolved on the

successors of St. Peter, nor yet that the Pope of Rome is the

successor of St. Peter; nor is there even solid evidence that St.

Peter ever was Bishop of Rome. The dogmatic inferences from a certain

interpretation of the words of Christ to Peter being therefore utterly

untenable, we can, with less fear of bias, examine their meaning. The

whole form here is Hebraistic. The 'blessed art thou' is Jewish in

spirit and form; the address, 'Simon bar Jona,' proves that the Lord

spake in Aramaic. Indeed, a Jewish Messiah responding, in the hour of

his Messianic acknowledgment, in Greek to His Jewish confessor, seems

utterly incongruous. Lastly, the expression 'flesh and blood,' as

contrasted with God, occurs not only in that Apocryphon of strictly

Jewish authorship, the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach,[3649]3649 and in

the letters of St. Paul,[3650]3650 but in almost innumerable passages

in Jewish writings, as denoting man in opposition to God; while the

revelation of such a truth by 'the Father Which is in Heaven,'

represents not only both Old and New Testament Teaching, but is

clothed in language familiar to Jewish ears ({hebrew} ).

Not less Jewish in form are the succeeding words of Christ, 'Thou art

Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (Petra) will I build my Church.' We

notice in the original the change from the masculine gender, 'Peter'

(Petros), to the feminine, 'Petra' ('Rock'), which seems the more

significant, that Petros is used in Greek for 'stone,' and also

sometimes for 'rock,' while Petra always means a 'rock.' The change of

gender must therefore have a definite object which will presently be

more fully explained. Meantime we recall that, when Peter first came

to Christ, the Lord had said unto him: 'Thou shalt be called Cephas,

which is, by interpretation, Peter [Petros, a Stone, or else a

Rock]'[3651]3651 - the Aramaic word Kepha ({hebrew}, or {hebrew})

meaning, like Peter, both 'stone' and 'rock.' But both the Greek

Petros and Petra have (as already stated) passed into Rabbinic

language. Thus, the name Peter, or rather Petros, is Jewish, and

occurs, for example, as that of the father of a certain Rabbi (Jose

bar Petros).[3652]3652 When the Lord, therefore, prophetically gave

the name Cephas, it may have been that by that term He gave only a

prophetic interpretation to what had been his previous name Peter

({hebrew}). This seems the more likely, since, as we have previously

seen, it was the practice in Galilee to have two names,[3653]3653

especially when the strictly Jewish name, such as Simon, had no

equivalent among the Gentiles.[3654]3654 Again, the Greek word Petra -

Rock - ('on this Petra [Rock] will I build my Church') was used in the

same sense in Rabbinic language. It occurs twice in a passage, which

so fully illustrates the Jewish use, not only of the word, but of the

whole figure, that it deserves a place here. According to Jewish

ideas, the world would not have been created, unless it had rested, as

it were, on some solid foundation of piety and acceptance of God's Law

- in other words, it required a moral, before it could receive a

physical foundation. Rabbinism here contrasts the Gentile world with

Israel. It is, so runs the comment, as if a king were going to build a

city. One and another site is tried for a foundation, but in digging

they always come upon water. At last they come upon a Rock (Petra,

{hebrew}). So, when God was about to build his world, He could not

rear it on the generation of Enos nor on that of the flood, who

brought destruction on the world; but 'when He beheld that Abraham

would arise in the future, He said: Behold I have found a Rock (Petra,

{hebrew}) to build on it, and to found the world,' whence also Abraham

is called a Rock (Tsur, {hebrew}) as it is said:[3655]3655 'Look unto

the Rock whence ye are hewn.'[3656]3656 [3657]3657 The parallel

between Abraham and Peter might be carried even further. If, from a

misunderstanding of the Lord's promise to Peter, later Christian

legend represented the Apostle as sitting at the gate of heaven,

Jewish legend represents Abraham as sitting at the gate of Gehenna, so

as to prevent all who had the seal of circumcision from falling into

its abyss.[3658]3658 [3659]3659 To complete this sketch, in the

curious Jewish legend about the Apostle Peter, which is outlined in an

Appendix to this volume,[3660]3660 Peter is always designated as Simon

Kepha (spelt {hebrew}), there being, however, some reminiscence of the

meaning attached to his name in the statement made, that, after his

death, they built a church and tower, and called it Peter ({hebrew})

'which is the name for stone, because he sat there upon a stone till

his death' ({hebrew}).[3661]3661

But to return. Believing, that Jesus spoke to Peter in the Aramic, we

can now understand how the words Petros and Petra would be purposely

used by Christ to mark the difference, which their choice would

suggest. Perhaps it might be expressed in this somewhat clumsy

paraphrase: 'Thou art Peter (Petros) - a Stone or Rock - and upon this

Petra - the Rock, the Petrine - will I found My Church.' If,

therefore, we would not certainly apply them to the words of Peter's

confession, we would certainly apply them to that which was the

Petrine in Peter: the heaven-given faith which manifested itself in

his confession.[3662]3662 And we can further understand how, just as

Christ's contemporaries may have regarded the world as reared on the

rock of faithful Abraham, so Christ promised, that He would build His

Church on the Petrine in Peter - on his faith and confession. Nor

would the term 'Church' sound strange in Jewish ears. The same Greek

word (_kkljs_a), as the equivalent of the Hebrew Qahal, 'convocation,'

'the called,'[3663]3663 occurs in the LXX. rendering of the Old

Testament, and in 'the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach'[3664]3664 and was

apparently in familiar use at the time.[3665]3665 In Hebrew use it

referred to Israel, not in their national but in their religious

unity. As here employed, it would convey the prophecy, that His

disciples would in the future be joined together in a religious unity;

that this religious unity or 'Church' would be a building of which

Christ was the Builder; that it would be founded on 'the Petrine' of

heaven-taught faith and confession; and that this religious unity,

this Church, was not only intended for a time, like a school of

thought, but would last beyond death and the disembodied state: that,

alike as regarded Christ and His Church - 'the gates of

Hades'[3666]3666 shall not prevail against it.

Viewing 'the Church' as a building founded upon 'the

Petrine,'[3667]3667 it was not to vary, but to carry on the same

metaphor, when Christ promised to give to him who had spoken as

representative of the Apostles - 'the stewards of the mysteries of

God' - 'the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven.' For, as the religious

unity of His disciples, or the Church, represented 'the royal rule of

heaven,' so, figuratively, entrance into the gates of this building,

submission to the rule of God - to that Kingdom of which Christ was

the King. And we remember how, in a special sense, this promise was

fulfilled to Peter. Even as he had been the first to utter the

confession of the Church, so was he also privileged to be the first to

open its hitherto closed gates to the Gentiles, when God made choice

of him, that, through his mouth, the Gentiles should first hear the

words of the Gospel,[3668]3668 and at his bidding first be

baptized.[3669]3669

If hitherto it has appeared that what Christ said to Peter, though

infinitely transcending Jewish ideas, was yet, in its expression and

even cast of thought, such as to be quite intelligible to Jewish

minds, nay, so familiar to them, that, as by well-marked steps, they

might ascend to the higher Sanctuary, the difficult words with which

our Lord closed must be read in the same light. For, assuredly, in

interpreting such a saying of Christ to Peter, our first inquiry must

be, what it would convey to the person to whom the promise was

addressed. And here we recall, that no other terms were in more

constant use in Rabbinic Canon-Law than those of 'binding' and

'loosing.' The words are the literal translation of the Hebrew

equivalents Asar ({hebrew}), which means 'to bind,' in the sense of

prohibiting, and Hittir ({hebrew}, from {hebrew}) which means 'to

loose,' in the sense of permitting. For the latter the term Shera or

Sheri ({hebrew}, or {hebrew}) is also used. But this expression is,

both in Targumic and Talmudic diction, not merely the equivalent of

permitting, but passes into that of remitting or pardoning. On the

other hand, 'binding and loosing' referred simply to things or acts

prohibiting or else permitting them, declaring them lawful or

unlawful. This was one of the powers claimed by the Rabbis. As regards

their laws (not decisions as to things or acts), it was a principle,

that while in Scripture there were some that bound and some that

loosed, all the laws of the Rabbis were in reference to

'binding.'[3670]3670 If this then represented the legislative, another

pretension of the Rabbis, that of declaring 'free' or else 'liable,'

i.e., guilty (Patur or Chayyabh), expressed their claim to the

judicial power. By the first of these they 'bound' or 'loosed' acts or

things; by the second they 'remitted' or 'retained,' declared a person

free from, or liable to punishment. to compensation, or to sacrifice.

These two powers - the legislative and judicial - which belonged to

the Rabbinic office, Christ now transferred, and that not in their

pretension, but in their reality, to His Apostles: the first here to

Peter as their Representative, the second after His Resurrection to

the Church.[3671]3671

On the second of these powers we need not at present dwell. That of

'binding' and 'loosing' included all the legislative functions for the

new Church. And it was a reality. In the view of the Rabbis heaven was

like earth, and questions were discussed and settled by a heavenly

Sanhedrin. Now, in regard to some of their earthly decrees, they were

wont to say that 'the Sanhedrin above' confirmed what 'the Sanhedrin

beneath' had done. But the words of Christ, as they avoided the

foolish conceit of His contemporaries, left it not doubtful, but

conveyed the assurance that, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost,

whatsoever they bound or loosed on earth would be bound or loosed in

heaven.

But all this that had passed between them could not be matter of

common talk - least of all, at that crisis in His History, and in that

locality. Accordingly, all the three Evangelists record - each with

distinctive emphasis[3672]3672 - that the open confession of his

Messiahship, which was virtually its proclamation, was not to be made

public. Among the people it could only have led to results the

opposite of those to be desired. How unprepared even that Apostle was,

who had made proclamation of the Messiah, for what his confession

implied, and how ignorant of the real meaning of Israel's Messiah,

appeared only too soon. For, His proclamation as the Christ imposed on

the Lord, so to speak, the necessity of setting forth the mode of His

contest and victory - the Cross and the Crown. Such teaching was the

needed sequence of Peter's confession - needed, not only for the

correction of misunderstanding, but for direction. And yet

significantly it is only said, that 'He began' to teach them these

things - no doubt, as regarded the manner, as well as the time of this

teaching. The Evangelists, indeed, write it down in plain language, as

fully taught them by later experience, that He was to be rejected by

the rulers of Israel, slain, and to rise again the third day. And

there can be as little doubt, that Christ's language (as afterwards

they looked back upon it) must have clearly implied all this, as that

at the time they did not fully understand it.[3673]3673 He was so

constantly in the habit of using symbolic language, and had only

lately reproved them for taking that about 'the leaven' in a literal,

which He had meant in a figurative sense, that it was but natural,

they should have regarded in the same light announcements which, in

their strict literality, would seem to them well nigh incredible. They

could well understand His rejection by the Scribes - a sort of

figurative death, or violent suppression of His claims and doctrines,

and then, after briefest period, their resurrection, as it were - but

not these terrible details in their full literality.

But, even so, there was enough of terrible realism in the words of

Jesus to alarm Peter. His very affection, intensely human, to the

Human Personality of his Master would lead him astray. That He, Whom

he verily believed to be the Messiah, Whom he loved with all the

intenseness of such an intense nature - that he should pass through

such an ordeal - No! Never! He put it in the very strongest language,

although the Evangelist gives only a literal translation of the

Rabbinic expression[3674]3674 - God forbid it, 'God be merciful to

Thee:'[3675]3675 no, such never could, nor should be to the Christ! It

was an appeal to the Human in Christ, just as Satan had, in the great

Temptation after the forty days' fast, appealed to the purely Human in

Jesus. Temptations these, with which we cannot reason, but which we

must put behind us as behind, or else they will be a stumbling-block

before us; temptations, which come to us often through the love and

care of others, Satan transforming himself into an Angel of light;

temptations, all the more dangerous, that they appeal to the purely

human, not the sinful, element in us, but which arise from the

circumstance, that they who so become our stumbling-block, so long as

they are before us, are prompted by an affection which has regard to

the purely human, and, in its one-sided human intenseness, minds the

things of man, and not those of God.

Yet Peter's words were to be made useful, by affording to the Master

the opportunity of correcting what was amiss in the hearts of all His

disciples, and teaching them such general principles about His

Kingdom, and about that implied in true discipleship, as would, if

received in the heart, enable them in due time victoriously to bear

those trials connected with that rejection and Death of the Christ,

which at the time they could not understand. Not a Messianic Kingdom,

with glory to its heralds and chieftains - but self-denial, and the

voluntary bearing of that cross on which the powers of this world

would nail the followers of Christ. They knew the torture which their

masters - the power of the world - the Romans, were wont to inflict:

such must they, and similar must we all, be prepared to

bear,[3676]3676 and, in so doing, begin by denying self. In such a

contest, to lose life would be to gain it, to gain would be to lose

life. And, if the issue lay between these two, who could hesitate what

to choose, even if it were ours to gain or lose a whole world? For

behind it all there was a reality - a Messianic triumph and Kingdom -

not, indeed, such as they imagined, but far higher, holier: the Coming

of the Son of Man in the glory of His Father, and with His Angels, and

then eternal gain or loss, according to our deeds.[3677]3677

But why speak of the future and distant? 'A sign' - a terrible sign of

it 'from heaven,' a vindication of Christ's 'rejected' claims, a

vindication of the Christ, Whom they had slain, invoking His Blood on

their City and Nation, a vindication, such as alone these men could

understand, of the reality of His Resurrection and Ascension, was in

the near future. The flames of the City and Temple would be the light

in that nation's darkness, by which to read the inscription on the

Cross. All this not afar off. Some of those who stood there would not

'taste death,'[3678]3678 till in those judgments they would see that

the Son of Man had come in His Kingdom.[3679]3679

Then - only then - at the burning of the City! Why not now, visibly,

and immediately on their terrible sin? Because God shows not 'signs

from heaven' such as man seeks; because His long-suffering waiteth

long; because, all unnoticed, the finger moves on the dial-plate of

time till the hour strikes; because there is Divine grandeur and

majesty in the slow, unheard, certain nigh-march of events under His

direction. God is content to wait, because He reigneth; man must be

content to wait, because he believeth.

Book IV.

THE DESCENT:

FROM THE MOUNT OF TRANSFIGURATION INTO

THE VALLEY OF HUMILIATION AND DEATH.

'But God forbede but men shulde leve

Wel mor thing then men han seen with eye

Men shall not wenen euery thing a lye

But yf him-selfe yt seeth or elles dooth

For god wot thing is neuer the lasse sooth

Thogh euery wight ne may it nat y-see.'

Chaucer: Prologue to the Legend of Good Women.

CHAPTER I.

THE TRANSFIGURATION.

(St Matt. xvii. 1-8; St. Mark ix. 2-8; St. Luke ix. 28-36.)

THE great confession of Peter, as the representative Apostle, had laid

the foundations of the Church as such. In contradistinction to the

varying opinions of even those best disposed towards Christ, it openly

declared that Jesus was the Very Christ of God, the fulfilment of all

Old Testament prophecy, the heir of Old Testament promise, the

realisation of the Old Testament hope for Israel, and, in Israel, for

all mankind. Without this confession, Christians might have been a

Jewish sect, a religious party, or a school of thought, and Jesus a

Teacher, Rabbi, Reformer, or Leader of men. But the confession which

marked Jesus as the Christ, also constituted His followers the Church.

It separated them, as it separated Him, from all around; it gathered

them into one, even Christ; and it marked out the foundation on which

the building made without hands was to rise. Never was illustrative

answer so exact as this: 'On this Rock' - bold, outstanding,

well-defined, immovable - 'will I build My Church.'

Without doubt this confession also marked the high-point of the

Apostles' faith. Never afterwards, till His Resurrection, did it reach

so high. Nay, what followed seems rather a retrogression from it:

beginning with their unwillingness to receive the announcement of His

decease, and ending with their unreadiness to share His sufferings or

to believe in His Resurrection. And if we realise the circumstances,

we shall understand at least, their initial difficulties. Their

highest faith had been followed by the most crushing disappointment;

the confession that He was the Christ, by the announcement of His

approaching Sufferings and Death at Jerusalem. The proclamation that

He was the Divine Messiah had not been met by promises of the near

glory of the Messianic Kingdom, but by announcements of certain,

public rejection and seeming terrible defeat. Such possibilities had

never seriously entered into their thoughts of the Messiah; and the

declaration of the very worst, and that in the near future, made at

such a moment, must have been a staggering blow to all their hopes. It

was as if they had reached the topmost height, only to be cast thence

into the lowest depth.

On the other hand, it was necessary that at this stage in the History

of the Christ, and immediately after His proclamation, the sufferings

and the rejection of the Messiah should be prominently brought

forward. It was needful for the Apostles, as the remonstrance of Peter

showed; and, with reverence be it added, it was needful for the Lord

Himself, as even His words to Peter seem to imply: 'Get thee behind

Me; thou art a stumbling-block unto me.' For - as we have said - was

not the remonstrance of the disciple in measure a re-enactment of the

great initial Temptation by Satan after the forty days' fast in the

wilderness? And, in view of all this, and of what immediately

afterwards followed, we venture to say, it was fitting that an

interval of 'six' days should intervene, or, as St. Luke puts it,

including the day of Peter's confession and the night of Christ's

Transfiguration, 'about eight days.' The Chronicle of these days is

significantly left blank in the Gospels, but we cannot doubt, that it

was filled up with thoughts and teaching concerning that Decease,

leading up to the revelation on the Mount of Transfiguration.

There are other blanks in the narrative besides that just referred to.

We shall try to fill them up, as best we can. Perhaps it was the

Sabbath when Peter's great confession was made; and the 'six days' of

St. Matthew and St. Mark become the 'about eight days' of St. Luke,

when we reckon from that Sabbath to the close of another, and suppose

that at even the Saviour ascended the Mount of Transfiguration with

the three Apostles: Peter, James, and John. There can scarcely be a

reasonable doubt that Christ and His disciples had not left the

neighborhood of Cæsarea,[3680]3680 and hence, that 'the mountain' must

have been one of the slopes of gigantic, snowy Hermon. In that quiet

semi-Gentile retreat of Cæsarea Philippi could He best teach them, and

they best learn, without interruption or temptation from Pharisees and

Scribes, that terrible mystery of His Suffering. And on that gigantic

mountain barrier which divided Jewish and Gentile lands, and while

surveying, as Moses of old, the land to be occupied in all its extent,

amidst the solemn solitude and majestic grandeur of Hermon, did it

seem most fitting that, both by anticipatory fact and declamatory

word, the Divine attestation should be given to the proclamation that

He was the Messiah, and to this also, that, in a world that is in the

power of sin and Satan, God's Elect must suffer, in order that, by

ransoming, He may conquer it to God. But what a background, here, for

the Transfiguration; what surroundings for the Vision, what echoes for

the Voice from heaven!

It was evening,[3681]3681 and, as we have suggested, the evening after

the Sabbath, when the Master and those three of His disciples, who

were most closely linked to Him in heart and thought, climbed the path

that led up to one of the heights of Hermon. In all the most solemn

transactions of earth's history, there has been this selection and

separation of the few to witness God's great doings. Alone with his

son, as the destined sacrifice, did Abraham climb Moriah; alone did

Moses behold, amid the awful loneliness of the wilderness, the burning

bush, and alone on Sinai's height did he commune with God; alone was

Elijah at Horeb, and with no other companion to view it than Elisha

did he ascend into heaven. But Jesus, the Saviour of His people, could

not be quite alone, save in those innermost transactions of His soul:

in the great contest of His first Temptation, and in the solitary

communings of His heart with God. These are mysteries which the

outspread wings of Angels, as reverently they hide their faces,

conceal from earth's, and even heaven's vision. But otherwise, in the

most solemn turning-points of this history, Jesus could not be alone,

and yet was alone with those three chosen ones, most receptive of Him,

and most representative of the Church. It was so in the house of

Jairus, on the Mount of Transfiguration, and in the Garden of

Gethsemane.

As St. Luke alone informs us, it was 'to pray' that Jesus took them

apart up into that mountain. 'To pray,' no doubt in connection with

'those sayings;' since their reception required quite as much the

direct teaching of the Heavenly Father, as had the previous confession

of Peter, of which it was, indeed, the complement, the other aspect,

the twin height. And the Transfiguration, with its attendant glorified

Ministry and Voice from heaven, was God's answer to that prayer.

What has already been stated, has convinced us that it could not have

been to one of the highest peaks of Hermon, as most modern writers

suppose, that Jesus led His companions. There are three such peaks:

those north and south, of about equal height (9,400 feet above the

sea, and nearly 11,000 above the Jordan valley), are only 500 paces

distant from each other, while the third, to the west (about 100 feet

lower), is separated from the others by a narrow valley. Now, to climb

the top of Hermon is, even from the nearest point, an Alpine ascent,

trying and fatiguing, which would occupy a whole day (six hours in the

ascent and four in the descent), and require provisions of food and

water; while, from the keenness of the air, it would be impossible to

spend the night on the top.[3682]3682 To all this there is no allusion

in the text, nor slightest hint of either difficulties or

preparations, such as otherwise would have been required. Indeed, a

contrary impression is left on the mind.

'Up into an high mountain apart,' 'to pray.' The Sabbath-sun had set,

and a delicious cool hung in the summer air, as Jesus an the three

commenced their ascent. From all parts of the land, far as Jerusalem

or Tyre, the one great object in view must always have been snow-clad

Hermon. And now it stood out before them - as, to the memory of the

traveller in the West, Monte Rosa or Mont Blanc[3683]3683 - in all the

wondrous glory of a sunset: first rose-colored, then deepening red,

next 'the death-like pallor, and the darkness relieved by the snow, in

quick succession.'[3684]3684 From high up there, as one describes

it,[3685]3685 'a deep ruby flush came over all the scene, and warm

purple shadows crept slowly on. The sea of Galilee was lit up with a

delicate greenish-yellow hue, between its dim walls of hill. The flush

died out in a few minutes, and a pale, steel-coloured shade succeeded.

. . . A long pyramidal shadow slid down to the eastern foot of Hermon,

and crept across the great plain; Damascus was swallowed up by it; and

finally the pointed end of the shadow stood out distinctly against the

sky - a dusky cone of dull colour against the flush of the afterglow.

It was the shadow of the mountain itself, stretching away for seventy

miles across the plain - the most marvellous shadow perhaps to be seen

anywhere. The sun underwent strange changes of shape in the thick

vapours - now almost square, now like a domed Temple - until at length

it slid into the sea, and went out like a blue spark.' And overhead

shone out in the blue summer-sky, one by one, the stars in Eastern

brilliancy. We know not the exact direction which the climbers took,

nor how far their journey went. But there is only one road that leads

from Cæsarea Philippi to Hermon, and we cannot be mistaken in

following it. First, among vine-clad hills stocked with mulberry,

apricot and fig-trees; then, through corn-fields where the pear tree

supplants the fig; next, through oak coppice, and up rocky ravines to

where the soil is dotted with dwarf shrubs. And if we pursue the

ascent, it still becomes steeper, till the first ridge of snow is

crossed, after which turfy banks, gravelly slopes, and broad

snow-patches alternate. The top of Hermon in summer - and it can only

be ascended in summer or autumn - is free from snow, but broad patches

run down the sides expanding as they descend. To the very summit it is

well earthed; to 500 feet below it, studded with countless plants,

higher up with dwarf clumps.[3686]3686

As they ascend in the cool of that Sabbath evening, the keen mountain

air must have breathed strength into the climbers, and the scent of

snow - for which the parched tongue would long in summer's

heat[3687]3687 - have refreshed them. We know not what part may have

been open to them of the glorious panorama from Hermon embracing as it

does a great part of Syria from the sea to Damascus, from the Lebanon

and the gorge of the Litany to the mountains of Moab; or down the

Jordan valley to the Dead Sea; or over Galilee, Samaria, and on to

Jerusalem and beyond it. But such darkness as that of a summer's night

would creep on. And now the moon shone out in dazzling splendour, cast

long shadows over the mountain, and lit up the broad patches of snow,

reflecting their brilliancy on the objects around.

On that mountain-top 'He prayed.' Although the text does not expressly

state it, we can scarcely doubt, that He prayed with them, and still

less, that He prayed for them, as did the Prophet for his servant,

when the city was surrounded by Syrian horsemen: that his eyes might

be opened to behold heaven's host - the far 'more that are with us

than they that are with them.'[3688]3688 And, with deep reverence be

it said, for Himself also did Jesus pray. For, as the pale moonlight

shone on the fields of snow in the deep passes of Hermon, so did the

light of the coming night shine on the cold glitter of Death in the

near future. He needed prayer, that in it His Soul might lie calm and

still - perfect, in the unruffled quiet of His Self-surrender, the

absolute rest of His Faith, and the victory of His Sacrificial

Obedience. And He needed prayer also, as the introduction to, and

preparation for, His Transfiguration. Truly, He stood on Hermon. It

was the highest ascent, the widest prospect into the past, present,

and future, in His Earthly Life. Yet was it but Hermon at night. And

this is the human, or rather the Theanthropic view of this prayer, and

of its consequence.

As we understand it, the prayer with them had ceased, or it had merged

into silent prayer of each, or Jesus now prayed alone and apart, when

what gives this scene such a truly human and truthful aspect ensued.

It was but natural for these men of simple habits, at night, and after

the long ascent, and in the strong mountain-air, to be heavy with

sleep. And we also know it as a psychological fact, that, in quick

reaction after the overpowering influence of the strongest emotions,

drowsiness would creep over their limbs and senses. 'They were heavy -

weighted - with sleep,' as afterwards at Gethsemane their eyes were

weighted.[3689]3689 [3690]3690 Yet they struggled with it, and it is

quite consistent with experience, that they should continue in that

state of semi-stupor, during what passed between Moses and Elijah and

Christ, and also be 'fully awake,'[3691]3691 'to see His Glory, and

the two men who stood with Him.' In any case this descriptive trait,

so far from being (as negative critics would have it), a 'later

embellishment,' could only have formed part of a primitive account,

since it is impossible to conceive any rational motive for its later

addition.[3692]3692

What they saw was their Master, while praying,

'transformed.'[3693]3693 The 'form of God' shone through the 'form of

a servant;' 'the appearance of His Face became other,'[3694]3694

[3695]3695 it 'did shine as the sun.'[3696]3696 [3697]3697 Nay, the

whole Figure seemed bathed in light, the very garments whiter far than

the snow on which the moon shone[3698]3698 - 'so as no fuller on earth

can white them,'[3699]3699 'glittering,'[3700]3700 'white as the

light.' And more than this they saw and heard. They saw 'with Him two

men,'[3701]3701 whom, in their heightened sensitiveness to spiritual

phenomena, they could have no difficulty in recognising, by such of

their conversation as they heard, as Moses and Elijah.[3702]3702 The

column was now complete: the base in the Law; the shaft in that

Prophetism of which Elijah was the great Representative - in his first

Mission, as fulfilling the primary object of the Prophets: to call

Israel back to God; and, in his second Mission, this other aspect of

the Prophets' work, to prepare the way for the Kingdom of God; and the

apex in Christ Himself - a unity completely fitting together in all

its parts. And they heard also, that they spake of 'His Exodus -

outgoing - which He was about to fulfil at Jerusalem.'[3703]3703

Although the term 'Exodus,' 'outgoing,' occurs otherwise for

'death,'[3704]3704 we must bear in mind its meaning as contrasted with

that in which the same Evangelic writer designates the Birth of

Christ, as His 'incoming.'[3705]3705 In truth, it implies not only His

Decease, but its manner, and even His Resurrection and Ascension. In

that sense we can understand the better, as on the lips of Moses and

Elijah, this about His fulfilling that Exodus: accomplishing it in all

its fulness, and so completing Law and Prophecy, type and prediction.

And still that night of glory had not ended. A strange peculiarity has

been noticed about Hermon in 'the extreme rapidity of the formation of

cloud on the summit. In a few minutes a thick cap forms over the top

of the mountain, and as quickly disperses and entirely

disappears.'[3706]3706 It almost seems as if this, like the natural

position of Hermon itself, was, if not to be connected with, yet, so

to speak, to form the background to what was to be enacted. Suddenly a

cloud passed over the clear brow of the mountain - not an ordinary,

but 'a luminous cloud,' a cloud uplit, filled with light. As it laid

itself between Jesus and the two Old Testament Representatives, it

parted, and presently enwrapped them. Most significant is it,

suggestive of the Presence of God, revealing, yet concealing - a

cloud, yet luminous. And this cloud overshadowed the disciples: the

shadow of its light fell upon them. A nameless terror seized them.

Fain would they have held what seemed for ever to escape their grasp.

Such vision had never before been vouchsafed to mortal man as had

fallen on their sight; they had already heard Heaven's converse; they

had tasted Angels' Food, the Bread of His Presence. Could the vision

not be perpetuated - at least prolonged? In the confusion of their

terror they knew not how otherwise to word it, than by an expression

of ecstatic longing for the continuance of what they had, of their

earnest readiness to do their little best, if they could but secure it

- make booths for the heavenly Visitants[3707]3707 - and themselves

wait in humble service and reverent attention on what their dull

heaviness had prevented their enjoying and profiting by, to the full.

They knew and felt it: 'Lord' - 'Rabbi' - 'Master' - 'it is good for

us to be here' - and they longed to have it; yet how to secure it,

their terror could not suggest, save in the language of ignorance and

semi-conscious confusion. 'They wist not what they said.' In presence

of the luminous cloud that enwrapt those glorified Saints, they spake

from out that darkness which compassed them about.

And now the light-cloud was spreading; presently its fringe fell upon

them.[3708]3708 Heaven's awe was upon them: for the touch of the

heavenly strains, almost to breaking, the bond betwixt body and soul.

'And a Voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is My

Beloved[3709]3709 Son: hear Him.' It had needed only One other

Testimony to seal it all; One other Voice, to give both meaning and

music to what had been the subject of Moses' and Elijah's speaking.

That Voice had now come - not in testimony to any fact, but to a

Person - that of Jesus as His 'Beloved Son,'[3710]3710 and in gracious

direction to them. They heard it, falling on their faces in awestruck

worship.

How long the silence had lasted, and the last rays of the cloud had

passed, we know not. Presently, it was a gentle touch that roused

them. It was the Hand of Jesus, as with words of comfort He reassured

them: 'Arise, and be not afraid.' And as, startled,[3711]3711 they

looked round about them, they saw no man save Jesus only. The Heavenly

Visitants had gone, the last glow of the light-cloud had faded away,

the echoes of Heaven's Voice had died out. It was night, and they were

on the Mount with Jesus, and with Jesus only.

Is it truth or falsehood; was it reality or vision, or part of both,

this Transfiguration-scene on Hermon? One thing, at least, must be

evident: if it be a true narrative, it cannot possibly describe a

merely subjective vision without objective reality. But, in that case,

it would be not only difficult, but impossible, to separate one part

of the narrative - the appearance of Moses and Elijah - from the

other, the Transfiguration of the Lord, and to assign to the latter

objective reality,[3712]3712 while regarding the former as merely a

vision. But is the account true? It certainly represents primitive

tradition, since it is not only told by all the three Evangelists, but

referred to in 2 Peter i. 16-18,[3713]3713 and evidently implied in

the words of St. John, both in his Gospel,[3714]3714 and in the

opening of his First Epistle. Few, if any would be so bold as to

assert that the whole of this history had been invented by the three

Apostles, who professed to have been its witnesses. Nor can any

adequate motive be imagined for its invention. It could not have been

intended to prepare the Jews for the Crucifixion of the Messiah, since

it was to be kept a secret till after His Resurrection; and, after the

event, it could not have been necessary for the assurance of those who

believed in the Resurrection, while to others it would carry no

weight. Again, the special traits of this history are inconsistent

with the theory of its invention. In a legend, the witnesses of such

an event would not have been represented as scarcely awake, and not

knowing what they said. Manifestly, the object would have been to

convey the opposite impression. Lastly, it cannot be too often

repeated, that, in view of the manifold witness of the Evangelists,

amply confirmed in all essentials by the Epistles - preached, lived,

and bloodsealed by the primitive Church, and handed down as primitive

tradition - the most untenable theory seems that which imputes

intentional fraud to their narratives, or, to put it otherwise,

non-belief on the part of the narrators of what they related.

But can we suppose, if not fraud, yet mistake on the part of these

witnesses, so that an event, otherwise naturally explicable, may,

through their ignorance or imaginativeness, have assumed the

proportions of this narrative? The investigation will be the more

easy, that, as regards all the main features of the narrative, the

three Evangelists are entirely agreed. Instead of examining in detail

the various rationalistic attempts made to explain this history on

natural grounds, it seems sufficient for refutation to ask the

intelligent reader to attempt imagining any natural event, which by

any possibility could have been mistaken for what the eyewitnesses

related, and the Evangelists recorded.

There still remains the mythical theory of explanation, which, if it

could be supported, would be the most attractive among those of a

negative character. But we cannot imagine a legend without some

historical motive or basis for its origination. The legend must be in

character - that is, congruous to the ideas and expectancies

entertained. Such a history as that of the Transfiguration could not

have been a pure invention; but if such or similar expectancies had

existed about the Messiah, then such a legend might, without

intentional fraud, have, by gradual accretion, gathered around the

Person of Him Who was regarded as the Christ. And this is the

rationale of the so-called mythical theory. But all such ideas vanish

at the touch of history. There was absolutely no Jewish expectancy

that could have bodied itself forth in a narrative like that of the

Transfiguration. To begin with the accessories, the idea, that the

coming of Moses was to be connected with that of the Messiah, rests

not only on an exaggeration, but on a dubious and difficult passage in

the Jerusalem Targum.[3715]3715 [3716]3716 It is quite true, that the

face of Moses shone when he came down from the Mount; but, if this is

to be regarded as the basis of the Transfiguration of Jesus, the

presence of Elijah would not be in point. On the other hand - to pass

over other inconsistencies - anything more un-Jewish could scarcely be

imagined than a Messiah crucified, or that Moses and Elijah should

appear to converse with Him on such a Death! If it be suggested, that

the purpose was to represent the Law and the Prophets as bearing

testimony to the Dying of the Messiah, we fully admit it. Certainly,

this is the New Testament and the true idea concerning the Christ; but

equally certainly, it was not and is not, that of the Jews concerning

the Messiah.[3717]3717

If it is impossible to regard this narrative as a fraud; hopeless, to

attempt explaining it as a natural event; and utterly unaccountable,

when viewed in connection with contemporary thought or expectancy - in

short, if all negative theories fail, let us see whether, and how on

the supposition of its reality, it will fit into the general

narrative. To begin with: if our previous investigations have rightly

led us up to this result, that Jesus was the Very Christ of God, then

this event can scarcely be described as miraculous - at least in such

a history. If we would not expect it, it is certainly that which might

have been expected. For, first, it was (and at that particular period)

a necessary stage in the Lord's History, viewed in the light in which

the Gospels present Him. Secondly, it was needful for His own

strengthening, even as the Ministry of the Angels after the

Temptation. Thirdly, it was 'good' for these three disciples to be

there: not only for future witness, but for present help, and also

with special reference to Peter's remonstrance against Christ's

death-message. Lastly, the Voice from heaven, in hearing of His

disciples, was of the deepest importance. Coming after the

announcement of His Death and Passion, it sealed that testimony, and,

in view of it, proclaimed Him as the Prophet to Whom Moses had bidden

Israel hearken,[3718]3718 while it repeated the heavenly utterance

concerning Him made at His Baptism.[3719]3719

But, for us all, the interest of this history lies not only in the

past; it is in the present also, and in the future. To all ages it is

like the vision of the bush burning, in which was the Presence of God.

And it points us forward to that transformation, of which that of

Christ was the pledge, when 'this corruptible shall put on

incorruption.' As of old the beacon-fires, lighted from hill to hill,

announced to them far away from Jerusalem the advent of solemn feast,

so does the glory kindled on the Mount of Transfiguration shine

through the darkness of the world, and tell of the Resurrection-Day.

On Hermon the Lord and His disciples had reached the highest point in

this history. Henceforth it is a descent into the Valley of

Humiliation and Death!

CHAPTER II.

ON THE MORROW OF THE TRANSFIGURATION

(St. Matt. xvii. 9-21; St. Mark ix. 9-29: St. Luke ix. 37-43.)

IT was the early dawn of another summer's day when the Master and His

disciples turned their steps once more towards the plain. They had

seen His Glory; they had had the most solemn witness which, as Jews,

the could have; and they had gained a new knowledge of the Old

Testament. It all bore reference to the Christ, and it spake of His

Decease. Perhaps on that morning better than in the previous night did

they realise the vision, and feel its calm happiness. It was to their

souls like the morning-air which they breathed on that mountain.

It would be only natural, that their thoughts should also wander to

the companions and fellow-disciples whom, on the previous evening,

they had left in the valley beneath. How much they had to tell them,

and how glad they would be of the tidings they would hear! That one

night had for ever answered so many questions about that most hard of

all His sayings: concerning His Rejection and violent Death at

Jerusalem; it had shed heavenly light into that terrible gloom! They -

at least these three - had formerly simply submitted to the saying of

Christ because it was His, without understanding it; but now they had

learned to see it in quite another light. How they must have longed to

impart it to those whose difficulties were at least as great, perhaps

greater, who perhaps had not yet recovered from the rude shock which

their Messianic thoughts and hopes had so lately received. We think

here especially of those, whom, so far as individuality of thinking is

concerned, we may designate as the representative three, and the

counterpart of the three chosen Apostles: Philip, who ever sought firm

standing-ground for faith; Thomas, who wanted evidence for believing;

and Judas, whose burning Jewish zeal for a Jewish Messiah had already

begun to consume his own soul, as the wind had driven back upon

himself the flame that had been kindled. Every question of a Philip,

every doubt of a Thomas, every despairing wild outburst of a Judas,

would be met by what they had now to tell.

But it was not to be so. Evidently, it was not an event to be made

generally known, either to the people or even to the great body of the

disciples. They could not have understood its real meaning; they would

have misunderstood, and in their ignorance misapplied to carnal Jewish

purposes, its heavenly lessons. But even the rest of the Apostles must

not know of it: that they were not qualified to witness it, proved

that they were not prepared to hear of it. We cannot for a moment

imagine, that there was favouritism in the selection of certain

Apostles to share in what the others might not witness. It was not

because these were better loved, but because they were better

prepared[3720]3720 - more fully receptive, more readily acquiescing,

more entirely self-surrendering. Too often we commit in our estimate

the error of thinking of them exclusively as Apostles, not as

disciples; as our teachers, not as His learners, with all the failings

of men, the prejudices of Jews, and the unbelief natural to us all,

but assuming in each individual special forms, and appearing as

characteristic weaknesses.

And so it was that, when the silence of that morning-descent was

broken, the Master laid on them the command to tell no man of this

vision, till after the Son of Man were risen from the dead. This

mysterious injunction of silence affords another presumptive evidence

against the invention, or the rationalistic explanations, or the

mythical origin of this narrative. It also teaches two further

lessons. The silence thus enjoined was the first step into the Valley

of Humiliation. It was also a test, whether they had understood the

spiritual teaching of the vision. And their strict obedience, not

questioning even the grounds of the injunction, proved that they had

learned it. So entire, indeed, was their submission, that they dared

not even ask the Master about a new and seemingly greater mystery than

they had yet heard: the meaning of the Son of Man rising from the

Dead.[3721]3721 Did it refer to the general Resurrection; was the

Messiah to be the first to rise from the dead, and to waken the other

sleepers - or was it only a figurative expression for His triumph and

vindication? Evidently, they knew as yet nothing of Christ's Personal

Resurrection as separate from that of others, and on the third day

after His Death. And yet it was so near! So ignorant were they, and so

unprepared! And they dared not ask the Master of it. This much they

had already learned: not to question the mysteries of the future, but

simply to receive them. But in their inmost hearts they kept that

saying - as the Virgin-Mother had kept many a like saying - carrying

it about 'with them' as a precious living germ that would presently

spring up and bear fruit, or as that which would kindle into light and

chase all darkness. But among themselves, then and many times

afterwards, in secret converse, they questioned what the rising again

from the dead should mean.[3722]3722

There was another question, and it they might ask of Jesus, since it

concerned not the mysteries of the future, but the lessons of the

past. Thinking of that vision, of the appearance of Elijah and of his

speaking of the Death of the Messiah, why did the Scribes say that

Elijah should first come - and, as was the universal teaching, for the

purpose of restoring all things? If, as they had seen, Elijah had

come, but only for a brief season, not to abide, along with Moses, as

they had fondly wished when they proposed to rear them booths; if he

had come not to the people but to Christ, in view of only them three -

and they were not even to tell of it; and, if it had been, not to

prepare for a spiritual restoration, but to speak of what implied the

opposite: the Rejection and violent Death of the Messiah - then, were

the Scribes right in their teaching, and what was its real meaning?

The question afforded the opportunity of presenting to the disciples

not only a solution of their difficulties, but another insight into

the necessity of His Rejection and Death. They had failed to

distinguish between the coming of Elijah and its alternative sequence.

Truly 'Elias cometh first' - and Elijah had 'come already' in the

person of John the Baptist. The Divinely intended object of Elijah's

coming was to 'restore all things.' This, of course, implied a moral

element in the submission of the people to God, and their willingness

to receive his message. Otherwise there was this Divine alternative in

the prophecy of Malachi: 'Lest I come to smite the land with the ban'

(Cherem). Elijah had come; if the people had received his message,

there would have been the promised restoration of all things. As the

Lord had said on a previous occasion[3723]3723: 'If ye are willing to

receive him,[3724]3724 this is Elijah, which is to come.' Similarly,

if Israel had received the Christ, He would have gathered them as a

hen her chickens for protection; He would not only have been, but have

visibly appeared as, their King. But Israel did not know their Elijah,

and did unto him whatsoever they listed; and so, in logical sequence,

would the Son of Man also suffer of them. And thus has the other part

of Malachi's prophecy been fulfilled: and the land of Israel been

smitten with the ban.[3725]3725

Amidst such conversation the descent from the mountain was

accomplished. Presently they found themselves in view of a scene,

which only too clearly showed that unfitness of the disciples for the

heavenly vision of the preceding night, to which reference has been

made. For, amidst the divergence of details between the narratives of

St. Matthew and St. Mark, and, so far as it goes, that of St. Luke,

the one point in which they almost literally and emphatically accord

is, when the Lord speaks of them, in language of bitter disappointment

and sorrow, as a generation with whose want of faith, notwithstanding

all that they had seen and learned, He had still to bear, expressly

attributing[3726]3726 their failure in restoring the lunatick, to

their 'unbelief.'[3727]3727

It was, indeed, a terrible contrast between the scene below and that

vision of Moses and Elijah, when they had spoken of the Exodus of the

Christ, and the Divine Voice had attested the Christ from out the

luminous cloud. A concourse of excited people - among them once more

'Scribes,' who had tracked the Lord and come upon His weakest

disciples in the hour of their greatest weakness - is gathered about a

man who had in vain brought his lunatick son for healing. He is

eagerly questioned by the multitude, and moodily answers; or, as it

might almost seem from St. Matthew,[3728]3728 he is leaving the crowd

and those from whom he had vainly sought help. This was the hour of

triumph for these Scribes. The Master had refused the challenge in

Dalmanutha, and the disciples, accepting it, had signally failed.

There they were, 'questioning with them' noisily, discussing this and

all similar phenomena, but chiefly the power, authority, and reality

of the Master. It reminds us of Israel's temptation in the wilderness,

and we should scarcely wonder, if they had even questioned the return

of Jesus, as they of old did that of Moses.

At that very moment, Jesus appeared with the three. We cannot wonder

that, 'when they saw Him, they were greatly amazed,[3729]3729 and

running to Him saluted Him.'[3730]3730 He came - as always, and to us

also - unexpectedly, most opportunely, and for the real decision of

the question in hand.[3731]3731 There was immediate calm, preceding

victory. Before the Master's inquiry about the cause of this violent

discussion could be answered, the man who had been its occasion came

forward. With lowliest gesture ('kneeling to Him'[3732]3732) he

addressed Jesus. At last he had found Him, Whom he had come to seek;

and, if possibility of help there were, oh! let it be granted.

Describing the symptoms of his son's distemper, which were those of

epilepsy and mania - although both the father and Jesus rightly

attributed the disease to demoniac influence - he told, how he had

come in search of the Master, but only found the nine disciples, and

how they had presumptuously attempted, and signally failed in the

attempted cure.

Why had they failed? For the same reason, that they had not been taken

into the Mount of Transfiguration - because they were 'faithless,'

because of their 'unbelief.' They had that outward faith of the

'probatum est' ('it is proved'); they believed because, and what, they

had seen; and they were drawn closer to Christ - at least almost all

of them, though in varying measure - as to Him Who, and Who alone,

spake 'the words of eternal life,' which, with wondrous power, had

swayed their souls, or laid them to heaven's rest. But that deeper,

truer faith, which consisted in the spiritual view of that which was

the unseen in Christ, and that higher power, which flows from such

apprehension, they had not. In such faith as they had, they spake,

repeated forms of exorcism, tried to imitate their Master. But they

signally failed, as did those seven Jewish Priest-sons at Ephesus. And

it was intended that they should fail, that so to them and to us the

higher meaning of faith as contrasted with power, the inward as

contrasted with the merely outward qualification, might appear. In

that hour of crisis, in the presence of questioning Scribes and a

wondering populace, and in the absence of the Christ, only one power

could prevail, that of spiritual faith; and 'that kind' could 'not

come out but by prayer.'[3733]3733

It is this lesson, viewed also in organic connection with all that had

happened since the great temptation at Dalmanutha, which furnishes the

explanation of the whole history. For one moment we have a glimpse

into the Saviour's soul: the poignant sorrow of His disappointment at

the unbelief of the 'faithless and perverse generation,'[3734]3734

with which He had so long borne; the infinite patience and

condescension, the Divine 'need be' of His having thus to bear even

with His own, together with the deep humiliation and keen pang which

it involved; and the almost home-longing, as one has called

it,[3735]3735 of His soul. These are mysteries to adore. The next

moment Jesus turns Him to the father. At His command the lunatick is

brought to Him. In the Presence of Jesus, and in view of the coming

contest between Light and Darkness, one of those paroxysms of demoniac

operation ensues, such as we have witnessed on all similar occasions.

This was allowed to pass in view of all. But both this, and the

question as to the length of time the lunatick had been afflicted,

together with the answer, and the description of the dangers involved,

which it elicited, were evidently intended to point the lesson of the

need of a higher faith. To the father, however, who knew not the mode

of treatment by the Heavenly Physician, they seemed like the questions

of an earthly healer who must consider the symptoms before he could

attempt to cure. 'If Thou canst do anything, have compassion on us,

and help us.'

It was but natural - and yet it was the turning-point in this whole

history, alike as regarded the healing of the lunatick, the better

leading of his father, the teaching of the disciples, and that of the

multitude and the Scribes. There is all the calm majesty of Divine

self-consciousness, yet without trace of self-assertion, when Jesus,

utterly ignoring the 'if Thou canst,' turns to the man and tells him

that, while with the Divine Helper there is the possibility of all

help, it is conditioned by a possibility in ourselves, by man's

receptiveness, by his faith. Not, if the Christ can do anything or

even everything, but, 'If thou canst believe,[3736]3736 all things are

possible to him that believeth.'[3737]3737 The question is not, it can

never be, as the man had put it; it must not even be answered, but

ignored. It must ever be, not what He can, but what we can. When the

infinite fulness is poured forth, as it ever is in Christ, it is not

the oil that is stayed, but the vessels which fail. He giveth richly,

inexhaustibly, but not mechanically; there is only one condition, the

moral one of the presence of absolute faith - our receptiveness. And

so these words have to all time remained the teaching to every

individual striver in the battle of the higher life, and to the Church

as a whole - the 'in hoc signo vinces'[3738]3738 over the Cross, the

victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.

It was a lesson, of which the reality was attested by the hold which

it took on the man's whole nature. While by one great outgoing of his

soul he overleapt all, to lay hold on the one fact set before him, he

felt all the more the dark chasm of unbelief behind him, but he also

clung to that Christ, Whose teaching of faith had shown him, together

with the possibility, the source of faith. Thus through the felt

unbelief of faith he attained true faith by laying hold on the Divine

Saviour, when he cried out and said:[3739]3739 'Lord, I believe; help

Thou mine unbelief.'[3740]3740 These words have remained historic,

marking all true faith, which, even as faith, is conscious of, nay

implies, unbelief, but brings it to Christ for help. The most bold

leap of faith and the timid resting at His Feet, the first beginning

and the last ending of faith, have alike this as their watchword.

Such cry could not be, and never is, unheard. It was real demoniac

influence which, continuing with this man from childhood onwards, had

well-nigh crushed all moral individuality in him. In his many lucid

intervals these many years, since he had grown from a child into a

youth, he had never sought to shake off the yoke and regain his moral

individuality, nor would he even now have come, if his father had not

brought him. If any, this narrative shows the view which the Gospels

and Jesus took of what are described as the 'demonised.' It was a

reality, and not accommodation to Jewish views, when, as He saw 'the

multitude running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to

him: Dumb and deaf spirit, I command thee, come out of him, and no

more come into him.'

Another and a more violent paroxysm, so that the bystanders almost

thought him dead. But the unclean spirit had come out of him. And with

strong gentle Hand the Saviour lifted him, and with loving gesture

delivered him to his father.

All things had been possible to faith; not to that external belief of

the disciples, which failed to reach 'that kind,'[3741]3741 and ever

fails to reach such kind, but to true spiritual faith in Him. And so

it is to each of us individually, and to the Church, to all time.

'That kind' - whether it be of sin, of lust, of the world, or of

science falsely so called, of temptation, or of materialism - cometh

not out by any of our ready-made formulas or dead dogmas. Not so are

the flesh and the Devil vanquished; not so is the world overcome. It

cometh out by nothing but by prayer: 'Lord, I believe; help Thou mine

unbelief.' Then, although our faith were only what in popular language

was described as the smallest' - like a grain of mustard-seed' - and

the result to be achieved the greatest, most difficult, seemingly

transcending human ability to compass it - what in popular language

was designated as 'removing mountains'[3742]3742 - 'nothing shall be

impossible' unto us. And these eighteen centuries of suffering in

Christ, and deliverance through Christ, and work for Christ, have

proved it. For all things are ours, if Christ is ours.

CHAPTER III.

THE LAST EVENTS IN GALILEE - THE TRIBUTE-MONEY, THE DISPUTE BY THE

WAY, THE

FORBIDDING OF HIM WHO COULD NOT FOLLOW WITH THE DISCIPLES, AND THE

CONSEQUENT TEACHING OF CHRIST.

(St. Matt. xvii. 22, xviii. 22; St. Mark ix. 30-50; St. Luke ix.

43-50.)

Now that the Lord's retreat in the utmost borders of the land, at

Cæsarea Philippi, was known to the Scribes, and that He was again

surrounded and followed by the multitude, there could be no further

object in His retirement. Indeed, the time was coming that He should

meet that for which He had been, and was still, preparing the minds of

His disciples - His Decease at Jerusalem. Accordingly, we find Him

once more with His disciples in Galilee - not to abide

there,[3743]3743 nor to traverse it as formerly for Missionary

purposes, but preparatory to His journey to the Feast of Tabernacles.

The few events of this brief stay, and the teaching connected with it,

may be summed up as follows.

1. Prominently, perhaps, as the summary of all, we have now the clear

and emphatic repetition of the prediction of His Death and

Resurrection. While He would keep His present stay in Galilee as

private as possible,[3744]3744 He would fain so emphasize this

teaching to His disciples, that it should sink down into their ears

and memories. For it was, indeed, the most needful for them in view of

the immediate future. Yet the announcement only filled their loving

hearts with exceeding sorrow; they comprehend it not; nay, they were -

perhaps not unnaturally - afraid to ask Him about it. We remember,

that even the three who had been with Jesus on the Mount, understood

not what the rising from the dead should mean, and that, by direction

of the Master, they kept the whole Vision from their fellow-disciples;

and, thinking of it all, we scarcely wonder that, from their

standpoint, it was hid from them, so that they might not perceive it.

2. It is to the depression caused by His insistence on this terrible

future, to the constant apprehension of near danger, and the

consequent desire not to 'offend,' and so provoke those at whose

hands, Christ had told them, He was to suffer, that we trace the

incident about the tribute-money. We can scarcely believe, that Peter

would have answered as he did, without previous permission of his

Master, had it not been for such thoughts and fears. It was another

mode of saying, 'That be far from Thee' - or, rather, trying to keep

it as far as he could from Christ. Indeed, we can scarcely repress the

feeling, that there was a certain amount of secretiveness on the part

of Peter, as if he had apprehended that Jesus would not have wished

him to act as he did, and would fain have kept the whole transaction

from the knowledge of his Master.

It is well known that, on the ground of the injunction in Exod. xxx.

13 &c., every male in Israel, from twenty years upwards, was expected

annually to contribute to the Temple-Treasury the sum of one

half-shekel[3745]3745 of the Sanctuary,[3746]3746 that is, one common

shekel, or two Attic drachms,[3747]3747 equivalent to about 1s. 2d. or

1s. 3d. of our money. Whether or not the original Biblical ordinance

had been intended to institute a regular annual contribution, the Jews

of the Dispersion would probably regard it in the light of a patriotic

as well as religious act.

To the particulars previously given on this subject a few others may

be added. The family of the Chief of the Sanhedrin (Gamaliel) seems to

have enjoyed the curious distinction of bringing their contributions

to the Temple-Treasury, not like others, but to have thrown them down

before him who opened the Temple-Chest,[3748]3748 when they were

immediately placed in the box from which, without delay, sacrifices

were provided.[3749]3749 Again, the commentators explain a certain

passage in the Mishnah[3750]3750 and the Talmud[3751]3751 as implying

that, although the Jews in Palestine had to pay the tribute-money

before the Passover, those from neighbouring lands might bring it

before the Feast of Weeks, and those from such remote countries as

Babylonia and Media as late as the Feast of Tabernacles.[3752]3752

Lastly, although the Mishnah lays it down, that the goods of those

might be distrained, who had not paid the Temple-tribute by the 25th

Adar, it is scarcely credible that this obtained at the time of

Christ,[3753]3753 at any rate in Galilee. Indeed, this seems implied

in the statement of the Mishnah[3754]3754 and the Talmud,[3755]3755

that one of the 'thirteen trumpets' in the Temple, into which

contributions were cast, was destined for the shekels of the current,

and another for those of the preceding, year. Finally, these

Temple-contributions were in the first place devoted to the purchase

of all public sacrifices, that is, those which were offered in the

name of the whole congregation of Israel, such as the morning and

evening sacrifices. It will be remembered, that this was one of the

points in fierce dispute between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and that

the former perpetuated their triumph by marking its anniversary as a

festive day in their calendar. It seems a terrible irony of

judgment[3756]3756 when Vespasian ordered, after the destruction of

the Temple, that this tribute should henceforth be paid for the

rebuilding of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus.[3757]3757

It will be remembered that, shortly before the previous Passover,

Jesus with His disciples had left Capernaum,[3758]3758 That they

returned to the latter city only for the Sabbath, and that, as we have

suggested, they passed the first Paschal days on the borders of Tyre.

We have, indeed, no means of knowing where the Master had tarried

during the ten days between the 15th and the 25th Adar, supposing the

Mishnic arrangements to have been in force in Capernaum. He was

certainly not at Capernaum, and it must also have been known, that He

had not gone up to Jerusalem for the Passover. Accordingly, when it

was told in Capernaum, that the Rabbi of Nazareth had once more come

to what seems to have been His Galilean home, it was only natural,

that they who collected the Temple-tribute[3759]3759 should have

applied for its payment. It is quite possible, that their application

may have been, if not prompted, yet quickened, by the wish to involve

Him in a breach of so well-known an obligation, or else by a hostile

curiosity. Would He, Who took so strangely different views of Jewish

observances, and Who made such extraordinary claims, own the duty of

paying the Temple-tribute? Had it been owing to His absence, or from

principle, that He had not paid it last Passover-season? The question

which they put to Peter implies, at least, their doubt.

We have already seen what motives prompted the hasty reply of Peter.

He might, indeed, also otherwise, in his rashness, have given an

affirmative answer to the inquiry, without first consulting the

Master. For there seems little doubt, that Jesus had on former

occasions complied with the Jewish custom. But matters were now wholly

changed. Since the first Passover, which had marked His first public

appearance in the Temple at Jerusalem, He had stated - and quite

lately in most explicit terms - that He was the Christ, the Son of

God. To have now paid the Temple-tribute, without explanation, might

have involved a very serious misapprehension. In view of all this, the

history before us seems alike simple and natural. There is no pretext

for the artificial construction put upon it by commentators, any more

than for the suggestion, that such was the poverty of the Master and

His disciples, that the small sum requisite for the Temple-tribute had

to be miraculously supplied.

We picture it to ourselves on this wise. Those who received the

Tribute-money had come to Peter, and perhaps met him in the court or

corridor, and asked him: 'Your Teacher (Rabbi), does He not pay the

didrachma?' While Peter hastily responded in the affirmative, and then

entered into the house to procure the coin, or else to report what has

passed, Jesus, Who had been in another part of the house, but was

cognisant of all, 'anticipated him.'[3760]3760 Addressing him in

kindly language as 'Simon,' He pointed out the real state of matters

by an illustration which must, of course, not be too literally

pressed, and of which the meaning was: Whom does a King intend to tax

for the maintenance of his palace and officers? Surely not his own

family, but others. The inference from this, as regarded the

Temple-tribute, was obvious. As in all similar Jewish parabolic

teaching, it was only indicated in general principle: 'Then are the

children free.' But even so, be it as Peter had wished, although not

from the same motive. Let no needless offence be given; for,

assuredly, they would not have understood the principle on which

Christ would have refused the Tribute money,[3761]3761 and all

misunderstanding on the part of Peter was now impossible. Yet Christ

would still further vindicate His royal title. He will pay for Peter

also, and pay, as heaven's King, with a Stater, or four-drachm piece,

miraculously provided.

Thus viewed, there is, we submit, a moral purpose and spiritual

instruction in the provision of the Stater out of the fish's mouth.

The rationalistic explanation of it need not be seriously considered;

for any mythical interpretation there is not the shadow of support in

Biblical precedent or Jewish expectancy. But the narrative in its

literality has a true and high meaning. And if we wished to mark the

difference between its sober simplicity and the extravagances of

legend, we would remind ourselves, not only of the well-known story of

the Ring of Polycrates, but of two somewhat kindred Jewish Haggadahs.

They are both intended to glorify the Jewish mode of Sabbath

observance. One of them bears that one Joseph, known as 'the honourer'

of the Sabbath, had a wealthy heathen neighbour, to whom the Chaldæans

had prophesied that all his riches would come to Joseph. To render

this impossible, the wealthy man converted all his property into one

magnificent gem, which he carefully concealed within his head-gear.

Then he took ship, so as for ever to avoid the dangerous vicinity of

the Jew. But the wind blew his head-gear into the sea, and the gem was

swallowed by a fish. And lo! it was the holy season, and they brought

to the market a splendid fish. Who would purchase it but Joseph, for

none as he would prepare to honour the day by the best which he could

provide. But when they opened the fish, the gem was found in it - the

moral being: 'He that borroweth for the Sabbath, the Sabbath will

repay him.'[3762]3762

The other legend is similar. It was in Rome (in the Christian world)

that a poor tailor went to market to buy a fish for a festive

meal.[3763]3763 Only one was on sale, and for it there was keen

competition between the servant of a Prince and the Jew, the latter at

last buying it for not less than twelve dinars. At the banquet, the

Prince inquired of his servants why no fish had been provided. When he

ascertained the cause, he sent for the Jew with the threatening

inquiry, how a poor tailor could afford to pay twelve dinars for a

fish? 'My Lord,' replied the Jew, 'there is a day on which all our

sins are remitted us, and should we not honour it?' The answer

satisfied the Prince. But God rewarded the Jew, for, when the fish was

opened, a precious gem was found in it, which he sold, and ever

afterwards lived of the proceeds.[3764]3764

The reader can scarcely fail to mark the absolute difference between

even the most beautiful Jewish legends and any trait in the Evangelic

history.

3. The event next recorded in the Gospels took place partly on the way

from the Mount of Transfiguration to Capernaum, and partly in

Capernaum itself, immediately after the scene connected with the

Tribute-money. It is recorded by the three Evangelists, and it led to

explanations and admonitions, which are told by St. Mark and St. Luke,

but chiefly by St. Matthew. This circumstance seems to indicate, that

the latter was the chief actor in that which occasioned this special

teaching and warning of Christ, and that it must have sunk very deeply

into his heart.

As we look at it, in the light of the then mental and spiritual state

of the Apostles, not in that in which, perhaps naturally, we regard

them, what happened seems not difficult to understand. As St. Mark

puts it,[3765]3765 by the way they had disputed among themselves which

of them would be the greatest - as St. Matthew explains,[3766]3766 in

the Messianic Kingdom of Heaven. They might now the more confidently

expect its near Advent from the mysterious announcement of the

Resurrection on the third day,[3767]3767 which they would probably

connect with the commencement of the last Judgment, following upon the

violent Death of the Messiah. Of a dispute, serious and even violent,

among the disciples, we have evidence in the exhortation of the

Master, as reported by St. Mark,[3768]3768 in the direction of the

Lord how to deal with an offending brother, and in the answering

inquiry of Peter.[3769]3769 Nor can we be at a loss to perceive its

occasion. The distinction just bestowed on the three, in being taken

up the Mount, may have roused feelings of jealousy in the others

perhaps of self-exaltation in the three. Alike the spirit which John

displayed in his harsh prohibition of the man that did not follow with

the disciples,[3770]3770 and the self-righteous bargaining of Peter

about forgiving the supposed or real offences of a brother,[3771]3771

give evidence of anything but the frame of mind which we would have

expected after the Vision on the Mount.

In truth, most incongruous as it may appear to us, looking back on it

in the light of the Resurrection, day, nay, almost incredible -

evidently, the Apostles were still greatly under the influence of the

old spirit. It was the common Jewish view, that there would be

distinctions of rank in the Kingdom of Heaven. It can scarcely be

necessary to prove this by Rabbinic quotations, since the whole system

of Rabbinism and Pharisaism, with its separation from the vulgar and

ignorant, rests upon it. But even within the charmed circle of

Rabbinism, there would be distinctions, due to learning, merit, and

even to favouritism. In this world there were His special favourites,

who could command anything at His hand, to use the Rabbinic

illustration, like a spoilt child from its father.[3772]3772

[3773]3773 And in the Messianic age God would assign booths to each

according to his rank.[3774]3774 On the other hand, many passages

could be quoted bearingon the duty of humility and self-abasement. But

the stress laid on the merit attaching to this shows too clearly, that

it was the pride that apes humility. One instance,[3775]3775

previously referred to, will suffice by way of illustration. When the

child of the great Rabbi Jochanan ben Zakkai was dangerously ill, he

was restored through the prayer of one Chanina ben Dosa. On this the

father of the child remarked to his wife: 'If the son of Zakkai had

all day long put his head between his knees, no heed would have been

given to him.' 'How is that?' asked his wife; 'is Chanina greater than

thou?' 'No,' was the reply, 'he is like a servant before the King,

while I am like a prince before the King' (he is always there, and has

thus opportunities which I, as a lord, do not enjoy).

How deep-rooted were such thoughts and feelings, appears not only from

the dispute of the disciples by the way, but from the request

proffered by the mother of Zebedee's children and her sons at a later

period, in terrible contrast to the near Passion of our

Lord.[3776]3776 It does, indeed come upon us as a most painful

surprise, and as sadly incongruous, this constant self-obtrusion,

self-assertion, and low, carnal self-seeking; this Judaistic trifling

in face of the utter self-abnegation and self-sacrifice of the Son of

Man. Surely, the contrast between Christ and His disciples seems at

times almost as great as between Him and the other Jews. If we would

measure His Stature, or comprehend the infinite distance between His

aims and teaching and those of His contemporaries, let it be by

comparison with even the best of His disciples. It must have been part

of His humiliation and self-examination to bear with them. And is it

not, in a sense, still so as regards us all?

We have already seen, that there was quite sufficient occasion and

material for such a dispute on the way from the Mount of

Transfiguration to Capernaum. We suppose Peter to have been only at

the first with the others. To judge by the later question, how often

he was to forgive the brother who had sinned against him, he may have

been so deeply hurt, that he left the other disciples, and hastened on

with the Master, Who would, at any rate, sojourn in his house. For,

neither he nor Christ seem to have been present when John and the

others forbade the man, who would not follow with them, to cast out

demons in Christ's name. Again, the other disciples only came into

Capernaum, and entered the house, just as Peter had gone for the

Stater, with which to pay the Temple-tribute for the Master and

himself. And, if speculation be permissible, we would suggest that the

brother, whose offences Peter found it so difficult to forgive, may

have been none other than Judas. In such a dispute by the way, he,

with his Judaistic views, would be specially interested; perhaps he

may have been its chief instigator; certainly, he, whose natural

character, amidst its sharp contrasts to that of Peter, presented so

many points of resemblance to it, would, on many grounds, be specially

jealous of, and antagonistic to him.

Quite natural in view of this dispute by the way is another incident

of the journey, which is afterwards related.[3777]3777 As we judge,

John seems to have been the principal actor in it; perhaps, in the

absence of Peter, he claimed the leadership. They had met one who was

casting out demons in the Name of Christ - whether successfully or

not, we need scarcely inquire. So widely had faith in the power of

Jesus extended; so real was the belief in the subjection of the demons

to Him; so reverent was the acknowledgment of Him. A man, who, thus

forsaking the methods of Jewish exorcists, owned Jesus in the face of

the Jewish world, could not be far from the Kingdom of Heaven; at any

rate, he could not quickly speak evil of Him. John had, in name of the

disciples, forbidden him, because he had not cast in his lot wholly

with them. It was quite in the spirit of their ideas about the

Messianic Kingdom, and of their dispute, which of His close followers

would be greatest there. And yet, they might deceive themselves as to

the motives of their conduct. If it were not almost impertinence to

use such terms, we would have said that there was infinite wisdom and

kindness in the answer which the Saviour gave, when referred to on the

subject. To forbid a man, in such circumstances, would be either

prompted by the spirit of the dispute by the way - or else must be

grounded on evidence that the motive was, or the effect would

ultimately be (as in the case of the sons of Sceva) to lead men 'to

speak evil' of Christ, or to hinder the work of His disciples.

Assuredly, such could not have been the case with a man, who invoked

His Name, and perhaps experienced its efficacy. More than this - and

here is an eternal principle: 'He that is not against us is for us;'

he that opposeth not the disciples, really is for them - a saying

still more clear, when we adopt the better reading in St.

Luke,[3778]3778 'He that is not against you is for you.'[3779]3779

There was reproof in this, as well as instruction, deeply consistent

with that other, though seemingly different, saying:[3780]3780 'He

that is not with Me is against Me.' The distinction between them is

twofold. In the one case it is 'not against,' in the other it is 'not

with;' but chiefly it lies in this: in the one case it is not against

the disciples in their work, while in the other it is - not with

Christ. A man who did what he could with such knowledge of Christ as

he possessed, even although he did not absolutely follow with them,

was 'not against' them. Such an one should be regarded as thus far

with them; at least be let alone, left to Him Who knew all things.

Such a man would not lightly speak evil of Christ - and that was all

the disciples should care for, unless, indeed, they sought their own.

Quite other was it as regarded the relation of a person to the Christ

Himself. There neutrality was impossible - and that which was not with

Christ, by this very fact was against Him. The lesson is of the most

deep-reaching character, and the distinction, alas! still overlooked -

perhaps, because ours is too often the spirit of those who journeyed

to Capernaum. Not, that it is unimportant to follow with the

disciples, but that it is not ours to forbid any work done, however

imperfectly, in His Name, and that only one question is really vital -

whether or not a man is decidedly with Christ.

Such were the incidents by the way. And now, while withholding from

Christ their dispute, and, indeed, anything that might seem personal

in the question, the disciples, on entering the house where He was in

Capernaum, addressed to Him this inquiry (which should be inserted

from the opening words of St. Matthew's narrative): 'Who, then, is

greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?' It was a general question - but

Jesus perceived the thought of their hearts;[3781]3781 He knew about

what they had disputed by the way,[3782]3782 and now asked them

concerning it. The account of St. Mark is most graphic. We almost see

the scene. Conscience-stricken 'they held their peace.' As we read the

further words:[3783]3783 'And He sat down,' it seems as if the Master

had a first gone to welcome the disciples on their arrival, and they,

'full of their dispute,' had, without delay, addressed their inquiry

to him in the court or antechamber, where they met Him, when, reading

their thoughts, He had first put the searching counter-question, what

had been the subject of their dispute. Then, leading the way into the

house, 'He sat down,' not only to answer their inquiry, which was not

a real inquiry, but to teach them what so much they needed to learn.

He called a little child - perhaps Peter's little son - and put him in

the midst of them. Not to strive who was to be greatest, but to be

utterly without self-consciousness, like a child - thus, to become

turned and entirely changed in mind: 'converted,' was the condition

for entering into the Kingdom of Heaven. Then, as to the question of

greatness there, it was really one of greatness of service - and that

was greatest service which implied most self-denial. Suiting the

action to the teaching, the Blessed Saviour took the happy child in

His Arms. Not, to teach, to preach, to work miracles, nor to do great

things, but to do the humblest service for Christ's sake - lovingly,

earnestly, wholly, self-forgetfully, simply for Christ, was to receive

Christ - nay, to receive the Father. And the smallest service, as it

might seem - even the giving a cup of cold water in such spirit, would

not lose its reward. Blessed teaching this to the disciples and to us;

blessed lesson, which, these many centuries of scorching heat, has

been of unspeakable refreshing, alike to the giver and the receiver of

the cup of water in the Name of Christ, in the love of Christ, and for

the sake of Christ.[3784]3784

These words about receiving Christ, and 'receiving in the Name of

Christ,' had stirred the memory and conscience of John, and made him

half wonder, half fear, whether what they had done by the way, in

forbidding the man to do what he could in the name of Christ, had been

right. And so he told it, and received the further and higher teaching

on the subject. And, more than this, St. Mark and, more fully, St.

Matthew, record some further instruction in connection with it, to

which St. Luke refers, in a slightly different form, at a somewhat

later period.[3785]3785 But it seems so congruous to the present

occasion, that we conclude it was then spoken, although, like other

sayings,[3786]3786 it may have been afterwards repeated under similar

circumstances.[3787]3787 Certainly, no more effective continuation,

and application to Jewish minds, of the teaching of our Lord could be

conceived than that which follows. For, the love of Christ goes deeper

than the condescension of receiving a child, utterly un-Pharisaic and

un-Rabbinic as this is.[3788]3788 To have regard to the weaknesses of

such a child - to its mental and moral ignorance and folly, to adapt

ourselves to it, to restrain our fuller knowledge and forego our felt

liberty, so as not 'to offend' - not to give occasion for stumbling to

'one of these little ones,' that so through our knowledge the weak

brother for whom Christ died should not perish: this is a lesson which

reaches even deeper than the question, what is the condition of

entrance into the Kingdom, or what service constitutes real greatness

in it. A man may enter into the Kingdom and do service - yet, if in so

doing he disregard the law of love to the little ones, far better his

work should be abruptly cut short; better, one of those large

millstones, turned by an ass, were hung about his neck and he cast

into the sea! We pause to note, once more, the Judaic, and, therefore,

evidential, setting of the Evangelic narrative. The Talmud also speaks

of two kinds of millstones - the one turned by hand

({hebrew}),[3789]3789 referred to in St. Luke xvii. 35; the other

turned by an ass (m_lov _nil_v), just as the Talmud also speaks of

'the ass of the millstone' ({hebrew}).[3790]3790 Similarly, the figure

about a millstone hung round the neck occurs also in the Talmud -

although there as figurative of almost insuperable

difficulties.[3791]3791 Again, the expression, 'it were better for

him,' is a well-known Rabbinic expression (Mutabh hayah lo).[3792]3792

Lastly, according to St. Jerome, the punishment which seems alluded to

in the words of Christ, and which we know to have been inflicted by

Augustus, was actually practised by the Romans in Galilee on some of

the leaders of the insurrection under Judas of Galilee.

And yet greater guilt would only too surely be incurred! Woe unto the

world![3793]3793 Occasions of stumbling and offence will surely come,

but woe to the man through whom such havoc was wrought. What then is

the alternative? If it be a question as between offence and some part

of ourselves, a limb or member, however useful - the hand, the foot,

the eye - then let it rather be severed from the body, however

painful, or however seemingly great the loss. It cannot be so great as

that of the whole being in the eternal fire of Gehenna, where their

worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.[3794]3794 it hand, foot,

or eye - practice, pursuit, or research - which consciously leads us

to occasions of stumbling, it must be resolutely put aside in view of

the incomparably greater loss of eternal remorse and anguish.

Here St. Mark abruptly breaks off with a saying in which the Saviour

makes general application, although the narrative is further continued

by St. Matthew. The words reported by St. Mark are so remarkable, so

brief, we had almost said truncated, as to require special

consideration.[3795]3795 It seems to us that, turning from this

thought that even members which are intended for useful service may,

in certain circumstances, have to be cut off to avoid the greatest

loss, the Lord gave to His disciples this as the final summary and

explanation of all: 'For every one shall be salted for the

fire'[3796]3796 - or, as a very early gloss, which has strangely crept

into the text,[3797]3797 paraphrased and explained it, 'Every

sacrifice shall be salted with salt.'[3798]3798 No one is fit for the

sacrificial fire, no one can himself be, nor offer anything as a

sacrifice, unless it have been first, according to the Levitical Law,

covered with salt, symbolic of the incorruptible. 'Salt is good; but

if the salt,' with which the spiritual sacrifice is to be salted for

the fire, 'have lost its savour, wherewith will ye season it?' Hence,

'have salt in yourselves,' but do not let that salt be corrupted by

making it an occasion of offence to others, or among yourselves, as in

the dispute by the way, or in the disposition of mind that led to it,

or in forbidding others to work who follow not with you, but 'be at

peace among yourselves.'

To this explanation of the words of Christ it may, perhaps, be added

that, from their form, they must have conveyed a special meaning to

the disciples. It is well-known law, that every sacrifice burned on

the Altar must be salted with salt.[3799]3799 Indeed, according to the

Talmud, not only every such offering, but even the wood with which the

sacrificial fire was kindled, was sprinkled with salt.[3800]3800 Salt

symbolised to the Jews of that time the incorruptible and the higher.

Thus, the soul was compared to the salt, and it was said concerning

the dead: 'Shake off the salt, and throw the flesh to the

dogs.'[3801]3801 The Bible was compared to salt; so was acuteness of

intellect.[3802]3802 Lastly, the question: 'If the salt have lost its

savour, wherewith will ye season it?' seems to have been proverbial,

and occurs in exactly the same words in the Talmud, apparently to

denote a thing that is impossible.[3803]3803 [3804]3804

Most thoroughly anti-Pharisaic and anti-Rabbinic as all this was, what

St. Matthew further reports leads still farther in the same direction.

We seem to see Jesus still holding this child, and, with evident

reference to the Jewish contempt for that which is small, point to him

and apply, in quite other manner than they had ever heard, the

Rabbinic teaching about the Angels. In the Jewish view,[3805]3805 only

the chiefest of the Angels were before the Face of God within the

curtained Veil, or Pargod, while the others, ranged in different

classes, stood outside and awaited his behest.[3806]3806 The

distinction which the former enjoyed was always to behold His Face,

and to hear and know directly the Divine counsels and commands. This

distinction was, therefore, one of knowledge; Christ taught that it

was one of love. Not the more exalted in knowledge, and merit, or

worth, but the simpler, the more unconscious of self, the more

receptive and clinging - the nearer to God. Look up from earth to

heaven; those representative, it may be, guardian, Angels nearest to

God, are not those of deepest knowledge of God's counsel and commands,

but those of simple, humble grace and faith - and so learn, not only

not to despise one of these little ones, but who is truly greatest in

the Kingdom of Heaven!

Viewed in this light, there is nothing incongruous in the transition:

'For the Son of Man is come to save that which was lost.'[3807]3807

This, His greatest condescension when He became the Babe of Bethlehem,

is also His greatest exaltation. He Who is nearest the Father, and, in

the most special and unique sense, always beholds His Face, is He that

became a Child, and, as the Son of Man, stoops lowest, to save that

which was lost. The words are, indeed, regarded as spurious by most

critics, because certain leading manuscripts omit them, and they are

supposed to have been imported from St. Luke xix. 10. But such a

transference from a context wholly unconnected with this

section[3808]3808 seems unaccountable, while, on the other hand, the

verse in question forms, not only an apt, but almost necessary,

transition to the Parable of the Lost Sheep. It seems, therefore,

difficult to eliminate it without also striking out that Parable; and

yet it fits most beautifully into the whole context. Suffice it for

the present to note this. The Parable itself is more fully repeated in

another connection,[3809]3809 in which it will be more convenient to

consider it.

Yet a further depth of Christian love remained to be shown, which, all

self-forgetful, sought not its own, but the things of others. This

also bore on the circumstances of the time, and the dispute between

the disciples, but went far beyond it, and set forth eternal

principles. Hitherto it had been a question of not seeking self, nor

minding great things, but Christ-like and God-like, to condescend to

the little ones. What if actual wrong had been done, and just offence

given by a 'brother'?[3810]3810 In such case, also, the principle of

the Kingdom - which, negatively, is that of self-forgetfulness,

positively, that of service of love - would first seek the good of the

offending brother. We mark, here, the contrast to Rabbinism, which

directs that the first overtures must be made by the offender, not the

offended;[3811]3811 and even prescribes this to be done in the

presence of numerous witnesses, and, if needful, repeated three

times.[3812]3812 As regards the duty of showing to a brother his

fault, and the delicate tenderness of doing this in private, so as not

to put him to shame, Rabbinism speaks the same as the Master of

Nazareth.[3813]3813 In fact, according to Jewish criminal law,

punishment could not be inflicted unless the offender (even the woman

suspected of adultery) had previously been warned before witnesses.

Yet, in practice, matters were very different: and neither could those

be found who would take reproof, nor yet such as were worthy to

administer it.[3814]3814

Quite other was it in the Kingdom of Christ, where the theory was left

undefined, but the practice clearly marked. Here, by loving dealing,

to convince of his wrong, him who had done it, was not humiliation nor

loss of dignity or of right, but real gain: the gain of our brother to

us, and eventually to Christ Himself. But even if this should fail,

the offended must not desist from his service of love, but conjoin in

it others with himself so as to give weight and authority to his

remonstrances, as not being the outcome of personal feeling or

prejudice - perhaps, also, to be witnesses before the Divine tribunal.

If this failed, a final appeal should be made on the part of the

Church as a whole, which, of course, could only be done through her

representatives and rulers, to whom Divine authority had been

committed. And if that were rejected, the offer of love would, as

always in the Gospel, pass into danger of judgment. Not, indeed, that

such was to be executed by man, but that such an offender, after the

first and second admonition, was to be rejected.[3815]3815 He was to

be treated as was the custom in regard to a heathen or a publican -

not persecuted, despised, or avoided, but not received in

Church-fellowship (a heathen), nor admitted to close familiar

intercourse (a publican). And this, as we understand it, marks out the

mode of what is called Church discipline in general, and specifically

as regards wrongs done to a brother. Discipline so exercised (which

may God restore to us) has the highest Divine sanction, and the most

earnest reality attaches to it. For, in virtue of the authority which

Christ has committed to the Church in the persons of her rulers and

representatives,[3816]3816 what they bound or loosed - declared

obligatory or non-obligatory - was ratified in heaven. Nor was this to

be wondered at. The incarnation of Christ was the link which bound

earth to heaven: through it whatever was agreed upon in the fellowship

of Christ, as that which was to be asked, would be done for them of

his Father Which was in heaven.[3817]3817 Thus, the power of the

Church reached up to heaven through the power of prayer in His Name

Who made God our Father. And so, beyond the exercise of discipline and

authority, there was the omnipotence of prayer - 'if two of you shall

agree . . . as touching anything . . . it shall be done for them' -

and, with it, also the infinite possibility of a higher service of

love. For, in the smallest gathering in the Name of Christ, His

Presence would be,[3818]3818 and with it the certainty of nearness to,

and acceptance with, God.[3819]3819

It is bitterly disappointing that, after such teaching, even a Peter

could - either immediately afterwards, or perhaps after he had had

time to think it over, and apply it - come to the Master with the

question, how often he was to forgive an offending brother, imagining

that he had more than satisfied the new requirements, if he extended

it to seven times.[3820]3820 Such traits show better than elaborate

discussions the need of the mission and the renewing of the Holy

Ghost. And yet there is something touching in the simplicity and

honesty with which Peter goes to the Master with such a

misapprehension of His teaching, as if he had fully entered into its

spirit. Surely, the new wine was bursting the old bottles. It was a

principle of Rabbinism that, even if the wrongdoer had made full

restoration, he would not obtain forgiveness till he had asked it of

him whom he had wronged, but that it was cruelty in such circumstances

to refuse pardon.[3821]3821 The Jerusalem Talmud[3822]3822 adds the

beautiful remark: 'Let this be a token in thine hand - each time that

thou showest mercy, God will show mercy on thee; and if thou showest

not mercy, neither will God show mercy on thee.' And yet it was a

settled rule, that forgiveness should not be extended more than three

times.[3823]3823 Even so, the practice was terribly different. The

Talmud relates, without blame, the conduct of a Rabbi, who would not

forgive a very small slight of his dignity, though asked by the

offender for thirteen successive years, and that on the Day of

Atonement - the reason being, that the offended Rabbi had learned by a

dream that his offending brother would attain the highest dignity,

whereupon he feigned himself irreconcilable, to force the other to

migrate from Palestine to Babylon, where, unenvied by him, he might

occupy the chief place![3824]3824

And so it must have seemed to Peter, in his ignorance, quite a stretch

of charity to extend forgiveness to seven, instead of three offences.

It did not occur to him, that the very act of numbering offences

marked an externalism which had never entered into, nor comprehended

the spirit of Christ. Until seven times? Nay, until seventy times

seven![3825]3825 The evident purport of these words was to efface all

such landmarks. Peter had yet to learn, what we, alas! too often

forget: that as Christ's forgiveness, so that of the Christian, must

not be computed by numbers. It is qualitative, not quantitative:

Christ forgives sin, not sins - and he who has experienced it, follows

in His footsteps.[3826]3826

CHAPTER IV.

THE JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM - CHRONOLOGICAL ARRANGEMENT OF THE LAST

PART OF THE

GOSPEL-NARRATIVES - FIRST INCIDENTS BY THE WAY.

(St. John vii. 1-16; St. Luke ix. 1-56; 57-62; St. Matthew viii.

19-22.)

THE part in the Evangelic History which we have now reached has this

peculiarity and difficulty, that the events are now recorded by only

one of the Evangelists. The section in St. Luke's Gospel from chapter

ix. 51 to chapter xviii. 14 stands absolutely alone. From the

circumstance that St. Luke omits throughout his narrative all notation

of time or place, the difficulty of arranging here the chronological

succession of events is so great, that we can only suggest what seems

most probable, without feeling certain of the details. Happily, the

period embraced is a short one, while at the same time the narrative

of St. Luke remarkably fits into that of St. John. St. John mentions

three appearances of Christ in Jerusalem at that period: at the Feast

of Tabernacles,[3827]3827 at that of the Dedication,[3828]3828 and His

final entry, which is referred to by all the other

Evangelists.[3829]3829 But, while the narrative of St. John confines

itself exclusively to what happened in Jerusalem or its immediate

neighborhood. it also either mentions or gives sufficient indication

that on two out of these three occasions Jesus left Jerusalem for the

country east of the Jordan (St. John x. 19-21; St. John x. 39-43,

where the words in ver. 39, 'they sought again to take Him,' point to

a previous similar attempt and flight). Besides these, St. John also

records a journey to Bethany - though not to Jerusalem - for the

raising of Lazarus,[3830]3830 and after that a council against Christ

in Jerusalem, in consequence of which He withdrew out of Judæan

territory into a district near 'the wilderness'[3831]3831 - as we

infer, that in the north, where John had been baptizing and Christ

been tempted, and whither He had afterwards withdrawn.[3832]3832 We

regard this 'wilderness' as on the western bank of the Jordan, and

extending northward towards the eastern shore of the Lake of

Galilee.[3833]3833

If St. John relates three appearances of Jesus at this time in

Jerusalem, St. Luke records three journeys to Jerusalem,[3834]3834 the

last of which agrees, in regard to its starting point, with the

notices of the other Evangelists,[3835]3835 always supposing that we

have correctly indicated the locality of 'the wilderness' whither,

according to St. John xi. 54, Christ retired previous to His last

journey to Jerusalem. In this respect, although it is impossible with

our present information to localise 'the City of Ephraim,'[3836]3836

the statement that it was 'near the wilderness,' affords us sufficient

general notice of its situation. For, the New Testament speaks of only

two 'wilderness,' that of Judæa in the far South, and that in the far

North of Peræa, or perhaps in the Decapolis, to which St. Luke refers

as the scene of the Baptist's labours, where Jesus was tempted, and

whither He afterwards withdrew. We can, therefore, have little doubt

that St. John refers[3837]3837 to this district. And this entirely

accords with the notices by the other Evangelists of Christ's last

journey to Jerusalem, as through the borders of Galilee and Samaria,

and then across the Jordan, and by Bethany to Jerusalem.

It follows (as previously stated) that St. Luke's account of the three

journeys to Jerusalem fits into the narrative of Christ's three

appearances in Jerusalem as described by St. John. And the unique

section in St. Luke[3838]3838 supplies the record of what took place

before, during, and after those journeys, of which the upshot is told

by St. John. This much seems certain; the exact chronological

succession must be, in part, matter of suggestion. But we have now

some insight into the plan of St. Luke's Gospel, as compared with that

of the others. We see that St. Luke forms a kind of transition, is a

sort of connecting link between the other two Synoptists[3839]3839 and

St. John. This is admitted even by negative critics.[3840]3840 The

Gospel by St. Matthew has for its main object the Discourses or

teaching of the Lord, around which the History groups itself. It is

intended as a demonstration, primarily addressed to the Jews, and in a

form peculiarly suited to them, that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of

the Living God. The Gospel by St. Mark is a rapid survey of the

History of the Christ as such. It deals mainly with the Galilean

Ministry. The Gospel by St. John, which gives the highest, the

reflective, view of the Eternal Son as the Word, deals almost

exclusively with the Jerusalem Ministry.[3841]3841 And the Gospel by

St. Luke complements the narratives in the other two Gospels (St.

Matthew and St. Mark), and it supplements them by tracing, what is not

done otherwise: the Ministry in Peroea. Thus, it also forms a

transition to the Fourth Gospel of the Judæan Ministry. If we may

venture a step further: The Gospel by St. Mark gives the general view

of the Christ; that by St. Matthew the Jewish, that by St. Luke the

Gentile, and that by St. John the Church's view. Imagination might,

indeed, go still further, and see the impress of the number five -

that of the Pentateuch and the Book of Psalms - in the First Gospel;

the numeral four (that of the world) in the Second Gospel (4x4=16

chapters); that of three in the Third (8x3=24 chapters); and that of

seven, the sacred Church number, in the Fourth Gospel (7x3=21

chapters). And perhaps we might even succeed in arranging the Gospels

into corresponding sections. But this would lead, not only beyond our

present task, but from solid history and exegesis into the regions of

speculation.[3842]3842

The subject, then, primarily before us, is the journeying of Jesus to

Jerusalem. In that wider view which St. Luke takes of this whole

history, he presents what really were three separate journeys as one -

that towards the great end. In its conscious aim and object, all -

from the moment of His finally quitting Galilee to His final Entry

into Jerusalem - formed, in the highest sense, only one journey And

this St. Luke designates in a peculiar manner. Just as[3843]3843 he

had spoken, not of Christ's Death but of His 'Exodus,' or outgoing,

which included His Resurrection and Ascension, so he now tells us

that, 'when the days of His uptaking' - including and pointing to His

Ascension[3844]3844 - 'were being fulfilled, He also[3845]3845

steadfastly set[3846]3846 His Face to go to Jerusalem.'

St. John, indeed, goes farther back, and speaks of the circumstances

which preceded His journey to Jerusalem. There is an interval, or, as

we might term it, a blank, of more than half a year between the last

narrative in the Fourth Gospel and this. For, the events chronicled in

the sixth chapter of St. John's Gospel took place immediately before

the Passover,[3847]3847 which was on the fifteenth day of the first

ecclesiastical month (Nisan), while the Feast of Tabernacle[3848]3848

began on the same day of the seventh ecclesiastical month (Tishri).

But, except in regard to the commencement of Christ's Ministry, that

sixth chapter is the only one in the Gospel of St. John which refers

to the Galilean Ministry of Christ. We would suggest, that what it

records is partly intended[3849]3849 to exhibit, by the side of

Christ's fully developed teaching, the fully developed enmity of the

Jerusalem Scribes, which led even to the defection of many former

disciples. Thus, chapter vi. would be a connecting-link (both as

regards the teaching of Christ and the opposition to Him) between

chapter v., which tells of His visit at the 'Unknown Feast,' and

chapter vii., which records that at the Feast of Tabernacles. The six

or seven months between the Feast of Passover[3850]3850 and that of

Tabernacles,[3851]3851 and all that passed within them, are covered by

this brief remark: 'After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for He

would not walk in Judæa, because the Jews [the leaders of the

people[3852]3852] sought to kill Him.'

But now the Feast of Tabernacles was at hand. The pilgrims would

probably arrive in Jerusalem before the opening day of the Festival.

For, besides the needful preparations - which would require time,

especially on this Feast, when booths had to be constructed in which

to live during the festive week - it was (as we remember) the common

practice to offer such sacrifices as might have previously become due

at any of the great Feasts to which the people might go up.[3853]3853

Remembering that five months had elapsed since the last great Feast

(that of Weeks), many such sacrifices must have been due. Accordingly,

the ordinary festive companies of pilgrims, which would travel slowly,

must have started from Galilee some time before the beginning of the

Feast. These circumstances fully explain the details of the narrative.

They also afford another most painful illustration of the loneliness

of Christ in His Work. His disciples had failed to understand, they

misapprehended His teaching. In the near prospect of His Death they

either displayed gross ignorance, or else disputed about their future

rank. And His own 'brethren' did not believe in Him. The whole course

of late events, especially the unmet challenge of the Scribes for 'a

sign from heaven,' had deeply shaken them. What was the purpose of

'works,' if done in the privacy of the circle of Christ's Apostles, in

a house, a remote district, or even before an ignorant multitude? If,

claiming to be the Messiah, He wished to be openly[3854]3854 known as

such, He must use other means. If He really did these things, let Him

manifest Himself before the world - in Jerusalem, the capital of their

world, and before those who could test the reality of His Works. Let

Him come forward, at one of Israel's great Feasts, in the Temple, and

especially at this Feast which pointed to the Messianic ingathering of

all nations. Let Him now go up with them in the festive company into

Judæa, that so His disciples - not the Galileans only - but all, might

have the opportunity of 'gazing'[3855]3855 on His Works.[3856]3856

As the challenge was not new,[3857]3857 so, from the worldly point of

view, it can scarcely be called unreasonable. It is, in fact, the same

in principle as that to which the world would now submit the claims of

Christianity to men's acceptance. It has only this one fault, that it

ignores the world's enmity to the Christ. Discipleship is not the

result of any outward manifestation by 'evidences' or demonstration.

It requires the conversion of a child-like spirit. To manifest

Himself! This truly would He do, though not in their way. For this

'the season'[3858]3858 had not yet come, though it would soon arrive.

Their 'season' - that for such Messianic manifestations as they

contemplated - was 'always ready.' And this naturally, for 'the world'

could not 'hate' them; they and their demonstrations were quite in

accordance with the world and its views. But towards Him the world

cherished personal hatred, because of their contrariety of principle,

because Christ was manifested, not to restore an earthly kingdom to

Israel, but to bring the Heavenly Kingdom upon earth - 'to destroy the

works of the Devil.' Hence, He must provoke the enmity of that world

which lay in the Wicked One. Another manifestation than that which

they sought would He make, when His 'season was fulfilled;' soon,

beginning at this very Feast, continued at the next, and completed at

the last Passover; such manifestation of Himself as the Christ, as

could alone be made in view of the essential enmity of the world.

And so He let them go up in the festive company, while Himself

tarried. When the noise and publicity (which He wished to avoid) were

no longer to be apprehended, He also went up, but privately,[3859]3859

not publicly, as they had suggested. Here St. Luke's account begins.

It almost reads like a commentary on what the Lord had just said to

His brethren, about the enmity of the world, and His mode of

manifestation - who would not, and who would receive Him, and why. 'He

came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as

received Him, to them gave He power to become children of God . . .

which were born . . . of God.'

The first purpose of Christ seems to have been to take the more direct

road to Jerusalem, through Samaria, and not to follow that of the

festive pilgrim-bands, which travelled to Jerusalem through Peræa, in

order to avoid the band of their hated rivals. But His intention was

soon frustrated. In the very first Samaritan village to which the

Christ had sent beforehand to prepare for Himself and His

company,[3860]3860 His messengers were told that the Rabbi could not

be received; that neither hospitality nor friendly treatment could be

extended to One Who was going up to the Feast at Jerusalem. The

messengers who brought back this strangely un-Oriental answer met the

Master and His followers on the road. It was not only an outrage on

common manners, but an act of open hostility to Israel, as well as to

Christ, and the 'Sons of Thunder,' whose feelings for their Master

were, perhaps, the more deeply stirred as opposition to Him grew more

fierce, proposed to vindicate the cause, alike of Israel and its

Messiah-King, by the open and Divine judgment of fire called down from

heaven to destroy that village. Did they in this connection think of

the vision of Elijah, ministering to Christ on the Mount of

Transfiguration - and was this their application of it? Truly, they

knew not of what Spirit they were to be the children and messengers.

He Who had come, not to destroy, but to save, turned and rebuked them,

and passed from Samaritan into Jewish territory to pursue His

journey.[3861]3861 Perhaps, indeed, He had only passed into Samaria to

teach His disciples this needful lesson. The view of this event just

presented seems confirmed by the circumstance, that St. Matthew lays

the scene immediately following 'on the other side' - that is, in the

Decapolis.[3862]3862

It was a journey of deepest interest and importance. For, it was

decisive not only as regarded the Master, but those who followed Him.

Henceforth it must not be, as in former times, but wholly and

exclusively, as into suffering and death. It is thus that we view the

next three incidents of the way. Two of them find, also, a place in

the Gospel by St. Matthew,[3863]3863 although in a different

connection, in accordance with the plan of that Gospel, which groups

together the Teaching of Christ, with but secondary attention to

chronological succession.

It seems that, as, after the rebuff of these Samaritans, they 'were

going' towards another, and a Jewish village, 'one'[3864]3864 of the

company, and, as we learn from St. Matthew, 'a Scribe,' in the

generous enthusiasm of the moment - perhaps, stimulated by the wrong

of the Samaritans, perhaps, touched by the love which would rebuke the

zeal of the disciples, but had no word of blame for the unkindness of

others - broke into a spontaneous declaration of readiness to follow

Him absolutely and everywhere. Like the benediction of the woman who

heard Him,[3865]3865 it was one of these outbursts of an enthusiasm

which His Presence awakened in every susceptible heart. But there was

one eventuality which that Scribe, and all of like enthusiasm,

reckoned not with - the utter homelessness of the Christ in this world

- and this, not from accidental circumstances, but because He was 'the

Son of Man.'[3866]3866 And there is here also material for still

deeper thought in the fact that this man was 'a Scribe,' and yet had

not gone up to the Feast, but tarried near Christ - was 'one' of those

that followed Him now, and was capable of such feelings![3867]3867 How

many whom we regard as Scribes, may be in analogous relation to the

Christ, and yet how much of fair promise has failed to ripen into

reality in view of the homelessness of Christ and Christianity in this

world - the stranger ship of suffering which it involves to those who

would follow, not somewhere, but absolutely, and everywhere?

The intenseness of the self-denial involved in following Christ, and

its contrariety to all that was commonly received among men, was,

purposely, immediately further brought out. This Scribe had proffered

to follow Jesus. Another of his disciples He asked to follow Him, and

that in circumstances of peculiar trail and difficulty.[3868]3868 The

expression 'to follow' a Teacher would, in those days be universally

understood as implying discipleship. Again, no other duty would be

regarded as more sacred than that they, on whom the obligation

naturally devolved, should bury the dead. To this everything must give

way - even prayer, and the study of the Law.[3869]3869 Lastly, we feel

morally certain, that, when Christ called this disciple to follow Him,

He was fully aware that at that very moment his father lay dead. Thus,

He called him not only to homelessness - for this he might have been

prepared - but to set aside what alike natural feeling and the Jewish

Law seemed to impose on him as the most sacred duty. In the seemingly

strange reply, which Christ made to the request to be allowed first to

bury his father, we pass over the consideration that, according to

Jewish law, the burial and mourning for a dead father, and the

subsequent purifications, would have occupied many days, so that it

might have been difficult, perhaps impossible, to overtake Christ. We

would rather abide by the simple words of Christ. They teach us this

very solemn and searching lesson, that there are higher duties than

either those of the Jewish Law, or even of natural reverence, and a

higher call than that of man. No doubt Christ had here in view the

near call to the Seventy - of whom this disciple was to be one - to

'go and preach the Kingdom of God.' When the direct call of Christ to

any work comes - that is, if we are sure of it from His own words, and

not (as, alas! too often we do) only infer it by our own reasoning on

His words - then every other call must give way. For, duties can never

be in conflict - and this duty about the living and life must take

precedence of that about death and the dead. Nor must we hesitate,

because we know not in what form this work for Christ may come. There

are critical moments in our inner history, when to postpone the

immediate call, is really to reject it; when to go and bury the dead -

even though it were a dead father - were to die ourselves!

Yet another hindrance to following Christ was to be faced. Another in

the company that followed Christ would go with Him, but he asked

permission first to go and bid farewell to those whom he had left in

his home. It almost seems as if this request had been one of those

'tempting' questions, addressed to Christ. But, even if otherwise, the

farewell proposed was not like that of Elisha, nor like the supper of

Levi-Matthew. It was rather like the year which Jephtha's daughter

would have with her companions, ere fulfilling the vow. It shows, that

to follow Christ was regarded as a duty, and to leave those in the

earthly home as a trial; and it betokens, not merely a divided heart,

but one not fit for the Kingdom of God. For, how can he draw a

straight furrow in which to cast the seed, who, as he puts his hand to

the plough, looks around or behind him?

Thus, these are the three vital conditions of following Christ:

absolute self-denial and homelessness in the world; immediate and

entire self-surrender to Christ and His Work, and a heart and

affections simple, undivided, and set on Christ and His Work, to which

there is no other trial of parting like that which would involve

parting from Him, no other or higher joy than that of following Him.

In such spirit let them now go after Christ in His last journey - and

to such work as He will appoint them!

CHAPTER V.

FURTHER INCIDENTS OF THE JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM - THE MISSION AND

RETURN OF

THE SEVENTY - THE HOME AT BETHANY - MARTHA AND MARY

(St. Luke x. 1-16; Matt. ix. 36-38; xi. 20-24; St. Luke x. 17-24; St.

Matt. xi. 25-30 ; xiii. 16 ; St. Luke x. 25 ; 38-42.)

ALTHOUGH, for the reasons explained in the previous chapter, the exact

succession of events cannot be absolutely determined, it seems most

likely, that it was on His progress southwards at this time that Jesus

'designated'[3870]3870 those 'seventy'[3871]3871 'others,' who were to

herald His arrival in every town and village. Even the circumstance,

that the instructions to them are so similar to, and yet distinct

from, those formerly given to the Twelve, seems to point to them as

those from whom the Seventy are to be distinguished as 'other.' We

judge, that they were sent forth at this time, first, from the Gospel

of St. Luke, where this whole section appears as a distinct and

separate record, presumably, chronologically arranged; secondly, from

the fitness of such a mission at that particular period, when Jesus

made His last Missionary progress towards Jerusalem; and, thirdly,

from the unlikelihood, if not impossibility, of taking such a public

step after the persecution which broke out after His appearance at

Jerusalem on the Feast of Tabernacles. At any rate, it could not have

taken place later than in the period between the Feast of Tabernacles

and that of the Dedication of the Temple, since, after that, Jesus

'walked no more openly among the Jews.'[3872]3872

With all their similarity, there are notable differences between the

Mission of the Twelve and this of 'the other Seventy.' Let it be

noted, that the former is recorded by the three Evangelists, so that

there could have been no confusion on the part of St. Luke.[3873]3873

But the mission of the Twelve was on their appointment to the

Apostolate; it was evangelistic and missionary; and it was in

confirmation and manifestation of the 'power and authority' given to

them. We regard it, therefore, as symbolical of the Apostolate just

instituted, with its work and authority. On the other hand, no power

or authority was formally conferred on the Seventy, their mission

being only temporary, and, indeed, for one definite purpose; its

primary object was to prepare for the coming of the Master in the

places to which they were sent; and their selection was from the wider

circle of disciples, the number being now Seventy instead of Twelve.

Even these two numbers, as well as the difference in the functions of

the two classes of messengers, seem to indicate that the Twelve

symbolised the princes of the tribes of Israel, while the Seventy were

the symbolical representatives of these tribes, like the seventy

elders appointed to assist Moses.[3874]3874 [3875]3875 This symbolical

meaning of the number Seventy continued among the Jews. We can trace

it in the LXX. (supposed) translators of the Bible into Greek, and in

the seventy members of the Sanhedrin, or supreme court.[3876]3876

There was something very significant in this appearance of Christ's

messengers, by two and two, in every place He was about to visit. As

John the Baptist had, at the first, heralded the Coming of Christ, so

now two heralds appeared to solemnly announce His Advent at the close

of His Ministry; as John had sought, as the representative of the Old

Testament Church, to prepare His Way, so they, as the representatives

of the New Testament Church. In both cases the preparation sought was

a moral one. It was the national summons to open the gates to the

rightful King, and accept His rule. Only, the need was now the greater

for the failure of John's mission, through the misunderstanding and

disbelief of the nation.[3877]3877 This conjunction with John the

Baptist and the failure of his mission, as regarded national results,

accounts for the insertion in St. Matthew's Gospel of part of the

address delivered on the Mission of the Seventy, immediately after the

record of Christ's rebuke of the national rejection of the

Baptist.[3878]3878 For St. Matthew, who (as well as St. Mark) records

not the Mission of the Seventy - simply because (as before explained)

the whole section, of which it forms part, is peculiar to St. Luke's

Gospel - reports 'the Discourses' connected with it in other, and to

them congruous, connections.

We mark, that, what may be termed 'the Preface' to the Mission of the

Seventy, is given by St. Matthew (in a somewhat fuller form) as that

to the appointment and mission of the Twelve Apostles;[3879]3879 and

it may have been, that kindred words had preceded both. Partially,

indeed, the expressions reported in St. Luke x. 2 had been employed

long before.[3880]3880 Those 'multitudes' throughout Israel - nay,

those also which 'are not of that flock' - appeared to His view like

sheep without a true shepherd's care, 'distressed and

prostrate,'[3881]3881 and their mute misery and only partly conscious

longing appealed, and not in vain, to His Divine compassion. This

constituted the ultimate ground of the Mission of the Apostles, and

now of the Seventy, into a harvest that was truly great. Compared with

the extent of the field, and the urgency of the work, how few were the

labourers! Yet, as the field was God's, so also could He alone 'thrust

forth labourers' willing and able to do His work, while it must be

ours to pray that He would be pleased to do so.

On these introductory words,[3882]3882 which ever since have formed

'the bidding prayer' of the Church in her work for Christ, followed

the commission and special directions to the thirty-five pairs of

disciples who went on this embassy. In almost every particular they

are the same as those formerly given to the Twelve.[3883]3883 We mark,

however, that both the introductory and the concluding words addressed

to the Apostles are wanting in what was said to the Seventy. It was

not necessary to warn them against going to the Samaritans, since the

direction of the Seventy was to those cities of Peræa and Judæa, on

the road to Jerusalem, through which Christ was about to pass. Nor

were they armed with precisely the same supernatural powers as the

Twelve.[3884]3884 Naturally, the personal directions as to their

conduct were in both cases substantially the same. We mark only three

peculiarities in those addressed to the Seventy. The direction to

'salute no man by the way' was suitable to a temporary and rapid

mission, which might have been sadly interrupted by making or renewing

acquaintances. Both the Mishnah[3885]3885 and the Talmud[3886]3886 lay

it down, that prayer was not to be interrupted to salute even a king,

nay, to uncoil a serpent that had wound round the foot.[3887]3887 On

the other hand, the Rabbis discussed the question, whether the reading

of the Shema and of the portion of the Psalms called the Hallel might

be interrupted at the close of a paragraph, from respect for a person,

or interrupted in the middle, from motives of fear.[3888]3888 All

agreed, that immediately before prayer no one should be saluted, to

prevent distraction, and it was advised rather to summarise or to cut

short than to break into prayer, though the latter might be admissible

in case of absolute necessity.[3889]3889 None of these provisions,

however, seems to have been in the mind of Christ. If any parallel is

to be sought, it would be found in the similar direction of Elisha to

Gehazi, when sent to lay the prophet's staff on the dead child of the

Shunammite.

The other two peculiarities in the address to the Seventy seem verbal

rather than real. The expression,[3890]3890 'if the Son of Peace be

there,' is a Hebraism, equivalent to 'if the house be

worthy,'[3891]3891 and refers to the character of the head of the

house and the tone of the household.[3892]3892 Lastly, the direction

to eat and drink such things as were set before them[3893]3893 is only

a further explanation of the command to abide in the house which had

received them, without seeking for better entertainment.[3894]3894 On

the other hand, the whole most important close of the address to the

Twelve - which, indeed, forms by far the largest part of it[3895]3895

- is wanting in the commission to the Seventy, thus clearly marking

its merely temporary character.

In St. Luke's Gospel, the address to the Seventy is followed by a

denunciation of Chorazin and Bethsaida.[3896]3896 This is evidently in

its right place there, after the Ministry of Christ in Galilee had

been completed and finally rejected. In St. Matthew's Gospel, it

stands (for a reason already indicated) immediately after the Lord's

rebuke of the popular rejection of the Baptist's message.[3897]3897

The 'woe' pronounced on those cities, in which 'most of His mighty

works were done,' is in proportion to the greatness of their

privileges. The denunciation of Chorazin and Bethsaida is the more

remarkable, that Chorazin is not otherwise mentioned in the Gospels,

nor yet any miracles recorded as having taken place in (the western)

Bethsaida. From this two inferences seem inevitable. First, this

history must be real. If the whole were legendary, Jesus would not be

represented as selecting the names of places, which the writer had not

connected with the legend. Again, apparently no record has been

preserved in the Gospels of most of Christ's miracles - only those

being narrated which were necessary in order to present Jesus as the

Christ, in accordance with the respective plans on which each of the

Gospels was constructed.[3898]3898

As already stated, the denunciations were in proportion to the

privileges, and hence to the guilt, of the unbelieving cities.

Chorazin and Bethsaida are compared with Tyre and Sidon, which under

similar admonitions would have repented,[3899]3899 while Capernaum,

which, as for so long the home of Jesus, had truly 'been exalted to

heaven,'[3900]3900 is compared with Sodom. And such guilt involved

greater punishment. The very site of Bethsaida and Chorazin cannot be

fixed with certainty. The former probably represents the 'Fisherton'

of Capernaum,[3901]3901 the latter seems to have almost disappeared

from the shore of the Lake. St. Jerome places it two miles from

Capernaum. If so, it may be represented by the modern Kerâzeh,

somewhat to the north-west of Capernaum. The site would correspond

with the name. For Kerâzeh is at present 'a spring with an

insignificant ruin above it,'[3902]3902 and the name Chorazin may well

be derived from Keroz ({hebrew}) a water-jar - Cherozin, or

'Chorazin,' the water-jars. If so, we can readily understand that the

'Fisherton' on the south side of Capernaum, and the well-known

springs, 'Chorazin,' on the other side of it, may have been the

frequent scene of Christ's miracles. This explains also, in part, why

the miracles there wrought had not been told as well as those done in

Capernaum itself. In the Talmud a Chorazin, or rather Chorzim, is

mentioned as celebrated for its wheat.[3903]3903 But as for Capernaum

itself - standing on that vast field of ruins and upturned stones

which marks the site of the modern Tell Hûm, we feel that no

description of it could be more pictorially true than that in which

Christ prophetically likened the city in its downfall to the

desolateness of death and 'Hades.'

Whether or not the Seventy actually returned to Jesus before the Feast

of Tabernacles,[3904]3904 it is convenient to consider in this

connection the result of their Mission. It had filled them with the

'joy' of assurance; nay, the result had exceeded their expectations,

just as their faith had gone beyond the mere letter unto the spirit of

His Words. As they reported it to Him, even the demons had been

subject to them through His Name. In this they had exceeded the letter

of Christ's commission; but as they made experiment of it, their faith

had grown, and they had applied His command to 'heal the sick' to the

worst of all sufferers, those grievously vexed by demons. And, as

always, their faith was not disappointed. Nor could it be otherwise.

The great contest had been long decided; it only remained for the

faith of the Church to gather the fruits of that victory. The Prince

of Light and Life had vanquished the Prince of Darkness and Death. The

Prince of this world must be cast out.[3905]3905 In spirit, Christ

gazed on 'Satan fallen as lightning from heaven.' As one has aptly

paraphrased it:[3906]3906 'While you cast out his subjects, I saw the

prince himself fall.' It has been asked, whether the words of Christ

referred to any particular event, such as His Victory in the

Temptation.[3907]3907 But any such limitation would imply grievous

misunderstanding of the whole. So to speak, the fall of Satan is to

the bottomless pit; ever going on to the final triumph of Christ. As

the Lord beholds him, he is fallen from heaven - from the seat of

power and of worship; for, his mastery is broken by the Stronger than

he. And he is fallen like lightning, in its rapidity, dazzling

splendour, and destructiveness.[3908]3908 Yet as we perceive it, it is

only demons cast out in His Name. For still is this fight and sight

continued, and to all ages of the present dispensation. Each time the

faith of the Church casts out demons - whether as formerly, or as they

presently vex men, whether in the lighter combat about possession of

the body, or in the sorer fight about possession of the soul - as

Christ beholds it, it is ever Satan fallen. For, he sees of the

travail of His soul, and is satisfied. And so also is there joy in

heaven over every sinner that repenteth.

The authority and power over 'the demons,' attained by faith, was not

to pass away with the occasion that had called it forth. The Seventy

were the representatives of the Church in her work of preparing for

the Advent of Christ. As already indicated, the sight of Satan fallen

from heaven is the continuous history of the Church. What the faith of

the Seventy had attained was now to be made permanent to the Church,

whose representatives they were. For, the words in which Christ now

gave authority and power to tread on[3909]3909 serpents and scorpions,

and over all the power of the Enemy, and the promise that nothing

should hurt them, could not have been addressed to the Seventy for a

Mission which had now come to an end, except in so far as they

represented the Church Universal. It is almost needless to add, that

those 'serpents and scorpions' are not to be literally but

symbolically understood.[3910]3910 [3911]3911 Yet it is not this power

or authority which is to be the main joy either of the Church or the

individual, but[3912]3912 the fact that our names are written in

heaven.[3913]3913 And so Christ brings us back to His great teaching

about the need of becoming children, and wherein lies the secret of

true greatness in the Kingdom.

It is beautifully in the spirit of all this, when we read that the joy

of the disciples was met by that of the Master, and that His teaching

presently merged into a prayer of thanksgiving. Throughout the

occurrences since the Transfiguration, we have noticed an increasing

antithesis to the teaching of the Rabbis. But it almost reached its

climax in the thanksgiving, that the Father in heaven had hid these

things from the wise and the understanding, and revealed them unto

babes. As we view it in the light of those times, we know that 'the

wise and understanding' - the Rabbi and the Scribe - could not, from

their standpoint, have perceived them; nay, that it is matter of

never-ending thanks that, not what they, but what 'the babes,'

understood, was - as alone it could be - the subject of the Heavenly

Father's revelation. We even tremble to think how it would have fared

with 'the babes,' if 'the wise and understanding' had had part with

them in the knowledge revealed. And so it must ever be, not only the

Law of the kingdom and the fundamental principle of Divine Revelation,

but matter for thanksgiving, that, not as 'wise and understanding,'

but only as 'babes' - as 'converted,' 'like children' - we can share

in that knowledge which maketh wise unto salvation. And this truly is

the Gospel, and the Father's good pleasure.[3914]3914

The words,[3915]3915 with which Christ turned from this Address to the

Seventy and thanksgiving to God, seem almost like the Father's answer

to the prayer of the Son. They refer to, and explain, the authority

which Jesus had bestowed on His Church: 'All things were

delivered[3916]3916 to Me of My Father;' and they afford the highest

rationale for the fact, that these things had been hid from the wise

and revealed unto babes. For, as no man, only the Father, could have

full knowledge of the Son, and, conversely, no man, only the Son, had

true knowledge of the Father, it followed, that this knowledge came to

us, not of Wisdom or learning, but only through the Revelation of

Christ: 'No one knoweth Who the Son is, save the Father; and Who the

Father is, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to

reveal Him.'

St. Matthew, who also records this - although in a different

connection, immediately after the denunciation of the unbelief of

Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum - concludes this section by words

which have ever since been the grand text of those who following in

the wake of the Seventy, have been ambassadors for Christ.[3917]3917

On the other hand, St. Luke concludes this part of his narrative by

adducing words equally congruous to the occasion,[3918]3918 which,

indeed, are not new in the mouth of the Lord.[3919]3919 From their

suitableness to what had preceded, we can have little doubt that both

that which St. Matthew, and that which St. Luke, reports was spoken on

this occasion. Because knowledge of the Father came only through the

Son, and because these things were hidden from the wise and revealed

to 'babes,' did the gracious Lord open His Arms so wide, and bid

all[3920]3920 that laboured and were heavy laden come to HIM. These

were the sheep, distressed and prostrate, whom to gather, that He

might give them rest, He had sent forth the Seventy on a work, for

which He had prayed the Father to thrust forth labourers, and which He

has since entrusted to the faith and service of love of the Church.

And the true wisdom, which qualified for the Kingdom, was to take up

His yoke, which would be found easy, and a lightsome burden, not like

that unbearable yoke of Rabbinic conditions;[3921]3921 and the true

understanding to be sought, was by learning of Him. In that wisdom of

entering the Kingdom by taking up its yoke, and in that knowledge

which came by learning of Him, Christ was Himself alike the true

lesson and the best Teacher for those 'babes.' For He is meek and

lowly in heart. He had done what He taught, and He taught what He had

done; and so, by coming unto Him, would true rest be found for the

soul.

These words, as recorded by St. Matthew - the Evangelist of the Jews -

must have sunk the deeper into the hearts of Christ's Jewish hearers,

that they came in their own old familiar form of speech, yet with such

contrast of spirit. One of the most common figurative expressions of

the time was that of 'the yoke' ({hebrew}), to indicate submission to

an occupation or obligation. Thus, we read not only of the 'yoke of

the Law,' but of that to 'earthly governments,' and ordinary 'civil

obligations.'[3922]3922 Very instructive for the understanding of the

figure is this paraphrase of Cant. i. 10: 'How beautiful is their neck

for bearing the yoke of Thy statues; and it shall be upon them like

the yoke on the neck of the ox that plougheth in the field, and

provideth food for himself and his master.'[3923]3923 [3924]3924 This

yoke might be 'cast off,' as the ten tribes had cast off that 'of

God,' and thus brought on themselves their exile.[3925]3925 On the

other hand, to 'take upon oneself the yoke' ({hebrew}) meant to submit

to it of free choice and deliberate resolution. Thus, in the

allegorism of the Midrash, in the inscription, Prov. xxx. 1,

concerning 'Agur, the son of Jakeh' - which is viewed as a symbolical

designation of Solomon - the word 'Massa,' rendered in the Authorized

Version 'prophecy,' is thus explained in reference to Solomon: 'Massa,

because he lifted on himself (Nasa) the yoke of the Holy One, blessed

be He.'[3926]3926 And of Isaiah it was said, that he had been

privileged to prophesy of so many blessings, 'because he had taken

upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven with joy.'[3927]3927

[3928]3928 And, as previously stated, it was set forth that in the

'Shema,' or Creed - which was repeated every day - the words, Deut.

vi. 4-9, were recited before those in xi. 13-21, so as first generally

to 'take upon ourselves the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, and only

afterwards that of the commandments.'[3929]3929 [3930]3930 And this

yoke all Israel had taken upon itself, thereby gaining the merit ever

afterwards imputed to them.

Yet, practically, 'the yoke of the Kingdom' was none other than that

'of the Law' and 'of the commandments;' one of laborious performances

and of impossible self-righteousness. It was 'unbearable,' not 'the

easy' and lightsome yoke of Christ, in which the Kingdom of God was of

faith, not of works. And, as if themselves to bear witness to this, we

have this saying of theirs, terribly significant in this connection:

'Not like those formerly (the first), who made for themselves the yoke

of the Law easy and light; but like those after them (those

afterwards), who made the yoke of the Law upon them heavy!'[3931]3931

And, indeed, this voluntary making of the yoke as heavy as possible,

the taking on themselves as many obligations as possible, was the

ideal of Rabbinic piety. There was, therefore, peculiar teaching and

comfort in the words of Christ; and well might He add, as St. Luke

reports,[3932]3932 that blessed were they who saw and heard these

things.[3933]3933 For, that Messianic Kingdom, which had been the

object of rapt vision and earnest longing to prophets and kings of old

had now become reality.[3934]3934

Abounding as this history is in contrasts, it seems not unlikely, that

the scene next recorded by St. Luke[3935]3935 stands in its right

place. Such an inquiry on the part of a 'certain lawyer,' as to what

he should do to inherit eternal life, together with Christ's Parabolic

teaching about the Good Samaritan, is evidently congruous to the

previous teaching of Christ about entering into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Possibly, this Scribe may have understood the words of the Master

about these things being hid from the wise, and the need of taking up

the yoke of the Kingdom, as enforcing the views of those Rabbinic

teachers, who laid more stress upon good works than upon study.

Perhaps himself belonged to that minority, although his question was

intended to tempt - to try whether the Master would stand the Rabbinic

test, alike morally and dialectically. And, without at present

entering on the Parable which gives Christ's final answer (and which

will best be considered together with the others belonging to that

period), it will be seen how peculiarly suited it was to the state of

mind just supposed.

From this interruption, which, but for the teaching of Christ

connected with it, would have formed a terrible discord in the

heavenly harmony of this journey, we turn to a far other scene. It

follows in the course of St. Luke's narrative, and we have no reason

to consider it out of its proper place. If so, it must mark the close

of Christ's journey to the Feast of Tabernacles, since the home of

Martha and Mary, to which it introduces us, was in Bethany, close to

Jerusalem, almost one of its suburbs. Other indications, confirmatory

of this note of time, are not wanting. Thus, the history which follows

that of the home of Bethany, when one of His disciples asks Him to

teach them to pray, as the Baptist had similarly taught his followers,

seems to indicate, that they were then on the scene of John's former

labours - north-east of Bethany; and, hence, that it occurred on

Christ's return from Jerusalem. Again, from the narrative of Christ's

reception in the house of Martha, we gather that Jesus had arrived in

Bethany with His disciples, but that He alone was the guest of the two

sisters.[3936]3936 We infer that Christ had dismissed His disciples to

go into the neighbouring City for the Feast, while Himself tarried in

Bethany. Lastly, with all this agrees the notice in St. John vii. 14,

that it was not at the beginning, but 'about the midst of the feast,'

that 'Jesus went up into the Temple.' Although travelling on the two

first festive days was not actually unlawful, yet we can scarcely

conceive that Jesus would have done so - especially on the Feast of

Tabernacles; and the inference is obvious, that Jesus had tarried in

the immediate neighbourhood, as we know He did at Bethany in the house

of Martha and Mary.[3937]3937

Other things, also, do so explain themselves - notably, the absence of

the brother of Martha and Mary, who probably spent the festive days in

the City itself. It was the beginning of the Feast of Tabernacles, and

the scene recorded by St. Luke[3938]3938 would take place in the open

leafy booth which served as the sitting apartment during the festive

week. For, according to law, it was duty during the festive week to

eat, sleep, pray, study - in short, to live - in these booths, which

were to be constructed of the boughs of living trees.[3939]3939 And,

although this was not absolutely obligatory on women,[3940]3940 yet,

the rule which bade all make 'the booth the principal, and the house

only the secondary dwelling,'[3941]3941 would induce them to make this

leafy tent at least the sitting apartment alike for men and women.

And, indeed, those autumn days were just the season when it would be

joy to sit in these delightful cool retreats - the memorials of

Israel's pilgrim-days! They were high enough, and yet not too high;

chiefly open in front; close enough to be shady, and yet not so close

as to exclude sunlight and air. Such would be the apartment in which

what is recorded passed; and, if we add that this booth stood probably

in the court, we can picture to ourselves Martha moving forwards and

backwards on her busy errands, and seeing, as she passed again and

again, Mary still sitting a rapt listener, not heeding what passed

around; and, lastly, how the elder sister could, as the language of

verse 40 implies, enter so suddenly the Master's Presence, bringing

her complaint.

To understand this history, we must dismiss from our minds

preconceived, though, perhaps, attractive thoughts. There is no

evidence that the household of Bethany had previously belonged to the

circle of Christ's professed disciples. It was, as the whole history

shows, a wealthy home. It consisted of two sisters - the elder, Martha

(a not uncommon Jewish name,[3942]3942 being the feminine of

Mar,[3943]3943 and equivalent to our word 'mistress'); the younger,

Mary; and their brother Lazarus, or, Laazar.[3944]3944 Although we

know not how it came, yet, evidently, the house was Martha's, and into

it she received Jesus on His arrival in Bethany. It would have been no

uncommon occurrence in Israel for a pious, wealthy lady to receive a

great Rabbi into her house. But the present was not an ordinary case.

Martha must have heard of Him, even if she had not seen Him. But,

indeed, the whole narrative implies,[3945]3945 that Jesus had come to

Bethany with the view of accepting the hospitality of Martha, which

probably had been proffered when some of those 'Seventy,' sojourning

in the worthiest house at Bethany, had announced the near arrival of

the Master. Still, her bearing affords only indication of being drawn

towards Christ - at most, of a sincere desire to learn the good news,

not of actual discipleship.

And so Jesus came - and, with Him and in Him, Heaven's own Light and

Peace. He was to lodge in one of the booths, the sisters in the house,

and the great booth in the middle of the courtyard would be the common

living apartment of all. It could not have been long after His arrival

- it must have been almost immediately, that the sisters felt they had

received more than an Angel unawares. How best to do Him honour, was

equally the thought of both. To Martha it seemed, as if she could not

do enough in showing Him all hospitality. And, indeed, this festive

season was a busy time for the mistress of a wealthy household,

especially in the near neighbourhood of Jerusalem, whence her brother

might, after the first two festive days, bring with him, any time that

week, honoured guests from the City. To these cares was now added that

of doing sufficient honour to such a Guest - for she, also, deeply

felt His greatness. And so she hurried to and fro through the

courtyard, literally, 'distracted[3946]3946 about much serving.'

Her younger sister, also, would do Him all highest honour; but, not as

Martha. Her homage consisted in forgetting all else but Him, Who spake

as none had ever done. As truest courtesy or affection consists, nor

in its demonstrations, but in being so absorbed in the object of it as

to forget its demonstration, so with Mary in the Presence of Christ.

And then a new Light, another Day had risen upon her; a fresh life had

sprung up within her soul: 'She sat at the Lord's Feet,[3947]3947 and

heard his Word.' We dare not inquire, and yet we well know, of what it

would be. And so, time after time - perhaps, hour after hour - as

Martha passed on her busy way, she still sat listening and living. At

last, the sister who, in her impatience, could not think that a woman

could, in such manner, fulfill her duty, or show forth her religious

profiting, broke in with what sounds like a querulous complaint:

'Lord, dost Thou not care that my sister did leave me to serve alone?'

Mary had served with her, but she had now left her to do the work

alone. Would the Master bid her resume her neglected work? But, with

tone of gentle reproof and admonition, the affectionateness of which

appeared even in the repetition of her name, Martha, Martha - as,

similarly, on a later occasion, Simon, Simon - did He teach her in

words which, however simple in their primary meaning, are so full,

that they have ever since borne the most many-sided application: 'Thou

art careful and anxious about many things; but one thing is

needful;[3948]3948 and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall

not be taken away from her.'

It was, as we imagine, perhaps the first day of, or else the

preparation for, the Feast. More than that one day did Jesus tarry in

the home of Bethany. Whether Lazarus came then to see Him - and, still

more, what both Martha and Mary learned, either then, or afterwards,

we reverently forbear to search into. Suffice it, that though the

natural disposition of the sisters remained what it had been, yet

henceforth, 'Jesus loved Martha and her sister.'

CHAPTER VI.

AT THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES - FIRST DISCOURSE IN THE TEMPLE

(St. John vii. 11-36.)

IT was Chol ha Moed - as the non-sacred part of the festive week, the

half-holy days were called.[3949]3949 Jerusalem, the City of

Solemnities, the City of Palaces, the City of beauty and glory, wore

quite another than its usual aspect; other, even, than when its

streets were thronged by festive pilgrims during the Passover-week, or

at Pentecost. For this was pre-eminently the Feast for foreign

pilgrims, coming from the farthest distance, whose

Temple-contributions were then received and counted.[3950]3950 Despite

the strange costumes of Media, Arabia, Persia, or India, and even

further; or the Western speech and bearing of the pilgrims from Italy,

Spain, the modern Crimea, and the banks of the Danube, if not from yet

more strange and barbarous lands, it would not be difficult to

recognise the lineaments of the Jew, nor to perceive that to change

one's clime was not to change one's mind. As the Jerusalemite would

look with proud self-consciousness, not unmingled with kindly

patronage, on the swarthy strangers, yet fellow-countrymen, or the

eager-eyed Galilean curiously stare after them, the pilgrims would, in

turn, gaze with mingled awe and wonderment on the novel scene. Here

was the realisation of their fondest dreams ever since childhood, the

home and spring of their holiest thoughts and best hopes - that which

gave inward victory to the vanquished, and converted persecution into

anticipated triumph.

They could come at this season of the year - not during the winter for

the Passover, nor yet quite so readily in summer's heat for Pentecost.

But now, in the delicious cool of early autumn, when all

harvest-operations, the gathering in of luscious fruit and the vintage

were past, and the first streaks of gold were tinting the foliage,

strangers from afar off, and countrymen from Judæa, Peræa, and

Galilee, would mingle in the streets of Jerusalem, under the

ever-present shadow of that glorious Sanctuary of marble, cedarwood,

and gold, up there on high Moriah, symbol of the infinitely more

glorious overshadowing Presence of Him, Who was the Holy One in the

midst of Israel. How all day long, even till the stars lit up the deep

blue canopy over head, the smoke of the burning, smouldering

sacrifices rose in slowly-widening column, and hung between the Mount

of Olives and Zion; how the chant of Levites, and the solemn responses

of the Hallel were borne on the breeze, or the clear blast of the

Priests silver trumpets seemed to waken the echoes far away! And then,

at night, how all these vast Temple-buildings stood out, illuminated

by the great Candelabras that burned in the Court of the Women, and by

the glare of torches, when strange sound of mystic hymns and dances

came floating over the intervening darkness! Truly, well might Israel

designate the Feast of Tabernacles as 'the Feast' (haChag), and the

Jewish historian describe it as 'the holiest and greatest.'[3951]3951

[3952]3952

Early on the 14th Tishri (corresponding to our September or early

October), all the festive pilgrims had arrived. Then it was, indeed, a

scene of bustle and activity. Hospitality had to be sought and found;

guests to be welcomed and entertained; all things required for the

feast to be got ready. Above all, booths must be erected everywhere -

in court and on housetop, in street and square, for the lodgment and

entertainment of that vast multitude; leafy dwellings everywhere, to

remind of the wilderness-journey, and now of the goodly land. Only

that fierce castle, Antonia, which frowned above the Temple, was

undecked by the festive spring into which the land had burst. To the

Jew it must have been a hateful sight, that castle, which guarded and

dominated his own City and Temple - hateful sight and sounds, that

Roman garrison, with its foreign, heathen, ribald speech and manners.

Yet, for all this, Israel could not read on the lowering sky the signs

of the times, nor yet knew the day of their merciful visitation. And

this, although of all festivals, that of Tabernacles should have most

clearly pointed them to the future.

Indeed, the whole symbolism of the Feast, beginning with the completed

harvest, for which it was a thanksgiving, pointed to the future. The

Rabbis themselves admitted this. The strange number of sacrificial

bullocks - seventy in all - they regarded as referring to 'the seventy

nations' of heathendom.[3953]3953 The ceremony of the outpouring of

water, which was considered of such vital importance as to give to the

whole festival the name of 'House of Outpouring,'[3954]3954 was

symbolical of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.[3955]3955 As the

brief night of the great Temple-illumination closed, there was solemn

testimony made before Jehovah against heathenism. It must have been a

stirring scene, when from out of the mass of Levites, with their

musical instruments, who crowded the fifteen steps that led from the

Court of Israel to that of the Women, stepped two priests with their

silver trumpets. As the first cockcrowing intimated the dawn of morn,

they blew a threefold blast; another on the tenth step, and yet

another threefold blast as they entered the Court of the Women. And

still sounding their trumpets, they marched through the Court of the

Women to the Beautiful Gate. Here, turning round and facing westwards

to the Holy Place, they repeated: 'Our fathers, who were in this

place, they turned their backs on the Sanctuary of Jehovah, and their

faces eastward, for they worshipped eastward, the sun; but we, our

eyes are towards Jehovah.' 'We are Jehovah's - our eyes are towards

Jehovah.'[3956]3956 [3957]3957 Nay, the whole of this night- and

morning-scene was symbolical: the Temple-illumination, of the light

which was to shine from out the Temple into the dark night of

heathendom; then, at the first dawn of morn the blast of the priests'

silver trumpets, of the army of God, as it advanced, with festive

trumpet-sound and call, to awaken the sleepers, marching on to quite

the utmost bounds of the Sanctuary, to the Beautiful Gate, which

opened upon the Court of the Gentiles - and, then again, facing round

to utter solemn protest against heathenism, and make solemn confession

of Jehovah!

But Jesus did not appear in the Temple during the first two festive

days. The pilgrims from all parts of the country - perhaps, they from

abroad also - had expected Him there, for everyone would now speak of

Him - 'not openly,' in Jerusalem, for they were afraid of their

rulers. It was hardly safe to speak of Him without reserve. But they

sought Him, and inquired after Him - and they did speak of Him, though

there was only a murmuring - a low, confused discussion of the pro and

con, in this great controversy among the 'multitudes,'[3958]3958 or

festive bands from various parts. Some said: He is a good man, while

others declared that He only led astray the common, ignorant populace.

And now, all at once, in Chol ha Moed,[3959]3959 Jesus Himself

appeared in the Temple, and taught. We know that, on a later

occasion,[3960]3960 He walked and taught in 'Solomon's Porch,' and,

from the circumstance that the early disciples made this their common

meeting-place,[3961]3961 we may draw the inference that it was here

the people now found Him. Although neither Josephus nor the Mishnah

mention this 'Porch' by name,[3962]3962 we have every reason for

believing that it was the eastern colonnade, which abutted against the

Mount of Olives and faced 'the Beautiful Gate,' that formed the

principal entrance into the 'Court of the Women,' and so into the

Sanctuary. For, all along the inside of the great wall which formed

the Temple-enclosure ran a double colonnade - each column a monolith

of white marble, 25 cubits high, covered with cedar-beams. That on the

south side (leading from the western entrance to Solomon's Porch),

known as the 'Royal Porch,' was a threefold colonnade, consisting of

four rows of columns, each 27 cubits high, and surmounted by

Corinthian capitals. We infer that the eastern was 'Solomon's Porch,'

from the circumstance that it was the only relic left of Solomon's

Temple.[3963]3963 These colonnades, which, from their ample space,

formed alike places for quiet walk and for larger gatherings, had

benches in them - and, from the liberty of speaking and teaching in

Israel, Jesus might here address the people in the very face of His

enemies.

We know not what was the subject of Christ's teaching on this

occasion. But the effect on the people was one of general

astonishment. They knew what common unlettered Galilean tradesmen were

- but this, whence came it?[3964]3964 'How does this one know

literature (letters, learning),[3965]3965 never having learned?' To

the Jews there was only one kind of learning - that of Theology; and

only one road to it - the Schools of the Rabbis. Their major was true,

but their minor false - and Jesus hastened to correct it. He had,

indeed, 'learned,' but in a School quite other than those which alone

they recognised. Yet, on their own showing, it claimed the most

absolute submission. Among the Jews a Rabbi's teaching derived

authority from the fact of its accordance with tradition - that it

accurately represented what had been received from a previous great

teacher, and so on upwards to Moses, and to God Himself. On this

ground Christ claimed the highest authority. His doctrine was not His

own invention - it was the teaching of Him that sent Him. The doctrine

was God-received, and Christ was sent direct from God to bring it. He

was God's messenger of it to them.[3966]3966 Of this twofold claim

there was also twofold evidence. Did He assert that what He taught was

God-received? Let trial be made of it. Everyone who in his soul felt

drawn towards God; each one who really 'willeth to do His Will,' would

know 'concerning this teaching, whether it is of God,' or whether it

was of man.[3967]3967 It was this felt, though unrealised influence

which had drawn all men after Him, so that they hung on His lips. It

was this which, in the hour of greatest temptation and mental

difficulty, had led Peter, in name of the others, to end the sore

inner contest by laying hold on this fact: 'To whom shall we go? Thou

hast the words of eternal life - and we have believed and know, that

Thou art the Holy One of God.'[3968]3968 Marking, as we pass, that

this inward connection between that teaching and learning and the

present occasion, may be the deeper reason why, in the Gospel by St.

John, the one narrative is immediately followed by the other, we pause

to say, how real it hath proved in all ages and to all stages of

Christian learning - that the heart makes the truly God-taught

('pectus facit Theologum'), and that inward, true aspiration after the

Divine prepares the eye to behold the Divine Reality in the Christ.

But, if it be so is there not evidence here, that He is the God-sent -

that He is a real, true Ambassador of God? If Jesus' teaching meets

and satisfies our moral nature, if it leads up to God, is He not the

Christ?

And this brings us to the second claim which Christ made, that of

being sent by God. There is yet another logical link in His reasoning.

He had said: 'He shall know of the teaching, whether it be of God, or

whether I speak from Myself.' From Myself? Why, there is this other

test of it: 'Who speaketh from himself, seeketh his own glory' - there

can be no doubt or question of this, but do I seek My own glory? -

'But He Who seeketh the glory of Him Who sent Him, He is true (a

faithful messenger), and unrighteousness is not in Him.'[3969]3969

Thus did Christ appeal and prove it: My doctrine is of God, and I am

sent of God!

Sent of God, no unrighteousness in Him! And yet at that very moment

there hung over Him the charge of defiance of the Law of Moses, nay,

of that of God, in an open breach of the Sabbath-commandment - there,

in that very City, the last time He had been in Jerusalem; for which,

as well as for His Divine claims, the Jews were even then seeking 'to

kill Him.'[3970]3970 And this forms the transition to what may be

called the second part of Christ's address. If, in the first part, the

Jewish form of ratiocination was already apparent, it seems almost

impossible for any one acquainted with those forms to understand how

it can be overlooked in what follows.[3971]3971 It is exactly the mode

in which a Jew would argue with Jews, only the substance of the

reasoning is to all times and people. Christ is defending Himself

against a charge which naturally came up, when He claimed that His

Teaching was of God and Himself God's real and faithful Messenger. In

His reply the two threads of the former argument are taken up. Doing

is the condition of knowledge - and a messenger had been sent from

God! Admittedly, Moses was such, and yet every one of them was

breaking the Law which he had given them; for, were they not seeking

to kill Him without right or justice? This, put in the form of a

double question,[3972]3972 represents a peculiarly Jewish mode of

argumentation, behind which lay the terrible truth, that those, whose

hearts were so little longing to do the Will of God, not only must

remain ignorant of His Teaching as that of God, but had also rejected

that of Moses.

A general disclaimer, a cry 'Thou hast a demon' (art possessed), 'who

seeks to kill Thee?' here broke in upon the Speaker. But He would not

be interrupted, and continued: 'One work I did, and all you wonder on

account of it'[3973]3973 - referring to His healing on the Sabbath,

and their utter inability to understand His conduct. Well, then, Moses

was a messenger of God, and I am sent of God. Moses gave the law of

circumcision - not, indeed, that it was of his authority, but had long

before been God-given - and, to observe this law, no one hesitated to

break the Sabbath,[3974]3974 since, according to Rabbinic principle, a

positive ordinance superseded a negative. And yet, when Christ, as

sent from God, made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath ('made a

whole man sound') they were angry with Him![3975]3975 Every argument

which might have been urged in favour of the postponement of Christ's

healing to a week-day, would equally apply to that of circumcision;

while every reason that could be urged in favour of

Sabbath-circumcision, would tell an hundredfold in favour of the act

of Christ. Oh, then, let them not judge after the mere outward

appearance, but 'judge the right judgment.' And, indeed, had it not

been to convince them of the externalism of their views, that Jesus

had on that Sabbath opened the great controversy between the letter

that killeth and the spirit that maketh alive, when He directed the

impotent man to carry home the bed on which he had lain?

If any doubt could obtain, how truly Jesus had gauged the existing

state of things, when He contrasted heart-willingness to do the Will

of God, as the necessary preparation for the reception of His God-sent

Teaching, with their murderous designs, springing from blind

literalism and ignorance of the spirit of their Law, the reported

remarks of some Jerusalemites in the crowd would suffice to convince

us.[3976]3976 The fact that He, Whom they sought to kill, was suffered

to speak openly, seemed to them incomprehensible. Could it be that the

authorities were shaken in their former idea about Him, and now

regarded Him as the Messiah? But it could not be.[3977]3977 It was a

settled popular belief, and, in a sense, not quite unfounded, that the

appearance of the Messiah would be sudden and unexpected. He might be

there, and not be known; or He might come, and be again hidden for a

time.[3978]3978 [3979]3979 As they put it, when Messiah came, no one

would know whence He was; but they all knew 'whence this One' was. And

with this rough and ready argument of a coarse realism, they, like so

many among us, settled off-hand and once for all the great question.

But Jesus could not, even for the sake of His poor weak disciples, let

it rest there. 'Therefore' He lifted up His voice,[3980]3980 that it

reached the dispersing, receding multitude. Yes, they thought they

knew both Him and whence He came. It would have been so had He come

from Himself. But He had been sent, and He that sent Him 'was

real;'[3981]3981 it was a real Mission, and Him, who had thus sent the

Christ, they knew not. And so, with a reaffirmation of His twofold

claim, His Discourse closed.[3982]3982 But they had understood His

allusions, and in their anger would fain have laid hands on Him, but

His hour had not come. Yet others were deeply stirred to faith. As

they parted they spoke of it among themselves, and the sum of it all

was: 'The Christ, when He cometh, will He do more miracles (signs)

than this One did?'

So ended the first teaching of that day in the Temple. And as the

people dispersed, the leaders of the Pharisees - who, no doubt aware

of the presence of Christ in the Temple, yet unwilling to be in the

number of His hearers, had watched the effect of His Teaching -

overheard the low, furtive, half-outspoken remarks ('the murmuring')

of the people about Him. Presently they conferred with the heads of

the priesthood and the chief Temple-officials.[3983]3983 Although

there was neither meeting, nor decree of the Sanhedrin about it, nor,

indeed, could be,[3984]3984 orders were given to the Temple-guard on

the first possible occasion to seize Him. Jesus was aware of it, and

as, either on this or another day, He was moving in the Temple,

watched by the spies of the rulers and followed by a mingled crowd of

disciples and enemies, deep sadness in view of the end filled His

heart. 'Jesus therefore said' - no doubt to His disciples, though in

the hearing of all - 'yet a little while am I with you, then I go

away[3985]3985 to Him that sent Me. Ye shall seek Me, and not find Me;

and where I am, thither ye cannot come.'[3986]3986 Mournful words,

these, which were only too soon to become true. But those who heard

them naturally failed to comprehend their meaning. Was He about to

leave Palestine, and go to the Diaspora of the Greeks, among the

dispersed who lived in heathen lands, to teach the Greeks? Or what

could be His meaning? But we, who hear it across these centuries, feel

as if their question, like the suggestion of the High-Priest at a

later period, nay like so many suggestions of men, had been, all

unconsciously, prophetic of the future.

CHAPTER VII.

IN THE LAST, THE GREAT DAY OF THE FEAST'

(St. John vii. 37 - viii. 11.)

IT was 'the last, the great day of the Feast,' and Jesus was once more

in the Temple. We can scarcely doubt that it was the concluding day of

the Feast, and not, as most modern writers suppose, its Octave, which,

in Rabbinic language, was regarded as 'a festival by

itself.'[3987]3987 [3988]3988 But such solemn interest attaches to the

Feast, and this occurrence on its last day, that we must try to

realise the scene. We have here the only Old Testament type yet

unfilfilled; the only Jewish festival which has no counterpart in the

cycle of the Christian year,[3989]3989 just because it points forward

to that great, yet unfulfilled hope of the Church: the ingathering of

Earth's nations to the Christ.

The celebration of the Feast corresponded to its great meaning. Not

only did all the priestly families minister during that week, but it

has been calculated that not fewer than 446 Priests, with, of course,

a corresponding number of Levites, were required for its sacrificial

worship. In general, the services were the same every day, except that

the number of bullocks offered decreased daily from thirteen on the

first, to seven on the seventh day. Only during the first two, and on

the last festive day (as also on the Octave of the Feast), was strict

Sabbatic rest enjoined. On the intervening half-holidays (Chol

haMoed), although no new labour was to be undertaken, unless in the

public service, the ordinary and necessary avocations of the home and

of life were carried on, and especially all done that was required for

the festive season. But 'the last, the Great Day of the Feast,' was

marked by special observances.

Let us suppose ourselves in the number of worshippers, who on 'the

last, the Great Day of the Feast,' are leaving their 'booths' at

daybreak to take part in the service. The pilgrims are all in festive

array. In his right hand each carries what is called the

Lulabh,[3990]3990 which, although properly meaning 'a branch,' or

'palm-branch,' consisted of a myrtle and willow-branch tied together

with a palm-branch between them. This was supposed to be in fulfilment

of the command, Lev. xxiii. 40. 'The fruit (A.V. 'boughs') of the

goodly trees,' mentioned in the same verse of Scripture, was supposed

to be the Ethrog, the so-called Paradise-apple (according to Ber. R.

15, the fruit of the forbidden tree), a species of citron.[3991]3991

This Ethrog each worshipper carries in his left hand. It is scarcely

necessary to add, that this interpretation of Lev. xxiii. 40 was given

by the Rabbis;[3992]3992 perhaps more interesting to know, that this

was one of the points in controversy between the Pharisees and

Sadducees.

Thus armed with Lulabh in their right, and Ethrog in their left hands,

the festive multitude would divide into three bands. Some would remain

in the Temple to attend the preparation of the Morning Sacrifice.

Another band would go in procession 'below Jerusalem'[3993]3993 to a

place called Moza, the 'Kolonia' of the Jerusalem Talmud,[3994]3994

which some have sought to identify with the Emmaus of the

Resurrection-Evening.[3995]3995 At Moza they cut down willow-branches,

with which, amidst the blasts of the Priests' trumpets, they adorned

the altar, forming a leafy canopy about it. Yet a third company were

taking part in a still more interesting service. To the sound of music

a procession started from the Temple. It followed a Priest who bore a

golden pitcher, capable of holding three log.[3996]3996 Onwards it

passed, probably, through Ophel, which recent investigations have

shown to have been covered with buildings to the very verge of Siloam,

down the edge of the Tyropoeon Valley, where it merges into that of

the Kedron. To this day terraces mark where the gardens, watered by

the living spring, extended from the King's Gardens by the spring

Rogel down to the entrance into the Tyropoeon. Here was the so-called

'Fountain-Gate,' and still within the City-wall 'the Pool of Siloam,'

the overflow of which fed a lower pool. As already stated it was at

the merging of the Tyropoeon into the Kedron Valley, in the

south-eastern angle of Jerusalem. The Pool of Siloam was fed by the

living spring farther up in the narrowest part of the Kedron Valley,

which presently bears the name of 'the Virgin's Fountain,' but

represents the ancient En-Rogel and Gihon. Indeed, the very canal

which led from the one to the other, with the inscription of the

workmen upon it, has lately been excavated.[3997]3997 Though chiefly

of historical interest, a sentence may be added. The Pool of Siloam is

the same as 'the King's Pool' of Neh. ii. 14.[3998]3998 It was made by

King Hezekiah, in order both to divert from a besieging army the

spring of Gihon, which could not be brought within the City-wall, and

yet to bring its waters within the City.[3999]3999 This explains the

origin of the name Siloam, 'sent' - a conduit[4000]4000 - or

'Siloah,' as Josephus calls it. Lastly, we remember that it was down

in the valley at Gihon (or En-Rogel), that Solomon was

proclaimed,[4001]4001 while the opposite faction held revel, and would

have made Adonijah king, on the cliff Zoheleth (the modern Zahweileh)

right over against it, not a hundred yards distant,[4002]4002 where

they must, of course, have distinctly heard the sound of the trumpets

and the shouts of the people as Solomon was proclaimed king.[4003]4003

But to return. When the Temple-procession had reached the Pool of

Siloam, the Priest filled his golden pitcher from its

waters.[4004]4004 Then they went back to the Temple, so timing it,

that they should arrive just as they were laying the pieces of the

sacrifice on the great Altar of Burnt-offering,[4005]4005 towards the

close of the ordinary Morning-Sacrifice service. A threefold blast of

the Priests' trumpets welcomed the arrival of the Priest, as he

entered through the 'Water-gate,'[4006]4006 which obtained its name

from this ceremony, and passed straight into the Court of the Priests.

Here he was joined by another Priest, who carried the wine for the

drink-offering. The two Priests ascended 'the rise' of the altar, and

turned to the left. There were two silver funnels here, with narrow

openings, leading down to the base of the altar. Into that at the

east, which was somewhat wider, the wine was poured, and, at the same

time, the water into the western and narrower opening, the people

shouting to the Priest to raise his hand, so as to make sure that he

poured the water into the funnel. For, although it was held, that the

water-pouring was an ordinance instituted by Moses, 'a Halakhah of

Moses from Sinai,'[4007]4007 this was another of the points disputed

by the Sadducees.[4008]4008 And, indeed, to give practical effect to

their views, the High-Priest Alexander Jannæus had on one occasion

poured the water on the ground, when he was nearly murdered, and in

the riot, that ensued, six thousand persons were killed in the

Temple.[4009]4009

Immediately after 'the pouring of water,' the great 'Hallel,'

consisting of Psalms cxiii. to cxviii. (inclusive), was chanted

antiphonally, or rather, with responses, to the accompaniment of the

flute. As the Levites intoned the first line of each Psalm, the people

repeated it; while to each of the other lines they responded by

Hallelu Yah ('Praise ye the Lord'). But in Psalm cxviii. the people

not only repeated the first line, 'O give thanks to the Lord,' but

also these, 'O then, work now salvation, Jehovah,'[4010]4010 'O Lord,

send now prosperity;'[4011]4011 and again, at the close of the Psalm,

'O give thanks to the Lord.' As they repeated these lines, they shook

towards the altar the Lulabh which they held in their hands - as if

with this token of the past to express the reality and cause of their

praise, and to remind God of His promises. It is this moment which

should be chiefly kept in view.

The festive morning-service was followed by the offering of the

special sacrifices for the day, with their drink-offerings, and by the

Psalm for the day, which, on 'the last, the Great Day of the Feast,'

was Psalm lxxxii. from verse 5.[4012]4012 [4013]4013 The Psalm was, of

course, chanted, as always, to instrumental accompaniment, and at the

end of each of its three sections the Priests blew a threefold blast,

while the people bowed down in worship. In further symbolism of this

Feast, as pointing to the ingathering of the heathen nations, the

public services closed with a procession round the Altar by the

Priests, who chanted 'O then, work now salvation, Jehovah! O Jehovah,

send now prosperity.'[4014]4014 But on 'the last, the Great Day of the

Feast,' this procession of Priests made the circuit of the altar, not

only once, but seven times, as if they were again compassing, but now

with prayer, the Gentile Jericho which barred their possession of the

promised land. Hence the seventh or last day of the Feast was also

called that of 'the Great Hosannah.' As the people left the Temple,

they saluted the altar with words of thanks,[4015]4015 and on the last

day of the Feast they shook off the leaves on the willow-branches

round the altar, and beat their palm-branches to pieces.[4016]4016 On

the same afternoon the 'booths' were dismantled, and the Feast

ended.[4017]4017

We can have little difficulty in determining at what part of the

services of 'the last, the Great Day of the Feast,' Jesus stood and

cried, 'If any one thirst, let Him come unto Me and drink!' It must

have been with special reference to the ceremony of the outpouring of

the water, which, as we have seen, was considered the central part of

the service.[4018]4018 Moreover, all would understand that His words

must refer to the Holy Spirit, since the rite was universally regarded

as symbolical of His outpouring. The forthpouring of the water was

immediately followed by the chanting of the Hallel. But after that

there must have been a short pause to prepare for the festive

sacrifices (the Musaph). It was then, immediately after the symbolic

rite of water-pouring, immediately after the people had responded by

repeating those lines from Psalm cxviii. - given thanks, and prayed

that Jehovah would send salvation and prosperity, and had shaken their

Lulabh towards the altar, thus praising 'with heart, and mouth, and

hands,' and then silence had fallen upon them - that there rose, so

loud as to be heard throughout the Temple, the Voice of Jesus. He

interrupted not the services, for they had for the moment ceased: He

interpreted, and He fulfilled them.

Whether we realise it in connection with the deeply-stirring rites

just concluded, and the song of praise that had scarcely died out of

the air; or think of it as a vast step in advance in the history of

Christ's Manifestation, the scene is equally wondrous. But yesterday

they had been divided about Him, and the authorities had given

directions to take Him; to-day He is not only in the Temple, but, at

the close of the most solemn rites of the Feast, asserting, within the

hearing of all, His claim to be regarded as the fulfilment of all, and

the true Messiah! And yet there is neither harshness of command nor

violence of threat in His proclamation. It is the King, meek, gentle,

and loving; the Messiah, Who will not break the bruised reed, Who will

not lift up His Voice in tone of anger, but speak in accents of

loving, condescending compassion, Who now bids, whosoever thirsteth,

come unto Him and drink. And so the words have to all time remained

the call of Christ to all that thirst, whence- or what-soever their

need and longing of soul may be. But, as we listen to these words as

originally spoken, we feel how they mark that Christ's hour was indeed

coming: the preparation past; the manifestation in the present,

unmistakable, urgent, and loving; and the final conflict at hand.

Of those who had heard Him, none but must have understood that, if the

invitation were indeed real, and Christ the fulfilment of all, then

the promise also had its deepest meaning, that he who believed on Him

would not only receive the promised fulness of the Spirit, but give it

forth to the fertilising of the barren waste around. It was, truly,

the fulfilment of the Scripture-promise, not of one but of all: that

in Messianic times the Nabhi, 'prophet,' literally the weller forth,

viz., of the Divine, should not be one or another select individual,

but that He would pour out on all His handmaidens and servants of His

Holy Spirit, and thus the moral wilderness of this world be changed

into a fruitful garden. Indeed, this is expressly stated in the Targum

which thus paraphrases Is. xliv. 3: 'Behold, as the waters are poured

on arid ground and spread over the dry soil, so will I give the Spirit

of My Holiness on they sons, and My blessing on thy children's

children.' What was new to them was, that all this was treasured up in

the Christ, that out of His fulness men might receive, and grace for

grace. And yet even this was not quite new. For, was it not the

fulfilment of that old prophetic cry: 'The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah

is upon Me: therefore has He Messiahed (anointed) Me to preach good

tidings unto the poor'? So then, it was nothing new, only the happy

fulfilment of the old, when He thus 'spake of the Holy Spirit, which

they who believed on Him should receive,' not then, but upon His

Messianic exaltation.

And so we scarcely wonder that many, on hearing Him, said, though not

with that heart-conviction which would have led to self-surrender,

that He was the Prophet promised of old, even the Christ, while

others, by their side, regarding Him as a Galilean, the Son of Joseph,

raised the ignorant objection that He could not be the Messiah, since

the latter must be of the seed of David and come from Bethlehm. Nay,

such was the anger of some against what they regarded a dangerous

seducer of the poor people, that they would fain have laid violent

hands on Him. But amidst all this, the strongest testimony to His

Person and Mission remains to be told. It came, as so often, from a

quarter whence it could least have been expected. Those

Temple-officers, whom the authorities had commissioned to watch an

opportunity for seizing Jesus, came back without having done their

behest, and that, when, manifestly, the scene in the Temple might have

offered the desired ground for His imprisonment. To the question of

the Pharisees, they could only give this reply, which has ever since

remained unquestionable fact of history, admitted alike by friend and

foe: 'Never man so spake as this man.'[4019]4019 For, as all spiritual

longing and all upward tending, not only of men but even of systems,

consciously or unconsciously tends towards Christ,[4020]4020 so can we

measure and judge all systems by this, which no sober student of

history will gainsay, that no man or system ever so spake.

It was not this which the Pharisees now gainsaid, but rather the

obvious, and, we may add, logical, inference from it. The scene which

followed is so thoroughly Jewish, that it alone would suffice to prove

the Jewish, and hence Johannine, authorship of the Fourth Gospel. The

harsh sneer: 'Are ye also led astray?' is succeeded by pointing to the

authority of the learned and great, who with one accord were rejecting

Jesus. 'But this people' - the country-people (Am ha-arez), the

ignorant, unlettered rabble - 'are cursed.' Sufficient has been shown

in previous parts of this book to explain alike the Pharisaic claim of

authority and their almost unutterable contempt of the unlettered. So

far did the latter go, that it would refuse, not only all family

connection and friendly intercourse,[4021]4021 but even the bread of

charity, to the unlettered;[4022]4022 nay, that, in theory at least,

it would have regarded their murder as no sin,[4023]4023 and even cut

them off from the hope of the Resurrection.[4024]4024 [4025]4025 But

is it not true, that, even in our days, this double sneer, rather than

argument, of the Pharisees is the main reason of the disbelief of so

many: Which of the learned believe on Him? but the ignorant multitude

are led by superstition to ruin.

There was one standing among the Temple-authorities, whom an uneasy

conscience would not allow to remain quite silent. It was the

Sanhedrist Nicodemus, still a night-disciple, even in brightest

noon-tide. He could not hold his peace, and yet he dared not speak for

Christ. So he made compromise of both by taking the part of, and

speaking as, a righteous, rigid Sanhedrist. 'Does our Law judge

(pronounce sentence upon) a man, except it first hear from himself and

know what he doeth?' From the Rabbinic point of view, no sounder

judicial saying could have been uttered. Yet such common-places impose

not on any one, nor even serve any good purpose. It helped not the

cause of Jesus, and it disguised not the advocacy of Nicodemus. We

know what was thought of Galilee in the Rabbinic world. 'Art thou also

of Galilee? Search and see, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.'

And so ended this incident, which, to all concerned, might have been

so fruitful of good. Once more Nicodemus was left alone, as every one

who had dared and yet not dared for Christ is after all such bootless

compromises; alone - with sore heart, stricken conscience, and a great

longing.[4026]4026

CHAPTER VIII.

TEACHING IN THE TEMPLE ON THE OCTAVE OF THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES.

(St. John viii. 12-59.)

The startling teaching on 'the last, the Great Day of the Feast' was

not the only one delivered at that season. The impression left on the

mind is, that after silencing, as they thought, Nicodemus, the leaders

of the Pharisees had dispersed.[4027]4027 The addresses of Jesus which

followed must, therefore, have been delivered, either later on that

day, or, what on every account seems more likely, chiefly, or all, on

the next day,[4028]4028 which was the Octave of the Feast, when the

Temple would be once more thronged by worshippers.

On this occasion we find Christ, first in 'The Treasury,'[4029]4029

and then[4030]4030 in some unnamed part of the sacred building, in all

probabilities one of the 'Porches,' Greater freedom could be here

enjoyed, since these 'Porches,' which enclosed the Court of the

Gentiles, did not form part of the Sanctuary in the stricter sense.

Discussions might take place, in which not, as in 'the Treasury,' only

'the Pharisees,'[4031]4031 but the people generally, might propound

questions, answer, or assent. Again, as regards the requirements of

the present narrative, since the Porches opened upon the Court, the

Jews might there pick up stones to cast at Him (which would have been

impossible in any part of the Sanctuary itself), while lastly, Jesus

might easily pass out of the Temple in the crowd that moved through

the Porches to the outer gates.[4032]4032

But the narrative first transports us into 'the Treasury,' where 'the

Pharisees' - or leaders - would alone venture to speak. It ought to be

specially marked, that if they laid not hands on Jesus when He dared

to teach in this sacred locality, and that such unwelcome doctrine,

His immunity must be ascribed to the higher appointment of God:

'because His hour had not yet come.'[4033]4033 An archæological

question may here be raised as to the exact localisation of 'the

Treasury,' whether it was the colonnade around 'the Court of the

Women,' in which the receptacles for charitable contributions - the

so-called Shopharoth, or 'trumpets' - were placed,[4034]4034 or one of

the two 'chambers' in which, respectively, secret gifts[4035]4035 and

votive offerings[4036]4036 were deposited.[4037]4037 [4038]4038 The

former seems the most likely. In any case, it would be within 'the

Court of the Women,' the common meeting-place of the worshippers, and,

as we may say, the most generally attended part of the

Sanctuary.[4039]4039 Here, in the hearing of the leaders of the

people, took place the first Dialogue between Christ and the

Pharisees.

It opened with what probably was an allusion alike to one of the great

ceremonies of the Feast of Tabernacles, to its symbolic meaning, and

to an express Messianic expectation of the Rabbis. As the Mishnah

states: On the first,[4040]4040 or, as the Talmud would have

it,[4041]4041 on every night[4042]4042 of the festive week, 'the Court

of the Women' was brilliantly illuminated, and the night spent in the

demonstrations already described. This was called 'the joy of the

feast.' This 'festive joy,' of which the origin is obscure, was no

doubt connected with the hope of earth's great harvest-joy in the

conversion of the heathen world, and so pointed to 'the days of the

Messiah.' In connection with this we mark, that the term 'light' was

specially applied to the Messiah. In a very interesting passage of the

Midrash[4043]4043 we are told, that, while commonly windows were made

wide within and narrow without, it was the opposite in the Temple of

Solomon, because the light issuing from the Sanctuary was to lighten

that which was without. This reminds us of the language of devout old

Simeon in regard to the Messiah,[4044]4044 as 'a light to lighten the

Gentiles, and the glory of His people Israel.' The Midrash further

explains, that, if the light in the Sanctuary was to be always burning

before Jehovah, the reason was, not that He needed such light, but

that He honoured Israel with this as a symbolic command. In Messianic

times God would, in fulfilment of the prophetic meaning of this rite,

'kindle for them the Great Light,' and the nations of the world would

point to them, who had lit the light for Him Who lightened the whole

world. But even this is not all. The Rabbis speak of the original

light in which God had wrapped Himself as in a garment,[4045]4045 and

which could not shine by day, because it would have dimmed the light

of the sun. From this light that of the sun, moon, and stars had been

kindled.[4046]4046 It was now reserved under the throne of God for the

Messiah,[4047]4047 in Whose days it would shine forth once more.

Lastly, we ought to refer to a passage in another Midrash,[4048]4048

where, after a remarkable discussion on such names of the Messiah as

'the Lord our Righteousness,' 'the Branch,' 'the Comforter,' 'Shiloh,'

'Compassion,' His Birth is connected with the destruction, and His

return with the restoration of the Temple.[4049]4049 But in that very

passage the Messiah is also specially designated as the 'Enlightener,'

the words:[4050]4050 'the light dwelleth with Him,' being applied to

Him.

What has just been stated shows, that the Messianic hope of the aged

Simeon[4051]4051 most truly expressed the Messianic thoughts of the

time. It also proves, that the Pharisees could not have mistaken the

Messianic meaning in the words of Jesus, in their reference to the

past festivity: 'I am the Light of the world.' This circumstance is

itself evidential as regards this Discourse of Christ, the truth of

this narrative, and even the Jewish authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

But, indeed, the whole Address, the argumentation with the Pharisees

which follows, as well as the subsequent Discourse to, and

argumentation with, the Jews, are peculiarly Jewish in their form of

reasoning. Substantially, these Discourses are a continuation of those

previously delivered at this Feast. But they carry the argument one

important step both backwards and forwards. The situation had now

become quite clear, and neither party cared to conceal it. What Jesus

had gradually communicated to the disciples, who were so unwilling to

receive it, had now become an acknowledged fact. It was no longer a

secret that the leaders of Israel and Jerusalem were compassing the

Death of Jesus. This underlies all His Words. And He sought to turn

them from their purpose, not by appealing to their pity nor to any

lower motive, but by claiming as His right that, for which they would

condemn Him. He was the Sent of God, the Messiah; although, to know

Him and His Mission, it needed moral kinship with Him that had sent

Him. But this led to the very root of the matter. It needed moral

kinship with God: did Israel, as such, possess it? They did not; nay,

no man possessed it, till given him of God. This was not exactly new

in these Discourses of Christ, but it was now far more clearly stated

and developed, and in that sense new.

We also are too apt to overlook this teaching of Christ - perhaps have

overlooked it. It is concerning the corruption of our whole nature by

sin, and hence the need of God-teaching, if we are to receive the

Christ, or understand His doctrine. That which is born of the flesh is

flesh; that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit; wherefore, 'marvel

not that I said, Ye must be born again.' That had been Christ's

initial teaching to Nicodemus, and it became, with growing emphasis,

His final teaching to the teachers of Israel. It is not St. Paul who

first sets forth the doctrine of our entire moral ruin: he had learned

it from the Christ. It forms the very basis of Christianity; it is the

ultimate reason of the need of a Redeemer, and the rationale of the

work which Christ came to do. The Priesthood and the Sacrificial Work

of Christ, as well as the higher aspect of His Prophetic Office, and

the true meaning of His Kingship, as not of this world, are based upon

it. Very markedly, it constitutes the starting-point in the

fundamental divergence between the leaders of the Synagogue and Christ

- we might say, to all time between Christians and non-Christians. The

teachers of Israel knew not, nor believed in the total corruption of

man - Jew as well as Gentile - and, therefore, felt not the need of a

Saviour. They could not understand it - how 'Except a man' - at least

a Jew - were 'born again,' and, 'from above,' he could not enter, nor

even see, the Kingdom of God. They understood not their own Bible: the

story of the Fall - not Moses and the Prophets; and how could they

understand Christ? they believed not them, and how could they believe

Him? And yet, from this point of view, but only from this, does all

seem clear: the Incarnation, the History of the Temptation and Victory

in the Wilderness, and even the Cross. Only he who has, in some

measure, himself felt the agony of the first garden, can understand

that of the second garden. Had they understood, by that personal

experience which we must all have of it, the Proto-Evangel of the

great contest, and of the great conquest by suffering, they would have

followed its lines to their final goal in the Christ as the fulfilment

of all. And so, here also, were the words of Christ true, that it

needed heavenly teaching, and kinship to the Divine, to understand His

doctrine.

This underlies, and is the main object of these Discourses of Christ.

As a corollary He would teach, that Satan was not a merely malicious,

impish being, working outward destruction, but that there was a moral

power of evil which held us all - not the Gentile world only, but even

the most favoured, learned, and exalted among the Jews. Of this power

Satan was the concentration and impersonation; the prince of the power

of 'darkness.' This opens up the reasoning of Christ, alike as

expressed and implied. He presented Himself to them as the Messiah,

and hence as the Light of the World. It resulted, that only in

following Him would a man 'not walk in the darkness,'[4052]4052 but

have the light - and that, be it marked, not the light of knowledge,

but of life.[4053]4053 On the other hand, it also followed, that all,

who were not within this light, were in darkness and in death.

It was an appeal to the moral in His hearers. The Pharisees sought to

turn it aside by an appeal to the external and visible. They asked for

some witness, or palpable evidence, of what they called His testimony

about Himself,[4054]4054 well knowing that such could only be through

some external, visible, miraculous manifestation, just as they had

formerly asked for a sign from heaven. The Bible, and especially the

Evangelic history, is full of what men ordinarily, and often

thoughtlessly, call the miraculous. But, in this case, the miraculous

would have become the magical, which it never is. If Christ had

yielded to their appeal, and transferred the question from the moral

to the coarsely external sphere, He would have ceased to be the

Messiah of the Incarnation, Temptation, and Cross, the

Messiah-Saviour. It would have been to un-Messiah the Messiah of the

Gospel, for it was only, in another form, a repetition of the

Temptation. A miracle or sign would at that moment have been a moral

anachronism - as much as any miracle would be in our days,[4055]4055

when the Christ makes His appeal to the moral, and is met by a demand

for the external and material evidence of His Witness.

The interruption of the Pharisees[4056]4056 was thoroughly Jewish, and

so was their objection. It had to be met, and that in the Jewish

form[4057]4057 in which it had been raised, while the Christ must at

the same time continue His former teaching to them concerning God and

their own distance from Him. Their objection had proceeded on this

fundamental judicial principle - 'A person is not accredited about

himself.'[4058]4058 Harsh and unjust as this principle sometimes

was,[4059]4059 it evidently applied only in judicial cases, and hence

implied that these Pharisees sat in judgment on Him as one suspected,

and charged with guilt. The reply of Jesus was plain. Even if His

testimony about Himself were unsupported, it would still be true, and

He was competent to bear it, for He knew, as a matter of fact, whence

He came and whither He went - His own part in this Mission, and its

goal, as well as God's - whereas they knew[4060]4060 not

either.[4061]4061 But, more than this: their demand for a witness had

proceeded on the assumption of their being the judges, and He the

panel - a relation which only arose from their judging after the

flesh. Spiritual judgment upon that which was within belonged only to

Him, that searcheth all secrets. Christ, while on earth, judged no

man; and, even if He did so, it must be remembered that He did it not

alone, but with, and as the Representative of, the Father. Hence, such

judgment would be true.[4062]4062 But, as for their main charge, was

it either true, or good in law? In accordance with the Law of God,

there were two witnesses to the fact of His Mission: His own, and the

frequently-shown attestation of His Father. And, if it were objected

that a man could not bear witness in his own cause, the same Rabbinic

canon laid it down, that this only applied if his testimony stood

alone. But if it were corroborated (even in a matter of greatest

delicacy),[4063]4063 although by only one male or female slave - who

ordinarily were unfit for testimony - it would be credited.

The reasoning of Christ, without for a moment quitting the higher

ground of His teaching, was quite unanswerable from the Jewish

standpoint. The Pharisees felt it, and, though well knowing to Whom He

referred, tried to evade it by the sneer - where (not Who) His Father

was? This gave occasion for Christ to return to the main subject of

His Address, that the reason of their ignorance of Him was, that they

knew not the Father, and, in turn, that only acknowledgment of Him

would bring true knowledge of the Father.[4064]4064

Such words would only ripen in the hearts of such men the murderous

resolve against Jesus. Yet, not till His, not their, hour had come!

Presently, we find Him again, now in one of the Porches - probably

that of Solomon - teaching, this time, 'the Jews.' We imagine they

were chiefly, if not all, Judæans - perhaps Jerusalemites, aware of

the murderous intent of their leaders - not His own Galileans, whom He

addressed. It was in continuation of what had gone before - alike of

what He had said to them and of what they felt towards Him. The words

are intensely sad - Christ's farewell to His rebellious people, His

tear-words over lost Israel; abrupt also, as if they were torn

sentences, or, else, headings for special discourses: 'I go My way' -

'Ye shall seek Me, and in your sin[4065]4065 shall ye die' - 'Whither

I go, ye cannot come!' And is it not all most true? These many

centuries has Israel sought its Christ, and perished in its great sin

of rejecting Him; and whither Christ and His kingdom tended, the

Synagogue and Judaism never came. They thought that He spoke of His

dying, and not, as He did, of that which came after it. But, how could

His dying establish such separation between them? This was the next

question which rose in their minds.[4066]4066 Would there be anything

so peculiar about His dying, or, did His expression about going

indicate a purpose of taking away His Own life?[4067]4067

It was this misunderstanding which Jesus briefly but emphatically

corrected by telling them, that the ground of their separation was the

difference of their nature: they were from beneath, He from above;

they of this world, He not of this world. Hence they could not come

where He would be, since they must die in their sin, as He had told

them - 'if ye believe not that I am.'[4068]4068

The words were intentionally mysteriously spoken, as to a Jewish

audience. Believe not that Thou art! But 'Who art Thou?' Whether or

not the words were spoken in scorn, their question condemned

themselves. In His broken sentence, Jesus had tried them - to see how

they would complete it. Then it was so! All this time they had not yet

learned Who He was; had not even a conviction on that point, either

for or against Him, but were ready to be swayed by their leaders! 'Who

I am?' - am I not telling you it even from the beginning; has My

testimony by word or deed ever swerved on this point? I am what all

along, from the beginning, I tell you.[4069]4069 Then, putting aside

this interruption, He resumed His argument.[4070]4070 Many other

things had He to say and to judge concerning them, besides the bitter

truth of their perishing if they believed not that it was He - but He

that had sent Him was true, and He must ever speak into the world the

message which He had received. When Christ referred to it as that

which 'He heard from Him,'[4071]4071 He evidently wished thereby to

emphasise the fact of His Mission from God, as constituting His claim

on their obedience of faith. But it was this very point which, even at

that moment, they were not understanding.[4072]4072 And they would

only learn it, not by His Words, but by the event, when they had

'lifted Him up,' as they thought, to the Cross, but really on the way

to His Glory.[4073]4073 [4074]4074 Then would they perceive the

meaning of the designation He had given of Himself, and the claim

founded on it:[4075]4075 'Then shall ye perceive that I am.' Meantime:

'And of Myself do I nothing, but as the[4076]4076 Father taught Me,

these things do I speak. And He that sent Me is with Me. He[4077]4077

hath not left Me alone, because what pleases Him I do always.'

If the Jews failed to understand the expression 'lifting up,' which

might mean His Exaltation, though it did mean, in the first place, His

Cross, there was that in His Appeal to His Words and Deeds as bearing

witness to His Mission and to the Divine Help and Presence in it,

which by its sincerity, earnestness, and reality, found its way to the

hearts of many. Instinctively they felt and believed that His Mission

must be Divine. Whether or not this found articulate expression, Jesus

now addressed Himself to those who thus far - at least for the moment

- believed on Him. They were at the crisis of their spiritual history,

and He must press home on them what He had sought to teach at the

first. By nature far from Him, they were bondsmen. Only if they abode

in His Word would they know the truth, and the truth would make them

free. The result of this knowledge would be moral, and hence that

knowledge consisted not in merely believing on Him, but in making His

Word and teaching their dwelling - abiding in it.[4078]4078 But it was

this very moral application which they resisted. In this also Jesus

had used their own forms of thinking and teaching, only in a much

higher sense. For their own tradition had it, that he only was free

who laboured in the study of the Law.[4079]4079 Yet the liberty of

which He spoke came not through study of the Law,[4080]4080 but from

abiding in the Word of Jesus. But it was this very thing which they

resisted. And so they ignored the spiritual, and fell back upon the

national, application of the words of Christ. As this is once more

evidential of the Jewish authorship of this Gospel, so also the

characteristically Jewish boast, that as the children of Abraham they

had never been, and never could be, in real servitude. It would take

too long to enumerate all the benefits supposed to be derived from

descent from Abraham. Suffice here the almost fundamental principle:

'All Israel are the children of Kings,'[4081]4081 and its application

even to common life, that as 'the children of Abraham, Isaac, and

Jacob, not even Solomon's feast could be too good for them.'[4082]4082

Not so, however, would the Lord allow them to pass it by. He pointed

them to another servitude which they knew not, that of sin,[4083]4083

and, entering at the same time also on their own ideas, He told them

that continuance in this servitude would also lead to national bondage

and rejection: 'For the servant abideth not in the house for

ever.'[4084]4084 On the other hand, the Son abode there for ever; whom

He made free by adoption into His family, they would be free in

reality and essentially.[4085]4085 [4086]4086 Then for their very

dulness, He would turn to their favourite conceit of being Abraham's

seed. There was, indeed, an obvious sense in which, by their natural

descent, they were such. But there was a moral descent - and that

alone was of real value. Another, and to them wholly new, and heavenly

teaching this, which our Lord presently applied in a manner they could

neither misunderstand nor gainsay, while He at the same time connected

it with the general drift of His teaching. Abraham's seed? But they

entertained purposes of murder, and that, because the Word of Christ

had not free course, made not way in them.[4087]4087 His Word was what

He had seen with (before) the Father,[4088]4088 not heard - for His

presence was there Eternal. Their deeds were what they had heard from

their father[4089]4089 - the word 'seen' in our common text depending

on a wrong reading. And thus He showed them - in answer to their

interpellation - that their father could not have been Abraham, so far

as spiritual descent was concerned.[4090]4090 They had now a glimpse

of His meaning, but only to misapply it, according to their Jewish

prejudice. Their spiritual descent, they urged, must be of God, since

their descent from Abraham was legitimate.[4091]4091 But the Lord

dispelled even this conceit by showing, that if theirs were spiritual

descent from God, then would they not reject His Message, nor seek to

kill Him, but recognise and love him.[4092]4092

But whence this misunderstanding of His speech?[4093]4093 [4094]4094

Because they are morally incapable of hearing it - and this because of

the sinfulness of their nature: an element which Judaism had never

taken into account. And so, with infinite Wisdom, Christ once more

brought back His Discourse to what He would teach them concerning

man's need, whether he be Jew or Gentile, of a Saviour and of renewing

by the Holy Ghost. If the Jews were morally unable to hear His Word

and cherished murderous designs, it was because, morally speaking,

their descent was of the Devil. Very differently from Jewish

ideas[4095]4095 did He speak concerning the moral evilof Satan, as

both a murderer and a liar - a murderer from the beginning of the

history of our race, and one who 'stood not in the truth, because

truth is not in him.' Hence 'whenever he speaketh a lie' - whether to

our first parents, or now concerning the Christ - 'he speaketh from

out his own (things), for he (Satan) is a liar, and the father of such

an one (who telleth or believeth lies).'[4096]4096 Which of them could

convict Him of sin? If therefore He spake truth,[4097]4097 and they

believed Him not, it was because they were not of God, but, as He had

shown them, of their father, the Devil.

The argument was unanswerable, and there seemed only one way to turn

it aside - a Jewish Tu quoque, an adaptation of the 'Physician, heal

thyself:' 'Do we not say rightly, that Thou art a Samaritan, and hast

a demon?' It is strange that the first clause of this reproach should

have been so misunderstood and yet its direct explanation lies on the

surface. We have only to translate it into the language which the Jews

had used. By no strain of ingenuity is it possible to account for the

designation 'Samaritan,' as given by the Jews to Jesus, if it is

regarded as referring to nationality. Even at the very Feast they had

made it an objection to His Messianic claims, that He was (as they

supposed) a Galilean.[4098]4098 Nor had He come to Jerusalem from

Samaria;[4099]4099 nor could He be so called (as Commentators suggest)

because He was 'a foe' to Israel, or a 'breaker of the Law,' or 'unfit

to bear witness'[4100]4100 - for neither of these circumstances would

have led the Jews to designate Him by the term 'Samaritan.' But, in

the language which they spoke, what is rendered into Greek by

'Samaritan,' would have been either Kuthi ({hebrew}), which, while

literally meaning a Samaritan,[4101]4101 is almost as often used in

the sense of 'heretic,' or else Shomroni ({hebrew}). The latter word

deserves special attention.[4102]4102 Literally, it also means,

'Samaritan;' but, the name Shomron (perhaps from its connection with

Samaria), is also sometimes used as the equivalent of Ashmedai, the

Prince of the demons.[4103]4103 [4104]4104 According to the

Kabbalists, Shomron was the father of Ashmedai, and hence the same as

Sammael, or Satan. That this was a wide-spread Jewish belief, appears

from the circumstance that in the Koran (which, in such matters, would

reproduce popular Jewish tradition), Israel is said to have been

seduced into idolatry by Shomron,[4105]4105 while, in Jewish

tradition, this is attributed to Sammael.[4106]4106 If, therefore,

the term applied by the Jews to Jesus was Shomroni - and not Kuthi,

'heretic' - it would literally mean, 'Child of the Devil.'[4107]4107

This would also explain why Christ only replied to the charge of

having a demon, since the two charges meant substantially the same:

'Thou art a child of the devil and hast a demon.' In wondrous patience

and mercy He almost passed it by, dwelling rather, for their teaching,

on the fact that, while they dishonoured Him, He honoured His Father.

He heeded not their charges. His concern was the glory of His Father;

the vindication of His own honour would be brought about by the Father

- though, alas! in judgment on those who were casting such dishonour

on the Sent of God.[4108]4108 Then, as if lingering in deep compassion

on the terrible issue, He once more pressed home the great subject of

His Discourse, that only 'if a man keep' - both have regard to, and

observe - His 'Word,' 'he shall not gaze at death [intently behold

it][4109]4109 unto eternity' - for ever shall he not come within close

and terrible gaze of what is really death, of what became such to Adam

in the hour of his Fall.

It was, as repeatedly observed, this death as the consequence of the

Fall, of which the Jews knew nothing. And so they once more

misunderstood it as of physical death,[4110]4110 and, since Abraham

and the prophets had died, regarded Christ as setting up a claim

higher than theirs.[4111]4111 The Discourse had contained all that He

had wished to bring before them, and their objections were

degenerating into wrangling. It was time to break it off by a general

application. The question, He added, was not of what He said, but of

what God said of Him - that God, Whom they claimed as theirs, and yet

knew not, but Whom He knew, and Whose Word He 'kept.'[4112]4112 But,

as for Abraham - he had 'exulted' in the thought of the coming day of

the Christ, and, seeing its glory, he was glad. Even Jewish tradition

could scarcely gainsay this, since there were two parties in the

Synagogue, of which one believed that, when that horror of great

darkness fell on him,[4113]4113 Abraham had, in vision, been shown not

only this, but the coming world - and not only all events in the

present 'age,' but also those in Messianic times.[4114]4114 [4115]4115

And now, theirs was not misunderstanding, but wilful

misinterpretation. He had spoken of Abraham seeing His day; they took

it of His seeing Abraham's day, and challenged its possibility.

Whether or not they intended thus to elicit an avowal of His claim to

eternal duration, and hence to Divinity, it was not time any longer to

forbear the full statement, and, with Divine emphasis, He spake the

words which could not be mistaken: 'Verily, verily, I say unto you,

before Abraham was, I AM.'

It was as if they had only waited for this. Furiously they rushed from

the Porch into the Court of the Gentiles - with symbolic significance,

even in this - to pick up stones, and to cast them at Him. But, once

more, His hour had not yet come, and their fury proved impotent.

Hiding Himself for the moment, as might so easily be done, in one of

the many chambers, passages, or gateways of the Temple, He presently

passed out.

It had been the first plain disclosure and avowal of His Divinity, and

it was 'in the midst of His enemies,' and when most contempt was cast

upon Him. Presently would that avowal be renewed both in Word and by

Deed; for 'the end' of mercy and judgment had not yet come, but was

drawing terribly nigh.

CHAPTER IX.

THE HEALING OF THE MAN BORN BLIND.

(St. John ix.)

After the scene in the Temple described in the last chapter, and

Christ's consequent withdrawal from His enemies, we can scarcely

suppose any other great event to have taken place on that day within

or near the precincts of the Sanctuary. And yet, from the close

connection of the narratives, we are led to infer that no long

interval of time can have elapsed before the healing of the man born

blind.[4116]4116 Probably it happened the day after the events just

recorded. We know that it was a Sabbath,[4117]4117 and this fresh mark

of time, as well as the multiplicity of things done, and the whole

style of the narrative, confirm our belief that it was not on the

evening of the day when He had spoken to them first in 'the Treasury,'

and then in the Porch.

On two other points there is strong presumption, though we cannot

offer actual proof. Remembering, that the entrance to the Temple or

its Courts was then - as that of churches is on the Continent - the

chosen spot for those who, as objects of pity, solicited

charity;[4118]4118 remembering, also, how rapidly the healing of the

blind man became known, and how soon both his parents and the healed

man himself appeared before the Pharisees - presumably, in the Temple;

lastly, how readily the Saviour knew where again to find him[4119]4119

- we can scarcely doubt that the miracle took place at the entering to

the Temple, or on the Temple-Mount. Secondly, both the Work, and

especially the Words of Christ, seem in such close connection with

what had preceded, that we can scarcely be mistaken in regarding them

as intended to form a continuation of it.

It is not difficult to realise the scene, nor to understand the

remarks of all who had part in it. It was the Sabbath - the day after

the Octave of the Feast, and Christ with His disciples was passing -

presumably when going into the Temple, where this blind beggar was

wont to sit, probably soliciting alms, perhaps in some such terms as

these, which were common at the time: 'Gain merit by me;' or, 'O

tenderhearted, by me gain merit, to thine own benefit.' But on the

Sabbath he would, of course, neither ask nor receive alms, though his

presence in the wonted place would secure wider notice and perhaps

lead to many private gifts. Indeed, the blind were regarded as

specially entitled to charity;[4120]4120 and the Jerusalem

Talmud[4121]4121 relates some touching instances of the delicacy

displayed towards them. As the Master and His disciples passed the

blind beggar, Jesus 'saw' him, with that look which they who followed

Him knew to be full of meaning. Yet, so thoroughly Judaised were they

by their late contact with the Pharisees, that no thought of possible

mercy came to them, only a truly and characteristically Jewish

question, addressed to Him expressly, and as 'Rabbi:'[4122]4122

through whose guilt this blindness had befallen him - through his own,

or that of his parents.

For, thoroughly Jewish the question was. Many instances could be

adduced, in which one or another sin is said to have been punished by

some immediate stroke, disease, or even by death; and we constantly

find Rabbis, when meeting such unfortunate persons, asking them, how

or by what sin this had come to them. But, as this man was 'blind from

his birth,' the possibility of some actual sin before birth would

suggest itself, at least as a speculative question, since the 'evil

impulse' (Yetser haRa), might even then be called into

activity.[4123]4123 At the same time, both the Talmud and the later

charge of the Pharisees, 'In sins wast thou born altogether,' imply

that in such cases the alternative explanation would be considered,

that the blindness might be caused by the sin of his

parents.[4124]4124 It was a common Jewish view, that the merits or

demerits of the parents would appear in the children. In fact, up to

thirteen years of age a child was considered, as it were, part of his

father, and as suffering for his guilt.[4125]4125 More than that, the

thoughts of a mother might affect the moral state of her unborn

offspring, and the terrible apostasy of one of the greatest Rabbis

had, in popular belief, been caused by the sinful delight his mother

had taken when passing through an idol-grove.[4126]4126 Lastly,

certain special sins in the parents would result in specific diseases

in their offspring, and one is mentioned[4127]4127 as causing

blindness in the children.[4128]4128 But the impression left on our

minds is, that the disciples felt not sure as to either of these

solutions of the difficulty. It seemed a mystery, inexplicable on the

supposition of God's infinite goodness, and to which they sought to

apply the common Jewish solution. Many similar mysteries meet us in

the administration of God's Providence - questions, which seem

unanswerable, but to which we try to give answers, perhaps, not much

wiser than the explanations suggested by disciples.

But why seek to answer them at all, since we possess not all, perhaps

very few of, the data requisite for it? There is one aspect, however,

of adversity, and of a strange dispensation of evil, on which the

light of Christ's Words here shines with the brightness of a new

morning. There is a physical, natural reason for them. God has not

specially sent them, in the sense of His interference or primary

causation, although He has sent them in the sense of His knowledge,

will, and reign. They have come in the ordinary course of things, and

are traceable to causes which, if we only knew them, would appear to

us the sequence of the laws which God has imposed on His creation, and

which are necessary for its orderly continuance. And, further, all

such evil consequences, from the operation of God's laws, are in the

last instance to be traced back to the curse which sin has brought

upon man and on earth. With these His Laws, and with their evil

sequences to us through the curse of sin, God does not interfere in

the ordinary course of His Providence; although he would be daring,

who would negative the possibility of what may seem, though it is not,

interference, since the natural causes which lead to these evil

consequences may so easily, naturally, and rationally be affected. But

there is another and a higher aspect of it, since Christ has come, and

is really the Healer of all disease and evil by being the Remover of

its ultimate moral cause. This is indicated in His words, when,

putting aside the clumsy alternative suggested by the disciples, He

told them that it was so in order 'that the works of God might be made

manifest in him.' They wanted to know the 'why,' He told them the 'in

order to,' of the man's calamity; they wished to understand its reason

as regarded its origin, He told them its reasonableness in regard to

the purpose which it, and all similar suffering, should serve, since

Christ has come, the Healer of evil - because the Saviour from sin.

Thus He transferred the question from intellectual ground to that of

the moral purpose which suffering might serve. And this not in itself,

nor by any destiny or appointment, but because the Coming and Work of

the Christ has made it possible to us all. Sin and its sequences are

still the same, for 'the world is established that it cannot move.'

But over it all has risen the Sun of Righteousness with healing in His

wings; and, if we but open ourselves to His influence, these evils may

serve this purpose, and so have this for their reason, not as, regards

their genesis, but their continuance, 'that the works of God may be

made manifest.'

To make this the reality to us, was 'the work of Him' Who sent, and

for which He sent, the Christ. And rapidly now must He work it, for

perpetual example, during the few hours still left of His brief

working-day.[4129]4129 This figure was not unfamiliar to the

Jews,[4130]4130 though it may well be that, by thus emphasising the

briefness of the time, He may also have anticipated any objection to

His healing on the Sabbath. But it is of even more importance to

notice, how the two leading thoughts of the previous day's Discourse

were now again taken up and set forth in the miracle that followed.

These were, that He did the Work which God had sent Him to

do,[4131]4131 and that He was the Light of the world.[4132]4132 As its

Light He could not but shine so long as He was in it. And this He

presently symbolised (and is not every miracle a symbol?) in the

healing of the blind.

Once more we notice, how in His Deeds, as in His Words, the Lord

adopted the forms known and used by His contemporaries, while He

filled them with quite other substance. It has already been

stated,[4133]4133 that saliva was commonly regarded as a remedy for

diseases of the eye, although, of course, not for the removal of

blindness. With this He made clay, which He now used, adding to it the

direction to go and wash in the Pool of Siloam, a term which literally

meant 'sent.'[4134]4134 A symbolism, this, of Him Who was the Sent of

the Father. For, all is here symbolical: the cure and its means. If we

ask ourselves why means were used in this instance, we can only

suggest, that it was partly for the sake of him who was to be healed,

partly for theirs who afterwards heard of it. For, the blind man seems

to have been ignorant of the character of his Healer,[4135]4135 and it

needed the use of some means to make him, so to speak, receptive. On

the other hand, not only the use of means, but their inadequacy to the

object, must have impressed all. Symbolical, also, were these means.

Sight was restored by clay, made out of the ground with the spittle of

Him, Whose breath had at the first breathed life into clay; and this

was then washed away in the Pool of Siloam, from whose waters had been

drawn on the Feast of Tabernacles that which symbolised the

forthpouring of the new life by the Spirit. Lastly, if it be asked why

such miracle should have been wrought on one who had not previous

faith, who does not even seem to have known about the Christ, we can

only repeat, that the man himself was intended to be a symbol, 'that

the works of God should be made manifest in him.'

And so, what the Pharisees had sought in vain, was freely vouch-safed

when there was need for it. With inimitable simplicity, itself

evidence that no legend is told, the man's obedience and healing are

recorded. We judge, that his first impulse when healed must have been

to seek for Jesus, naturally, where he had first met Him. On his way,

probably past his own house to tell his parents, and again on the spot

where he had so long sat begging, all who had known him must have

noticed the great change that had passed over him. So marvellous,

indeed, did it appear, that, while part of the crowd that gathered

would, of course, acknowledge his identity, others would say: 'No, but

he is like him;' in their suspiciousness looking for some imposture.

For there can be little doubt, that on his way he must have learned

more about Jesus than merely His Name,[4136]4136 and in turn have

communicated to his informants the story of his healing. Similarly,

the formal question now put to him by the Jews was as much, if not

more, a preparatory inquisition than the outcome of a wish to learn

the circumstances of his healing. And so we notice in his answer the

cautious desire not to say anything that could incriminate his

Benefactor. He tells the facts truthfully, plainly; he accentuates by

what means he had 'recovered,'[4137]4137 not received, sight; but

otherwise gives no clue by which either to discover or to incriminate

Jesus.[4138]4138

Presently they bring him to the Pharisees, not to take notice of his

healing, but to found on it a charge against Christ. Such must have

been their motive, since it was universally known that the leaders of

the people had, of course informally, agreed to take the strictest

measures, not only against the Christ, but against any one who

professed to be His disciple.[4139]4139 The ground on which the

present charge against Jesus would rest was plain: the healing

involved a manifold breach of the Sabbath-Law. The first of these was

that He had made clay.[4140]4140 Next, it would be a question whether

any remedy might be applied on the holy day. Such could only be done

in diseases of the internal organs (from the throat downwards), except

when danger to life or the loss of an organ was involved.[4141]4141 It

was, indeed, declared lawful to apply, for example, wine to the

outside of the eyelid, on the ground that this might be treated as

washing; but it was sinful to apply it to the inside of the eye. And

as regards saliva, its application to the eye is expressly forbidden,

on the ground that it was evidently intended as a remedy.[4142]4142

There was, therefore, abundant legal ground for a criminal charge.

And, although on the Sabbath the Sanhedrin would not hold any formal

meeting, and, even had there been such, the testimony of one man would

not have sufficed, yet 'the Pharisees' set the inquiry regularly on

foot. First, as if not satisfied with the report of those who had

brought the man, they made him repeat it.[4143]4143 The simplicity of

the man's language left no room for evasion or subterfuge. Rabbinism

was on its great trial. The wondrous fact could neither be denied nor

explained, and the only ground for resisting the legitimate inference

as to the character of Him Who had done it, was its inconsistence with

their traditional law. The alternative was: whether their traditional

law of Sabbath-observance, or else He Who had done such miracles, was

Divine? Was Christ not of God, because He did not keep the Sabbath in

their way? But, then; could an open transgressor of God's Law do such

miracles? In this dilemma they turned to the simple man before them.

'Seeing that He opened' his eyes, what did he say of Him? what was the

impression left on his mind, who had the best opportunity for

judging?[4144]4144

There is something very peculiar, and, in one sense, most instructive,

as to the general opinion entertained even by the best-disposed, who

had not yet been taught the higher truth, in his reply, so simple and

solemn, so comprehensive in its sequences, and yet so utterly

inadequate by itself: 'He is a Prophet.' One possibility still

remained. After all, the man might not have been really blind; and

they might, by cross-examining the parents, elicit that about his

original condition which would explain the pretended cure. But on this

most important point, the parents, with all their fear of the anger of

the Pharisees, remained unshaken. He had been born blind; but as to

the manner of his cure, they declined to offer any opinion. Thus, as

so often, the machinations of the enemies of Christ led to results the

opposite of those wished for. For, the evidential value of their

attestation of their son's blindness was manifestly proportional to

their fear of committing themselves to any testimony for Christ, well

knowing what it would entail.

For to persons so wretchedly poor as to allow their son to live by

begging,[4145]4145 the consequence of being 'un-Synagogued,' or put

outside the congregation[4146]4146 - which was to be the punishment of

any who confessed Jesus as the Messiah - would have been dreadful.

Talmudic writings speak of two, or rather, we should say, of three,

kinds of 'excommunication,' of which the two first were chiefly

disciplinary, while the third was the real 'casting out,'

'un-Synagoguing,' 'cutting off from the congregation.'[4147]4147 The

general designation[4148]4148 for 'excommunication' was Shammatta,

although, according to its literal meaning, the term would only apply

to the severest form of it.[4149]4149 The first and lightest degree

was the so-called Neziphah or Neziphutha; properly, 'a rebuke,' an

inveighing. Ordinarily, its duration extended over seven days; but, if

pronounced by the Nasi, or Head of the Sanhedrin, it lasted for thirty

days. In later times, however, it only rested for one day on the

guilty person.[4150]4150 Perhaps St. Paul referred to this 'rebuke' in

the expression which he used about an offending Elder.[4151]4151 He

certainly adopted the practice in Palestine,[4152]4152 when he would

not have an Elder 'rebuked' although he went far beyond it when he

would have such 'entreated.' In Palestine it was ordered, that an

offending Rabbi should be scourged instead of being

excommunicated.[4153]4153 Yet another direction of St. Paul's is

evidently derived from these arrangements of the Synagogue, although

applied in a far different spirit. When the Apostle wrote: 'An heretic

after the first and second admonition reject;' there must have been in

his mind the second degree of Jewish excommunication, the so-called

Niddui (from the verb to thrust, thrust out, cast out). This lasted

for thirty days at the least, although among the Babylonians only for

seven days.[4154]4154 At the end of that term there was 'a second

admonition,' which lasted other thirty days. If still unrepentant, the

third, or real excommunication, was pronounced, which was called the

Cherem, or ban, and of which the duration was indefinite. Any three

persons, or even one duly authorised, could pronounce the lowest

sentence. The greater excommunication (Niddui) - which, happily, could

only be pronounced in an assembly of ten - must have been terrible,

being accompanied by curses,[4155]4155 [4156]4156 and, at a later

period, sometimes proclaimed with the blast of the horn.[4157]4157

[4158]4158 If the person so visited occupied an honourable position,

it was the custom to intimate his sentence in a euphemistic manner,

such as: 'It seems to me that thy companions are separating themselves

from thee.' He who was so, or similarly addressed, would only too well

understand its meaning. Henceforth he would sit on the ground, and

bear himself like one in deep mourning. He would allow his beard and

hair to grow wild and shaggy; he would not bathe, nor anoint himself;

he would not be admitted into an assembly of ten men, neither to

public prayer, nor to the Academy; though he might either teach, or be

taught by, single individuals. Nay, as if he were a leper, people

would keep at a distance of four cubits from him. If he died, stones

were cast on his coffin, nor was he allowed the honour of the ordinary

funeral, nor were they to mourn for him. Still more terrible was the

final excommunication, or Cherem, when a ban of indefinite duration

was laid on a man. Henceforth he was like one dead. He was not allowed

to study with others, no intercourse was to be held with him, he was

not even to be shown the road. He might, indeed, buy the necessaries

of life, but it was forbidden to eat or drink with such an

one.[4159]4159

We can understand, how everyone would dread such an anathema. But when

we remember, what it would involve to persons in the rank of life, and

so miserably poor as the parents of that blind man, we no longer

wonder at their evasion of the question put by the Sanhedrin. And if

we ask ourselves, on what ground so terrible a punishment could be

inflicted to all time and in every place - for the ban once pronounced

applied everywhere - simply for the confession of Jesus as the Christ,

the answer is not difficult. The Rabbinists enumerate twenty-four

grounds for excommunication, of which more than one might serve the

purpose of the Pharisees. But in general, to resist the authority of

the Scribes, or any of their decrees, or to lead others either away

from 'the commandments,' or to what was regarded as profanation of the

Divine Name, was sufficient to incur the ban, while it must be borne

in mind that excommunication by the President of the Sanhedrin

extended to all places and persons.[4160]4160

As nothing could be elicited from his parents, the man who had been

blind was once more summoned before the Pharisees. It was no longer to

inquire into the reality of his alleged blindness, nor to ask about

the cure, but simply to demand of him recantation, though this was put

in the most specious manner. Thou hast been healed: own that it was

only by God's Hand miraculously stretched forth,[4161]4161 and that

'this man' had nothing to do with it, save that the coincidence may

have been allowed to try the faith of Israel. It could not have been

Jesus Who had done it, for they knew Him to be 'a sinner.' Of the two

alternatives they had chosen that of the absolute rightness of their

own Sabbath-traditions as against the evidence of His Miracles.

Virtually, then, this was the condemnation of Christ and the

apotheosis of traditionalism. And yet, false as their conclusion was,

there was this truth in their premisses, that they judged of miracles

by the moral evidence in regard to Him, Who was represented as working

them.

But he who had been healed of his blindness was not to be so betrayed

into a denunciation of his great Physician. The simplicity and

earnestness of his convictions enabled him to gain even a logical

victory. It was his turn now to bring back the question to the issue

which they had originally raised; and we admire it all the more, as we

remember the consequences to this poor man of thus daring the

Pharisees. As against their opinion about Jesus, as to the correctness

of which neither he nor others could have direct knowledge,[4162]4162

there was the unquestionable fact of his healing of which he had

personal knowledge. The renewed inquiry now by the Pharisees, as to

the manner in which Jesus had healed him,[4163]4163 might have had for

its object to betray the man into a positive confession, or to elicit

something demoniacal in the mode of the cure. The blind man had now

fully the advantage. He had already told them; why the renewed

inquiry? As he put it half ironically: Was it because they felt the

wrongness of their own position, and that they should become His

disciples? It stung them to the quick; they lost all self-possession,

and with this their moral defeat became complete. 'Thou art the

disciple of that man, but we (according to the favourite phrase) are

the disciples of Moses.' Of the Divine Mission of Moses they knew, but

of the Mission of Jesus they knew nothing.[4164]4164 The unlettered

man had now the full advantage in the controversy. 'In this, indeed,'

there was 'the marvellous,' that the leaders of Israel should confess

themselves ignorant of the authority of One, Who had power to open the

eyes of the blind - a marvel which had never before been witnessed. If

He had that power, whence had He obtained it, and why? It could only

have been from God. They said, He was 'a sinner' - and yet there was

no principle more frequently repeated by the Rabbis,[4165]4165 than

that answers to prayer depended on a man being 'devout' and doing the

Will of God. There could therefore by only one inference: If Jesus had

not Divine Authority, He could not have had Divine Power.

The argument was unanswerable, and in its unanswerableness shows us,

not indeed the purpose, but the evidential force of Christ's Miracles.

In one sense they had no purpose, or rather were purpose to

themselves, being the forthbursting of His Power and the manifestation

of His Being and Mission, of which latter, as applied to things

physical, they were part. But the truthful reasoning of that untutored

man, which confounded the acuteness of the sages, shows the effect of

these manifestations on all whose hearts were open to the truth. The

Pharisees had nothing to answer, and, as not unfrequently in analogous

cases, could only, in their fury, cast him out with bitter reproaches.

Would he teach them - he, whose very disease showed him to have been a

child conceived and born in sin, and who, ever since his birth, had

been among ignorant, Law-neglecting 'sinners'?

But there was Another, Who watched and knew him: He Whom, so far as he

knew, he had dared to confess, and for Whom he was content to suffer.

Let him now have the reward of his faith, even its completion; and so

shall it become manifest to all time, how, as we follow and cherish

the better light, it riseth upon us in all its brightness, and that

faithfulness in little bringeth the greater stewardship. Tenderly did

Jesus seek him out, wherever it may have been:[4166]4166 and, as He

found him, this one question did He ask, whether the conviction of his

experience was not growing into the higher faith of the yet unseen:

'Dost thou believe on the Son of God?'[4167]4167 He had had personal

experience of Him - was not that such as to lead up to the higher

faith? And is it not always so, that the higher faith is based on the

conviction of personal experience - that we believe on Him as the Son

of God, because we have experience of Him as the God-sent, Who has

Divine Power, and has opened the eyes of the blind-born - and Who has

done to us what had never been done by any other in the world? Thus is

faith always the child of experience, and yet its father also; faith

not without experience, and yet beyond experience; faith not

superseded by experience, but made reasonable by it.

To such a soul it needed only the directing Word of Christ. 'And Who

is He, Lord, that I may believe on Him?'[4168]4168 It seems as if the

question of Jesus had kindled in him the conviction of what was the

right answer. We almost see how, like a well of living water, the

words sprang gladsome from his inmost heart, and how he looked up

expectant on Jesus. To such readiness of faith there could be only one

answer. In language more plain than He had ever before used, Jesus

answered, and with immediate confession of implicit faith the man

lowly worshipped.[4169]4169 And so it was, that the first time he saw

his Deliverer, it was to worship Him. It was the highest stage yet

attained. What contrast this faith and worship of the poor unlettered

man, once blind, now in every sense seeing, to the blindness of

judgment which had fallen on those who were the leaders of

Israel![4170]4170 The cause alike of the one and the other was the

Person of the Christ. For our relationship to Him determines sight or

blindness, as we either receive the evidence of what He is from what

He indubitably does, or reject it, because we hold by our own false

conceptions of God, and of what His Will to us is. And so is Christ

also for 'judgment.'

There were those who still followed Him - not convinced by, nor as yet

decided against Him - Pharisees, who well understood the application

of His Words. Formally, it had been a contest between traditionalism

and the Work of Christ. They also were traditionalists - were they

also blind? But, nay, they had misunderstood Him by leaving out the

moral element, thus showing themselves blind indeed. It was not the

calamity of blindness; but it was a blindness in which they were

guilty, and for which they were responsible,[4171]4171 which indeed

was the result of their deliberate choice: therefore their sin - not

their blindness only - remained!

CHAPTER X.

THE 'GOOD SHEPHERD' AND HIS 'ONE FLOCK' - LAST DISCOURSE AT THE FEAST

TABERNACLES.

(St. John x. 1-21.)

The closing words which Jesus had spoken to those Pharisees who

followed HIm breathe the sadness of expected near judgment, rather

than the hopefulness of expostulation. And the Discourse which

followed, ere He once more left Jerusalem, is of the same character.

It seems, as if Jesus could not part from the City in holy anger, but

ever, and only, with tears. All the topics of the former Discourses

are now resumed and applied. They are not in any way softened or

modified, but uttered in accents of loving sadness rather than of

reproving monition. This connection with the past proves, that the

Discourse was spoken immediately after, and in connection with, the

events recorded in the previous chapters. At the same time, the tone

adopted by Christ prepares us for His Peræan Ministry, which may be

described as that of the last and fullest outgoing of His most intense

pity. This, in contrast to what was exhibited by the rulers of Israel,

and which would so soon bring terrible judgment on them. For, if such

things were done in 'the green tree' of Israel's Messiah-King, what

would the end be in the dry wood of Israel's commonwealth and

institutions?

It was in accordance with the character of the Discourse presently

under consideration, that Jesus spake it, not, indeed, in Parables in

the strict sense (for none such are recorded in the Fourth Gospel),

but in an allegory[4172]4172 in the Parabolic form,[4173]4173 hiding

the higher truths from those who, having eyes, had not seen, but

revealing them to such whose eyes had been opened. If the scenes of

the last few days had made anything plain, it was the utter unfitness

of the teachers of Israel for their professed work of feeding the

flock of God. The Rabbinists also called their spiritual leaders

'feeders,' Parnasin ({hebrew}) - a term by which the Targum renders

some of the references to 'the Shepherds' in Ezek. xxxiv. and Zech

xi.[4174]4174 The term comprised the two ideas of 'leading' and

'feeding,' which are separately insisted on in the Lord's allegory. As

we think of it, no better illustration, nor more apt, could be found

for those to whom 'the flock of God' was entrusted. It needed not

therefore that a sheepfold should have been in view,[4175]4175 to

explain the form of Christ's address.[4176]4176 It only required to

recall the Old Testament language about the shepherding of God, and

that of evil shepherds, to make the application to what had so lately

happened. They were, surely, not shepherds, who had cast out the

healed blind man, or who so judged of the Christ, and would cast out

all His disciples. They had entered into God's Sheepfold, but not by

the door by which the owner, God, had brought His flock into the fold.

To it the entrance had been His free love, His gracious provision, His

thoughts of pardoning, His purpose of saving mercy. That was God's Old

Testament-door into His Sheepfold. Not by that door, as had so lately

fully appeared, had Israel's rulers come in. They had climbed up to

their place in the fold some other way - with the same right, or by

the same wrong, as a thief or a robber. They had wrongfully taken what

did not belong to them - cunningly and undetected, like a thief; they

had allotted it to themselves, and usurped it by violence, like a

robber. What more accurate description could be given of the means by

which the Pharisees and Sadducees had attained the rule over God's

flock, and claimed it for themselves? And what was true of them holds

equally so of all, who, like them, enter by 'some other way.'

How different He, Who comes in and leads us through God's door of

covenant-mercy and Gospel-promise - the door by which God had brought,

and ever brings, His flock into His fold! This was the true Shepherd.

The allegory must, of course, not be too closely pressed; but, as we

remember how in the East the flocks are at night driven into a large

fold, and charge of them is given to an under shepherd, we can

understand how, when the shepherd comes in the morning, 'the

doorkeeper'[4177]4177 or 'guardian' opens to him. In interpreting the

allegory, stress must be laid not so much on any single phrase, be it

the 'porter,' the 'door,' or the 'opening,' as on their combination.

If the shepherd comes to the door, the porter hastens to open it to

him from within, that he may obtain access to the flock; and when a

true spiritual Shepherd comes to the true spiritual door, it is opened

to him by the guardian from within, that is, he finds ready and

immediate access. Equally pictorial is the progress of the allegory.

Having thus gained access to His flock, it has not been to steal or

rob, but the Shepherd knows and calls them, each by his name, and

leads them out. We mark that in the expression: 'when He has put forth

all His own'[4178]4178 - the word is a strong one. For they have to go

each singly, and perhaps they are not willing to go out each by

himself, or even to leave that fold, and so he 'puts' or thrusts them

forth, and He does so to 'all His own.' Then the Eastern shepherd

places himself at the head of his flock, and goes before them, guiding

them, making sure of their following simply by his voice, which they

know. So would His flock follow Christ, for they know His Voice, and

in vain would strangers seek to lead them away, as the Pharisees had

tried. It was not the known Voice of their own Shepherd, and they

would only flee from it.[4179]4179

We can scarcely wonder, that they who heard it did not understand the

allegory, for they were not of His flock and knew not His Voice. But

His own knew it then, and would know it for ever.

'Therefore,'[4180]4180 both for the sake of the one and the other, He

continued, now dividing for greater clearness the two leading ideas of

His allegory, and applying each separately for better comfort. These

two ideas were: entrance by the door, and the characteristics of the

good Shepherd - thus affording a twofold test by which to recognise

the true, and distinguish it from the false.

I. The door - Christ was the Door.[4181]4181 The entrance into God's

fold and to God's flock was only through that, of which Christ was the

reality. And it had ever been so. All the Old Testament institutions,

prophecies, and promises, so far as they referred to access into God's

fold, meant Christ. And all those who went before Him,[4182]4182

pretending to be the door - whether Pharisees, Sadducees, or

Nationalists - were only thieves and robbers: that was not the door

into the Kingdom of God. And the sheep, God's flock, did not hear

them; for, although they might pretend to lead the flock, the voice

was that of strangers. The transition now to another application of

the allegorical idea of the 'door' was natural and almost necessary,

though it appears somewhat abrupt. Even in this it is peculiarly

Jewish. We must understand this transition as follows: I am the Door;

those who professed otherwise to gain access to the fold have climbed

in some other way. But if I am the only, I am also truly the Door.

And, dropping the figure, if any man enters by Me, he shall be saved,

securely go out and in (where the language is not to be closely

pressed), in the sense of having liberty and finding pasture.

II. This forms also the transition to the second leading idea of the

allegory: the True and Good Shepherd. Here we mark a fourfold

progression of thought, which reminds us of the poetry of the Book of

Psalms. There the thought expressed in one line or one couplet is

carried forward and developed in the next, forming what are called the

Psalms of Ascent ('of Degrees'). And in the Discourse of Christ also

the final thought of each couplet of verses is carried forward, or

rather leads upward in the next. Thus we have here a Psalm of Degrees

concerning the Good Shepherd and His Flock, and, at the same time, a

New Testament version of Psalm xxiii. Accordingly its analysis might

be formulated as follows: -

1. Christ, the Good Shepherd, in contrast to others who falsely

claimed to be the shepherds.[4183]4183 Their object had been self, and

they had pursued it even at the cost of the sheep, of their life and

safety. He 'came'[4184]4184 for them, to give, not to take, 'that they

may have life and have abundance.'[4185]4185

'Life,' nay, that they may have it, I 'lay down'[4186]4186 Mine: so

does it appear that 'I am the Good[4187]4187 Shepherd.'[4188]4188

2. The Good Shepherd Who layeth down His life for His Sheep! What a

contrast to a mere hireling, whose are not the sheep, and who fleeth

at sight of the wolf (danger), 'and the wolf seizeth them, and

scattereth (viz., the flock): (he fleeth) because he is a hireling,

and careth not for the sheep.' The simile of the wolf must not be too

closely pressed, but taken in a general sense, to point the contrast

to Him 'Who layeth down His Life for His sheep.'[4189]4189

Truly He is - is seen to be - 'the fair Shepherder,'[4190]4190 Whose

are the sheep, and as such, 'I know Mine, and Mine know Me, even as

the Father knoweth Me, and I know the Father. And I lay down My Life

for the sheep.'

3. For the sheep that are Mine, whom I know, and for whom I lay down

My Life! But those sheep, they are not only 'of this fold,' not all of

the Jewish 'fold,' but also scattered sheep of the Gentiles. They have

all the characteristics of the flock: they are His; and they hear His

Voice; but as yet they are outside the fold. Them also the Good

Shepherd 'must lead,' and, in evidence that they are His, as He calls

them and goes before them, they shall hear His Voice, and so, O most

glorious consummation, 'they shall become one flock[4191]4191 and one

Shepherd.'

And thus is the great goal of the Old Testament reached, and 'the good

tidings of great joy' which issue from Israel 'are unto all people.'

The Kingdom of David, which is the Kingdom of God, is set up upon

earth, and opened to all believers. We cannot help noticing - though

it almost seems to detract from it - how different from the Jewish

ideas of it is this Kingdom with its Shepherd-King, Who knows and Who

lays down His Life for the sheep, and Who leads the Gentiles not to

subjection nor to inferiority, but to equality of faith and

privileges, taking the Jews out of their special fold and leading up

the Gentiles, and so making of both 'one flock.' Whence did Jesus of

Nazareth obtain these thoughts and views, towering so far aloft of all

around?

But, on the other hand, they are utterly un-Gentile also - if by the

term 'Gentile' we mean the 'Gentile Churches,' in antagonism to the

Jewish Christians, as a certain school of critics would represent

them, which traces the origin of this Gospel to this separation. A

Gospel written in that spirit would never have spoken on this wise of

the mutual relation of Jews and Gentiles towards Christ and in the

Church. The sublime words of Jesus are only compatible with one

supposition: that He was indeed the Christ of God. Nay, although men

have studied or cavilled at these words for eighteen and a half

centuries, they have not yet reached unto this: 'They shall become one

flock, one Shepherd.'

4. In the final Step of 'Ascent'[4192]4192 the leading thoughts of the

whole Discourse are taken up and carried to the last and highest

thought. The Good Shepherd that brings together the One Flock! Yes -

by laying down His Life, but also by taking it up again. Both are

necessary for the work of the Good Shepherd - nay, the life is laid

down in the surrender of sacrifice, in order that it may be taken up

again, and much more fully, in the Resurrection-Power. And, therefore,

His Father loveth Him as the Messiah-Shepherd, Who so fully does the

work committed to Him, and so entirely surrenders Himself to it.

His Death, His Resurrection, let no one imagine that it comes from

without! It is His own act. He has 'power' in regard to both, and both

are His own, voluntary, Sovereign, and Divine acts.

And this, all this, in order to be the Shepherd-Saviour - to die, and

rise for His Sheep, and thus to gather them all, Jews and Gentiles,

into one flock, and to be their Shepherd. This, neither more nor less,

was the Mission which God had given Him; this, 'the commandment' which

He had received of His Father - that which God had given Him to

do.[4193]4193

It was a noble close of the series of those Discourses in the Temple,

which had it for their object to show, that He was truly sent of God.

And, in a measure, they attained that object. To some, indeed, it all

seemed unintelligible, incoherent, madness; and they fell back on the

favourite explanation of all this strange drama - He hath a demon! But

others there were - let us hope, many, not yet His disciples - to

whose hearts these words went straight. And how could they resist the

impression? 'These utterances are not of a demonised' - and, then, it

came back to them: 'Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?'

And so, once again, the Light of His Words and His Person fell upon

His Works, and, as ever, revealed their character, and made them

clear.

Note. - It seems right here, in a kind of 'Postscript-Note,' to call

attention to what could not have been inserted in the text without

breaking up its unity, and yet seems too important to be relegated to

an ordinary foot-note. In Yoma 66 b, lines 18 to 24 from top, we have

a series of questions addressed to Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanos,

designed - as it seems to me - to test his views about Jesus and his

relation to the new doctrine. Rabbi Eliezer, one of the greatest

Rabbis, was the brother-in-law of Gamaliel II., the son of that

Gamaliel at whose feet Paul sat. He may, therefore, have been

acquainted with the Apostle. And we have indubitable evidence that he

had intercourse with Jewish Christians, and took pleasure in their

teaching; and, further, that he was accused of favouring Christianity.

Under these circumstances, the series of covered, enigmatic questions,

reported as addressed to him, gains a new interest. I can only repeat,

that I regard them as referring to the Person and the Words of Christ.

One of these questions is to this effect: 'Is it [right, proper, duty]

for the Shepherd to save a lamb from the lion?' To this the Rabbi

gives (as always in this series of questions) an evasive answer, as

follows: 'You have only asked me about the lamb.' On this the

following question is next put, I presume by way of forcing an express

reply: 'Is it [right, proper, duty] to save the Shepherd from the

lion?' and to this the Rabbi once more evasively replies: 'You have

only asked me about the Shepherd.' Thus, as the words of Christ to

which covert reference is made have only meaning when the two ideas of

the Sheep and the Shepherd are combined, the Rabbi, by dividing them,

cleverly evaded giving an answer to his questioners. But these

inferences come to us, all of deepest importance: 1. I regard the

questions above quoted as containing a distinct reference to the words

of Christ in St. John x. 11. Indeed, the whole string of questions, of

which the above form part, refers to Christ and His Words. 2. It casts

a peculiar light, not only upon the personal history of this great

Rabbi, the brother-in-law of the Patriarch Gamaliel II., but a

side-light also, on the history of Nicodemus. Of course, such evasive

answers are utterly unworthy of a disciple of Christ, and quite

incompatible with the boldness of confession which must characterise

them. But the question arises - now often seriously discussed by

Jewish writers: how far many Rabbis and laymen may have gone in their

belief of Christ, and yet - at least in too many instances - fallen

short of discipleship; and, lastly, as to the relation between the

early Church and the Jews, on which not a few things of deep interest

have to be said, though it may not be on the present occasion. 3.

Critically also, the quotation is of the deepest importance. For, does

it not furnish a reference - and that on the lips of Jews - to the

Fourth Gospel, and that from the close of the first century? There is

here something which the opponents of its genuineness and authenticity

will have to meet and answer.

Another series of similar allegorical questions in connection with R.

Joshua b.Chananyah is recorded in Bekhor. 8 a and b, but answered by

the Rabbi in an anti-Christian sense. See Mandelstamm, Talmud. Stud.

i. But Mandelstamm goes too far in his view of the purely allegorical

meaning, especially of the introductory part.

CHAPTER XI.

THE FIRST PERÆAN DISCOURSES - TO THE PHARISEES CONCERNING THE TWO

KINGDOMS -

THEIR CONTEST - WHAT QUALIFIES A DISCIPLE FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD, AND

HOW

ISRAEL WAS BECOMING SUBJECT TO THAT OF EVIL.

(St. Matt. xii. 22-45; St. Luke xi. 14-36.)

It was well that Jesus should, for the present, have parted from

Jerusalem with words like these. They would cling about His hearers

like the odour of incense that had ascended. Even 'the schism' that

had come among them[4194]4194 concerning His Person made it possible

not only to continue His Teaching, but to return to the City once more

ere His final entrance. For, His Peræan Ministry, which extended from

after the Feast of Tabernacles to the week preceding the last

Passover, was, so to speak, cut in half by the brief visit of Jesus to

Jerusalem at the Feast of the Dedication.[4195]4195 Thus, each part of

the Peræan Ministry would last about three months; the first, from

about the end of September to the month of December;[4196]4196 the

second, from that period to the beginning of April.[4197]4197 Of these

six months we have (with the solitary exception of St. Matthew xii.

22-45),[4198]4198 no other account than that furnished by St.

Luke,[4199]4199 [4200]4200 although, as usually, the Jerusalem and

Judæan incidents of it are described by St. John.[4201]4201 After that

we have the account of His journey to the last Passover, recorded,

with more or less detail, in the three Synoptic Gospels.

It will be noticed that this section is peculiarly lacking in

incident. It consists almost exclusively of Discourses and Parables,

with but few narrative portions interspersed. And this, not only

because the season of the year must have made itinerancy difficult,

and thus have hindered the introduction to new scenes and of new

persons, but chiefly from the character of His Ministry in Peræa. We

remember that, similarly, the beginning of Christ's Galilean Ministry

had been chiefly marked by Discourses and Parables. Besides, after

what had passed, and must now have been so well known, illustrative

Deeds could scarcely have been so requisite in Peræa. In fact, His

Peræan was, substantially, a resumption of His early Galilean

Ministry, only modified and influenced by the much fuller knowledge of

the people concerning Christ, and the greatly developed enmity of

their leaders. This accounts for the recurrence, although in fuller,

or else in modified, form, of many things recorded in the earlier part

of this History. Thus, to begin with, we can understand how He would,

at this initial stage of His Peræan, as in that of His Galilean

Ministry, repeat, when asked for instruction concerning prayer, those

sacred words ever since known as the Lord's Prayer. The variations are

so slight as to be easily accounted for by the individuality of the

reporter.[4202]4202 They afford, however, the occasion for remarking

on the two principal differences. In St. Luke the prayer is for the

forgiveness of 'sins,' while St. Matthew uses the Hebraic term

'debts,' which has passed even into the Jewish Liturgy, denoting our

guilt as indebtedness ({hebrew}). Again, the 'day by day' of St. Luke,

which further explains the petition for 'daily bread,' common both to

St. Matthew and St. Luke, may be illustrated by the beautiful Rabbinic

teaching, that the Manna fell only for each day, in order that thought

of their daily dependence might call forth constant faith in our

'Father Which is in heaven.'[4203]4203 [4204]4204 Another Rabbinic

saying places[4205]4205 our nourishment on the same level with our

redemption, as regards the thanks due to God and the fact that both

are day by day.[4206]4206 Yet a third Rabbinic saying[4207]4207 notes

the peculiar manner in which both nourishment and redemption are

always mentioned in Scripture (by reduplicated expressions), and how,

while redemption took place by an Angel,[4208]4208 nourishment is

attributed directly to God.[4209]4209

But to return. From the introductory expression: 'When (or whenever)

ye pray, say' - we venture to infer, that this prayer was intended,

not only as the model, but as furnishing the words for the future use

of the Church. Yet another suggestion may be made. The request, 'Lord,

teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples,'[4210]4210 seems

to indicate what was 'the certain place,' which, now consecreated by

our Lord's prayer, became the school for ours. It seems at least

likely, that the allusion of the disciples to the Baptist may have

been prompted by the circumstance, that the locality was that which

had been the scene of John's labours - of course, in Peræa. Such a

note of place is the more interesting, that St. Luke so rarely

indicates localities. In fact, he leaves us in ignorance of what was

the central place in Christ's Peræan Ministry, although there must

have been such. In the main, the events are, indeed, most likely

narrated in their chronological order. But, as Discourses, Parables,

and incidents are so closely mixed up, it will be better, in a work

like the present, for clearness' and briefness' sake, to separate and

group them, so far as possible. Accordingly, this chapter will be

devoted to the briefest summary of the Lord's Discourses in Peræa,

previous to His return to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Dedication of

the Temple.

The first of these was on the occasion of His casting out a

demon,[4211]4211 and restoring speech to the demonised; or if, as

seems likely, the cure is the same as that recorded in St. Matt. xii.

22, both sight and speech, which had probably been paralysed. This is

one of the cases in which it is difficult to determine whether

narratives in different Gospels, with slightly varying details,

represent different events or only differing modes of narration. It

needs no argument to prove, that substantially the same event, such as

the healing of a blind or dumb demonised person, may, and probably

would, have taken place on more than one occasion, and that, when it

occurred, it would elicit substantially the same remarks by the

people, and the same charge against Christ of superior demoniac agency

which the Pharisees had now distinctly formulated.[4212]4212 Again,

when recording similar events, the Evangelists would naturally come to

tell them in much the same manner. Hence, it does not follow that two

similar narratives in different Gospels always represent the same

event. But in this instance, it seems likely. The earlier place which

it occupies in the Gospel by St. Matthew may be explained by its

position in a group denunciatory of the Pharisees; and the notice

there of their blasphemous charge of His being the instrument of Satan

probably indicates the outcome of their 'council,' how they might

destroy Him.[4213]4213 [4214]4214

It is this charge of the Pharisees which forms the main subject of

Christ's address, His language being now much more explicit than

formerly,[4215]4215 even as the opposition of the Pharisees had more

fully ripened. In regard to the slight difference in the narratives of

St. Matthew and St. Luke, we mark that, as always, the Words of the

Lord are more fully reported by the former, while the latter supplies

some vivid pictorial touches.[4216]4216 The following are the leading

features of Christ's reply to the Pharisaic charge: First, It was

utterly unreasonable,[4217]4217 and inconsistent with their own

premisses,[4218]4218 showing that their ascription of Satanic agency

to what Christ did was only prompted by hostility to His Person. This

mode of turning the argument against the arguer was peculiarly

Hebraic, and it does not imply any assertion on the part of Christ, as

to whether or not the disciples of the Pharisees really cast out

demons. Mentally, we must supply - according to your own professions,

your disciples cast out demons. If so, by whom are they doing it?

But, secondly, beneath this logical argumentation lies deep and

spiritual instruction, closely connected with the late teaching during

the festive days in Jerusalem. It is directed against the flimsy,

superstitious, and unspiritual views entertained by Israel, alike of

the Kingdom of evil and of that of God. For, if we ignore the moral

aspect of Satan and his kingdom, all degenerates into the absurdities

and superstitions of the Jewish view concerning demons and Satan,

which are fully described in another place.[4219]4219 On the other

hand, introduce the ideas of moral evil, of the concentration of its

power in a kingdom of which Satan is the representative and ruler, and

of our own inherent sinfulness, which makes us his subjects - and all

becomes clear. Then, truly, can Satan not cast out Satan - else how

could his kingdom stand; then, also, is the casting out of Satan only

by 'God's Spirit,' or 'Finger:' and this is the Kingdom of

God.[4220]4220 Nay, by their own admission, the casting out of Satan

was part of the work of Messiah.[4221]4221 [4222]4222 Then had the

Kingdom of God, indeed, come to them - for in this was the Kingdom of

God; and He was the God-sent Messiah, come not for the glory of

Israel, nor for anything outward or intellectual, but to engage in

mortal conflict with moral evil, and with Satan as its representative.

In that contest Christ, as the Stronger, bindeth 'the strong one,'

spoils his house (divideth his spoil), and takes from him the armour

in which his strength lay ('he trusted') by taking away the power of

sin.[4223]4223 This is the work of the Messiah - and, therefore also,

no one can be indifferent towards Him, because all, being by nature in

a certain relation towards Satan, must, since the Messiah had

commenced His Work, occupy a definite relationship towards the Christ

Who combats Satan.[4224]4224 [4225]4225

It follows, that the work of the Christ is a moral contest waged

through the Spirit of God, in which, from their position, all must

take a part. But it is conceivable that a man may not only try to be

passively, but even be actively on the enemy's side, and this not by

merely speaking against the Christ, which might be the outcome of

ignorance or unbelief, but by representing that as Satanic which was

the object of His Coming.[4226]4226 Such perversion of all that is

highest and holiest, such opposition to, and denunciation of, the Holy

Spirit as if He were the manifestation of Satan, represents sin in its

absolute completeness, and for which there can be no pardon, since the

state of mind of which it is the outcome admits not the possibility of

repentance, because its essence lies in this, to call that Satanic

which is the very object of repentance. It were unduly to press the

Words of Christ, to draw from them such inferences as, whether sins

unforgiven in this world might or might not be forgiven in the next,

since, manifestly, it was not the intention of Christ to teach on this

subject. On the other hand, His Words seem to imply that, at least as

regards this sin, there is no room for forgiveness in the other world.

For, the expression is not 'the age to come' ({hebrew}), but, 'the

world to come' ({hebrew}, or, {hebrew}), which, as we know, does not

strictly refer to Messianic times. but to the future and eternal, as

distinguished both from this world ({hebrew}), and from 'the days of

the Messiah' ({hebrew}).[4227]4227

3. But this recognition of the spiritual, which was the opposite of

the sin against the Holy Ghost, was, as Christ had so lately explained

in Jerusalem, only to be attained by spiritual kinship with

it.[4228]4228 The tree must be made good, if the fruit were to be

good; tree and fruit would correspond to each other. How, then, could

these Pharisees 'speak good things,' since the state of the heart

determined speech and action? Hence, a man would have to give an

account even of every idle word, since, however trifling it might

appear to others or to oneself, it was really the outcome of 'the

heart,' and showed the inner state. And thus, in reality. would a

man's future in judgment be determined by his words; a conclusion the

more solemn, when we remember its bearing on what His disciples on the

one side, and the Pharisees on the other, said concerning Christ and

the Spirit of God.

4. Both logically and morally the Words of Christ were unanswerable;

and the Pharisees fell back on the old device of challenging proof of

His Divine Mission by some visible sign.[4229]4229 But this was to

avoid the appeal to the moral element which the Lord had made; it was

an attempt to shift the argument from the moral to the physical. It

was the moral that was at fault, or rather, wanting in them; and no

amount of physical evidence or demonstration could have supplied that.

All the signs from heaven would not have supplied the deep sense of

sin and of the need for a mighty spiritual deliverance,[4230]4230

which alone would lead to the reception of the Saviour Christ. Hence,

as under previous similar circumstances,[4231]4231 He would offer them

only one sign, that of Jonas the prophet. But whereas on the former

occasion Christ chiefly referred to Jonas' preaching (of repentance),

on this He rather pointed to the allegorical history of Jonas as the

Divine attestation of his Mission. As he appeared in Nineveh, he was

himself 'a sign unto the Ninevites;'[4232]4232 the fact that he had

been three days and nights in the whale's belly, and that thence he

had, so to speak, been sent forth alive to preach in Nineveh, was

evidence to them that he had been sent of God. And so would it be

again. After three days and three nights 'in the heart of the earth' -

which is a Hebraism for 'in the earth'[4233]4233 - would His

Resurrection Divinely attest to this generation His Mission. The

Ninevites did not question, but received this attestation of Jonas;

nay, an authentic report of the wisdom of Solomon had been sufficient

to bring the Queen of Sheba from so far; in the one case it was,

because they felt their sin; in the other, because she felt need and

longing for better wisdom than she possessed. But these were the very

elements wanting in the men of this generation; and so both Nineveh

and the Queen of Sheba would stand up, not only as mute witnesses

against, but to condemn, them. For, the great Reality of which the

preaching of Jonas had been only the type, and for which the wisdom of

Solomon had been only the preparation, had been presented to them in

Christ.[4234]4234

5. And so, having put aside this cavil, Jesus returned to His former

teaching[4235]4235 concerning the Kingdom of Satan and the power of

evil; only now with application, not, as before, to the individual,

but, as prompted by a view of the unbelieving resistance of Israel, to

the Jewish commonwealth as a whole. Here, also, it must be remembered,

that, as the words used by our Lord were allegorical and illustrative,

they must not be too closely pressed. As compared with the other

nations of the world, Israel was like a house from which the demon of

idolatry had gone out with all his attendants, really the

'Beel-Zibbul' whom they dreaded. And then the house had been swept of

all the foulness and uncleanness of idolatry, and garnished with all

manner of Pharisaic adornments. Yet all this while the house was left

really empty; God was not there; the Stronger One, Who alone could

have resisted the Strong One, held not rule in it. And so the demon

returned to it again, to find the house whence he had come out, swept

and garnished indeed, but also empty and defenceless. The folly of

Israel lay in this, that they thought of only one demon - him of

idolatry - Beel-Zibbul, with all his foulness. That was all very

repulsive, and they had carefully removed it. But they knew that

demons were only manifestations of demoniac power, and that there was

a Kingdom of evil. So this house, swept of the foulness of heathenism

and adorned with all the self-righteousness of Pharisaism, but empty

of God, would only become a more suitable and more secure habitation

of Satan; because, from its cleanness and beauty, his presence and

rule there as an evil spirit would not be suspected. So, to continue

the illustrative language of Christ, he came back 'with seven other

spirits more wicked than himself' - pride, self-righteousness,

unbelief, and the like, the number seven being general - and thus the

last state - Israel without the foulness of gross idolatry and

garnished with all the adornments of Pharisaic devotion to the study

and practice of the Law - was really worse than had been the first

with all its open repulsiveness.

6. Once more was the Discourse interrupted, this time by a truly

Jewish incident. A woman in the crowd burst into exclamations about

the blessedness of the Mother who had borne and nurtured such a

Son.[4236]4236 The phraseology seems to have been not uncommon, since

it is equally applied by the Rabbis to Moses,[4237]4237 and even to a

great Rabbi.[4238]4238 More striking, perhaps, is another Rabbinic

passage (previously quoted), in which Israel is described as breaking

forth into these words on beholding the Messiah: 'Blessed the hour in

which Messiah was created; blessed the womb whence He issued; blessed

the generation that sees Him; blessed the eye that is worthy to behold

Him.'[4239]4239 [4240]4240

And yet such praise must have been peculiarly unwelcome to Christ, as

being the exaltation of only His Human Personal excellence,

intellectual or moral. It quite looked away from that which He would

present: His Work and Mission as the Saviour. Hence it was, although

from the opposite direction, as great a misunderstanding as the

Personal depreciation of the Pharisees. Or, to use another

illustration, this praise of the Christ through His Virgin-Mother was

as unacceptable and unsuitable as the depreciation of the Christ,

which really, though unconsciously, underlay the loving care of the

Virgin-Mother when she would have arrested Him in His Work,[4241]4241

and which (perhaps for this very reason) St. Matthew relates in the

same connection.[4242]4242 Accordingly, the answer in both cases is

substantially the same: to point away from His merely Human

Personality to His Work and Mission - in the one case: 'Whosoever

shall do the Will of My Father Which is in heaven, the same is My

brother, and sister, and mother;' in the other: 'Yea rather, blessed

are they that hear the Word of God and keep it.'[4243]4243

7. And now the Discourse draws to a close[4244]4244 by a fresh

application of what, in some other form or connection, Christ had

taught at the outset of His public Ministry in the 'Sermon on the

Mount.'[4245]4245 Rightly to understand its present connection, we

must pass over the various interruptions of Christ's Discourse, and

join this as the conclusion to the previous part, which contained the

main subject. This was, that spiritual knowledge presupposed spiritual

kinship.[4246]4246 Here, as becomes the close of a Discourse, the same

truth is practically applied in a more popular and plain, one might

almost say realistic, manner. As here put, it is, that spiritual

receptiveness is ever the condition of spiritual reception. What was

the object of lighting a lamp? Surely, that it may give light. But if

so, no one would put it into a vault, nor under the bushel, but on the

stand. Should we then expect that God would light the spiritual lamp,

if it be put in a dark vault? Or, to take an illustration of it from

the eye, which, as regards the body, serves the same purpose as the

lamp in a house. Does it not depend on the state of the eye whether or

not we have the sensation, enjoyment, and benefit of the light? Let

us, therefore, take care, lest, by placing, as it were, the lamp in a

vault, the light in us be really only darkness.[4247]4247 On the other

hand, if by means of a good eye the light is transmitted through the

whole system - if it is not turned into darkness, like a lamp that is

put into a vault or under a bushel, instead of being set up to spread

light through the house - then shall we be wholly full of light. And

this, finally, explains the reception or rejection of Christ: how, in

the words of an Apostle, the same Gospel would be both a savour of

life unto life, and of death unto death.

It was a blessed lesson with which to close His Discourse, and one

full of light, if only they had not put it into the vault of their

darkened hearts. Yet presently would it shine forth again, and give

light to those whose eyes were opened to receive it; for, according to

the Divine rule and spiritual order, to him that hath shall be given,

and from him that hath not shall be taken away even that he hath.

CHAPTER XII.

THE MORNING-MEAL IN THE PHARISEE'S HOUSE - MEALS AND FEASTS AMONG

THE JEWS -

CHRIST'S LAST PERÆAN WARNING TO PHARISAISM

(St. Luke xi. 37-54.)

BITTER as was the enmity of the Pharisaic party against Jesus, it had

not yet so far spread, nor become so avowed, as in every place to

supersede the ordinary rules of courtesy. It is thus that we explain

that invitation of a Pharisee to the morning-meal, which furnished the

occasion for the second recorded Peræan Discourse of Christ. Alike in

substance and tone, it is a continuation of His former address to the

Pharisees. And it is probably here inserted in order to mark the

further development of Christ's anti-Pharisaic teaching. It is the

last address to the Pharisees, recorded in the Gospel of St.

Luke.[4248]4248 A similar last appeal is recorded in a much later

portion of St. Matthew's Gospel,[4249]4249 only that St. Luke reports

that spoken in Peræa, St. Matthew that made in Jerusalem. This may

also partly account for the similarity of language in the two

Discourses. Not only were the circumstances parallel, but the language

held at the end[4250]4250 may naturally have recurred to the writer,

when reporting the last controversial Discourse in Peræa. Thus it may

well have been, that Christ said substantially the same things on both

occasions, and yet that, in the report of them, some of the later

modes of expression may have been transferred to the earlier occasion.

And because the later both represents and presents the fullest

anti-Pharisaic Discourse of the Saviour, it will be better to postpone

our analysis till we reach that period of His Life.[4251]4251

Some distinctive points, however, must here be noted. The remarks

already made will explain, how some time may have elapsed between this

and the former Discourse, and that the expression 'And as He

spake'[4252]4252 must not be pressed as a mark of time (referring to

the immediately preceding Discourse), but rather be regarded as

indicating the circumstances under which a Pharisee had bidden Him to

the meal.[4253]4253 Indeed, we can scarcely imagine that, immediately

after such a charge by the Pharisees as that Jesus acted as the

representative of Beelzebul, and such a reply on the part of Jesus, a

Pharisee would have invited Him to a friendly meal, or that 'Lawyers,'

or, to use a modern term, 'Canonists,' would have been present at it.

How different their feelings were after they had heard His

denunciations, appears from the bitterness with which they afterwards

sought to provoke Him into saying what might serve as ground for a

criminal charge.[4254]4254 And there is absolutely no evidence that,

as commentators suggest, the invitation of the Pharisee had been

hypocritically given, for the purpose of getting up an accusation

against Christ. More than this, it seems entirely inconsistent with

the unexpressed astonishment of the Pharisee, when he saw Jesus

sitting down to food without having first washed hands. Up to that

moment, then, it would seem that he had only regarded Him as a

celebrated Rabbi, though perhaps one who taught strange things.

But what makes it almost certain, that some time must have elapsed

between this and the previous Discourse (or rather that, as we

believe, the two events happened in different places), is, that the

invitation of the Pharisee was to the 'morning-meal.'[4255]4255 We

know that this took place early immediately after the return from

morning prayers in the Synagogue.[4256]4256 It is, therefore, scarcely

conceivable, that all that is recorded in connection with the first

Discourse should have occurred before this first meal. On the other

hand, it may well have been, that what passed at the Pharisee's table

may have some connection with something that had occurred just before

in the Synagogue, for we conjecture that it was the Sabbath-day. We

infer this from the circumstance that the invitation was not to the

principal meal, which on a Sabbath 'the Lawyers' (and, indeed, all

householders) would, at least ordinarily, have in their own

homes.[4257]4257 We can picture to ourselves the scene. The week-day

family-meal was simple enough, whether breakfast or dinner - the

latter towards evening, although sometimes also in the middle of the

day, but always before actual darkness, in order, as it was expressed,

that the sight of the dishes by daylight might excite the

appetite.[4258]4258 The Babylonian Jews were content to make a meal

without meat; not so the Palestinians.[4259]4259 With the latter the

favorite food was young meat: goats, lambs, calves. Beef was not so

often used, and still more rarely fowls. Bread was regarded as the

mainstay of life,[4260]4260 without which no entertainment was

considered as a meal. Indeed, in a sense it constituted the meal. For

the blessing was spoken over the bread, and this was supposed to cover

all the rest of the food that followed, such as the meat, fish or

vegetables - in short, all that made up the dinner, but not the

dessert. Similarly, the blessing spoken over the wine included all

other kinds of drink.[4261]4261 Otherwise it would have been necessary

to pronounce a separate benediction over each different article eaten

or drunk. He who neglected the prescribed benedictions was regarded as

if he had eaten of things dedicated to God,[4262]4262 since it was

written: 'The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.'[4263]4263

[4264]4264 Beautiful as this principle is, it degenerated into tedious

questions of casuistry. Thus, if one kind of food was eaten as an

addition to another, it was settled that the blessing should be spoken

only over the principal kind. Again, there are elaborate disputations

as to what should be regarded as fruit, and have the corresponding

blessing, and how, for example, one blessing should be spoken over the

leaves and blossom, and another over the berries of the

caper.[4265]4265 Indeed, that bush gave rise to a serious controversy

between the Schools of Hillel and Shammai. Another series of elaborate

discussions arose, as to what blessing should be used when a dish

consisted of various ingredients, some the product of the earth,

others, like honey, derived from the animal world. Such and similar

disquisitions, giving rise to endless argument and controversy, busied

the minds of the Pharisees and Scribes.

Let us suppose the guests assembled. To such a morning-meal they would

not be summoned by slaves, nor be received in such solemn state as at

feasts. First, each would observe, as a religious rite, 'the washing

of hands.' Next, the head of the house would cut a piece from the

whole loaf - on the Sabbath there were two loaves - and speak the

blessing.[4266]4266 But this, only if the company reclined at table,

as at dinner. If they sat, as probably always at the early meal, each

would speak the benediction for himself.[4267]4267 The same rule

applied in regard to the wine. Jewish casuistry had it, that one

blessing sufficed for the wine intended as part of the meal. If other

wine were brought in during the meal, then each one would have to say

the blessing anew over it; if after the meal (as was done on Sabbaths

and feast-days, to prolong the feast by drinking), one of the company

spoke the benediction for all.

At the entertainment of this Pharisee, as indeed generally, our Lord

omitted the prescribed 'washing of hands' before the meal. But as this

rite was in itself indifferent, He must have had some definite object,

which will be explained in the sequel. The externalism of all these

practices will best appear from the following account which the Talmud

gives of 'a feast.'[4268]4268 As the guests enter, they sit down on

chairs, and water is brought to them, with which they wash one hand.

After this the cup is taken, when each speaks the blessing over the

wine partaken of before dinner. Presently they all lie down at table.

Water is again brought them, with which they now wash both hands,

preparatory to the meal, when the blessing is spoken over the bread,

and then over the cup, by the chief person at the feast, or else by

one selected by way of distinction. The company responded by Amen,

always supposing the benediction to have been spoken by an Israelite,

not a heathen, slave, nor law-breaker. Nor was it lawful to say it

with an unlettered man, although it might be said with a

Cuthæan[4269]4269 (heretic, or else Samaritan), who was learned. After

dinner the crumbs, if any, are carefully gathered - hands are again

washed, and he who first had done so leads in the prayer of

thanksgiving. The formula in which he is to call on the rest to join

him, by repeating the prayers after him, is prescribed, and differs

according to the number of those present. The blessing and the

thanksgiving are allowed to be said not only in Hebrew, but in any

other language.[4270]4270

In regard to the position of the guests, we know that the uppermost

seats were occupied by the Rabbis. The Talmud formulates it[4271]4271

in this manner: That the worthiest lies down first, on his left side,

with his feet stretching back. If there are two 'cushions' (divans),

the next worthiest reclines above him, at his left hand; if there are

three cushions, the third worthiest lies below him who had lain down

first (at his right), so that the chief person is in the middle

(between the worthiest guest at his left and the less worthy one at

his right hand). The water before eating is first handed to the

worthiest, and so in regard to the washing after meat. But if a very

large number are present, you begin after dinner with the least

worthy, till you come to the last five, when the worthiest in the

company washes his hands, and the other four after him.[4272]4272 The

guests being thus arranged, the head of the house, or the chief person

at table, speaks the blessing,[4273]4273 and then cuts the bread. By

some it was not deemed etiquette to begin eating till after he who had

said the prayer had done so, but this does not seem to have been the

rule among the Palestinian Jews. Then, generally, the bread was dipped

into salt, or something salted, etiquette demanding that where there

were two they should wait one for the other, but not where there were

three or more.

This is not the place to furnish what may be termed a list of menus at

Jewish tables. In earlier times the meal was, no doubt, very simple.

It became otherwise when intercourse with Rome, Greece, and the East

made the people familiar with foreign luxury, while commerce supplied

its requirements. Indeed, it would scarcely be possible to enumerate

the various articles which seem to have been imported from different,

and even distant, countries.

To begin with: the wine was mixed with water, and, indeed, some

thought that the benediction should not be pronounced till the water

had been added to the wine.[4274]4274 According to one statement, two

parts,[4275]4275 according to another, three parts, of water were to

be added to the wine.[4276]4276 Various vintages are mentioned: among

them a red wine of Saron, and a black wine. Spiced wine was made with

honey and pepper. Another mixture, chiefly used for invalids,

consisted of old wine, water, and balsam; yet another was 'wine of

myrrh;'[4277]4277 we also read of a wine in which capers had been

soaked. To these we should add wine spiced, either with pepper, or

with absinthe; and what is described as vinegar, a cooling drink made

either of grapes that had not ripened, or of the lees. Besides these,

palm-wine was also in use. Of foreign drinks, we read of wine from

Ammon, and from the province Asia, the latter a kind of 'must' boiled

down. Wine in ice came from the Lebanon; a certain kind of vinegar

from Idumaea; beer from Media and Babylon; a barley-wine (zythos) from

Egypt. Finally, we ought to mention Palestinian apple-cider,[4278]4278

and the juice of other fruits. If we adopt the rendering of some, even

liqueurs were known and used.

Long as this catalogue is, that of the various articles of food,

whether native or imported, would occupy a much larger space. Suffice

it that, as regarded the various kinds of grain, meat, fish, and

fruits. either in their natural state or preserved, it embraced almost

everything known to the ancient world. At feasts there was an

introductory course, consisting of appetising salted meat, or of some

light dish. This was followed by the dinner itself, which finished

with dessert (Aphiqomon or terugima) consisting of pickled olives,

radishes and lettuce, and fruits, among which even preserved ginger

from India is mentioned.[4279]4279 The most diverse and even strange

statements are made as to the healthiness, or the reverse, of certain

articles of diet, especially vegetables. Fish was a favorite dish, and

never wanting at a Sabbath-meal. It was a saying, that both salt and

water should be used at every meal, if health was to be preserved.

Condiments, such as mustard or pepper, were to be sparingly used. Very

different were the meals of the poor. Locusts - fried in flour or

honey, or preserved - required, according to the Talmud, no blessing,

since the animal was really among the curses of the land. Eggs were a

common article of food, and sold in the shops. Then there was a

milk-dish into which people dipped their bread. Others, who were

better off, had a soup made of vegetables, especially onions, and

meat, while the very poor would satisfy the cravings of hunger with

bread and cheese, or bread and fruit, or some vegetables, such as

cucumbers, lentils, beans, peas, or onions.

At meals the rules of etiquette were strictly observed, especially as

regarded the sages. Indeed, two tractates are added to the Talmud, of

which the one describes the general etiquette, the other that of

'sages,' and the title of which may be translated by 'The Way of the

World' (Derekh Erets), being a sort of code of good manners. According

to some, it was not good breeding to speak while eating. The learned

and most honored occupied not only the chief places, but were

sometimes distinguished by a double portion. According to Jewish

etiquette, a guest should conform in everything to his host, even

though it were unpleasant. Although hospitality was the greatest and

most prized social virtue, which, to use a Rabbinic expression, might

make every home a sanctuary and every table an altar, an unbidden

guest, or a guest who brought another guest, was proverbially an

unwelcome apparition. Sometimes, by way of self-righteousness, the

poor were brought in, and the best part of the meal ostentatiously

given to them. At ordinary entertainments, people were to help

themselves. It was not considered good manners to drink as soon as you

were asked, but you ought to hold the cup for a little in your hand.

But it would be the height of rudeness, either to wipe the plates, to

scrape together the bread, as though you had not had enough to eat, or

to drop it, to the inconvenience of your neighbour. If a piece were

taken out of a dish, it must of course not be put back; still less

must you offer from your cup or plate to your neighbour. From the

almost religious value attaching to bread, we scarcely wonder that

these rules were laid down: not to steady a cup or plate upon bread,

nor to throw away bread, and that after dinner the bread was to be

carefully swept together. Otherwise, it was thought, demons would sit

upon it. The 'Way of the World' for Sages,[4280]4280 lays down these

as the marks of a Rabbi: that he does not eat standing; that he does

not lick his fingers; that he sits down only beside his equals - in

fact, many regarded it as wrong to eat with the unlearned; that he

begins cutting the bread where it is best baked, nor ever breaks off a

bit with his hand; and that, when drinking, he turns away his face

from the company. Another saying was that the sage was known by four

things: at his cups, in money matters, when angry, and in his

jokes.[4281]4281 After dinner, the formalities concerning handwashing

and prayer, already described, were gone through, and then frequently

aromatic spices burnt, over which a special benediction was

pronounced. We have only to add, that on Sabbaths it was deemed a

religious duty to have three meals, and to procure the best that money

could obtain, even though one were to save and fast for it all the

week. Lastly, it was regarded as a special obligation and honor to

entertain sages.

We have no difficulty now in understanding what passed at the table of

the Pharisee. When the water for purification was presented to Him,

Jesus would either refuse it; or if, as seems more likely at a

morning-meal, each guest repaired by himself for the prescribed

purification, He would omit to do so, and sit down to meat without

this formality. No one, who knows the stress which Pharisaism laid on

this rite would argue that Jesus might have conformed to the

practice.[4282]4282 Indeed, the controversy was long and bitter

between the Schools of Shammai and Hillel, on such a point as whether

the hands were to be washed before the cup was filled with wine, or

after that, and where the towel was to be deposited. With such things

the most serious ritual inferences were connected on both

sides.[4283]4283 A religion which spent its energy on such

trivialities must have lowered the moral tone. All the more that Jesus

insisted so earnestly, as the substance of His Teaching, on that

corruption of our nature which Judaism ignored, and on that spiritual

purification which was needful for the reception of His doctrine,

would He publicly and openly set aside ordinances of man which

diverted thoughts of purity into questions of the most childish

character. On the other hand, we can also understand what bitter

thoughts must have filled the mind of the Pharisee, whose guest Jesus

was, when he observed His neglect of the cherished rite. It was an

insult to himself, a defiance of Jewish Law, a revolt against the most

cherished tradltions of the Synagogue. Remembering that a Pharisee

ought not to sit down to a meal with such, he might feel that he

should not have asked Jesus to his table. All this, as well as the

terrible contrast between the punctiliousness of Pharisaism in outward

purifications, and the inward defilement which it never sought to

remove, must have lain open before Him Who read the inmost secrets of

the heart, and kindled His holy wrath. Probably taking occasion (as

previously suggested) from something that had passed before, He spoke

with the point and emphasis which a last appeal to Pharisaism

demanded.

What our Lord said on this occasion will be considered in detail in

another place.[4284]4284 Suffice it hear to mark, that He first

exposed the mere externalism of the Pharisaic law of purification, to

the utter ignoring of the higher need of inward purity, which lay at

the foundation of all.[4285]4285 If the primary origin of the

ordinance was to prevent the eating of sacred offerings in

defilement,[4286]4286 were these outward offerings not a symbol of the

inward sacrifice, and was there not an inward defilement as well as

the outward?[4287]4287 To consecrate what we had to God in His poor,

instead of selfishly enjoying it, would not, indeed, be a purification

of them (for such was not needed), but it would, in the truest sense,

be to eat God's offerings in cleanness.[4288]4288 We mark here a

progress and a development, as compared with the former occasion when

Jesus had publicly spoken on the same subject.[4289]4289 Formerly, He

had treated the ordinance of the Elders as a matter not binding; now,

He showed how this externalism militated against thoughts of the

internal and spiritual. Formerly, He had shown how traditionalism came

into conflict with the written Law of God: now, how it superseded the

first principles which underlay that Law. Formerly, He had laid down

the principle that defilement came not from without inwards, but from

within outwards;[4290]4290 now, He unfolded this highest principle

that higher consecration imparted purity.

The same principle, indeed, would apply to other things, such as to

the Rabbinic law of tithing. At the same time it may have been, as

already suggested, that something which had previously taken place, or

was the subject of conversation at table, had given occasion for the

further remarks of Christ.[4291]4291 Thus, the Pharisee may have

wished to convey his rebuke of Christ by referring to the subject of

tithing. And such covert mode of rebuking was very common among the

Jews. It was regarded as utterly defiling to eat of that which had not

been tithed. Indeed, the three distinctions of a Pharisee

were:[4292]4292 not to make use nor to partake of anything that had

not been tithed; to observe the laws of purification; and, as a

consequence of these two, to abstain from familiar intercourse with

all non-Pharisees. This separation formed the ground of their claim to

distinction.[4293]4293 It will be noticed that it is exactly to these

three things our Lord adverts: so that these sayings of His are not,

as might seem, unconnected, but in the strictest internal

relationship. Our Lord shows how Pharisaism, as regarded the outer,

was connected with the opposite tendency as regarded the inner man:

outward purification with ignorance of the need of that inward purity,

which consisted in God-consecration, and with the neglect of it;

strictness of outward tithing with ignorance and neglect of the

principle which underlay it, viz., the acknowledgment of God's right

over mind and heart (judgment and the love of God); while, lastly, the

Pharisaic pretence of separation, and consequent claim to distinction,

issued only in pride and self-assertion. Thus, tried by its own tests,

Pharisaism[4294]4294 terribly failed. It was hypocrisy, although that

word was not mentioned till afterwards;[4295]4295 [4296]4296 and that

both negatively and positively: the concealment of what it was, and

the pretension to what it was not. And the Pharisaism which pretended

to the highest purity, was, really, the greatest impurity - the

defilement of graves, only covered up, not to be seen of men!

It was at this point that one of 'the Scribes' at table broke in.

Remembering in what contempt some of the learned held the ignorant

bigotry of the Pharisees,[4297]4297 we can understand that he might

have listened with secret enjoyment to denunciations of their 'folly.'

As the common saying had it, 'the silly pietist,' 'a woman Pharisee,'

and the (self-inflicted) 'blows of Pharisaism,' were among the plagues

of life.[4298]4298 And we cannot help feeling, that there is sometimes

a touch of quiet humour in the accounts which the Rabbis give of the

encounters between the Pharisees and their opponents.[4299]4299 But,

as the Scribe rightly remarked, by attacking, not merely their

practice, but their principles, the whole system of traditionalism,

which they represented, was condemned.[4300]4300 And so the Lord

assuredly meant it. The 'Scribes' were the exponents of the

traditional law; those who bound and loosed in Israel. They did bind

on heavy burdens, but they never loosed one; all those grievous

burdens of traditionalism they laid on the poor people, but not the

slightest effort did they make to remove any of them.[4301]4301

Tradition, yes! the very profession of it bore witness against them.

Tradition, the ordinances that had come down - they would not reform

nor put aside anything, but claim and proclaim all that had come down

from the fathers as a sacred inheritance to which they clung. So be

it! let them be judged by their own words. The fathers had murdered

the prophets, and they built their sepulchres; that, also, was a

tradition - that of guilt which would be avenged. Tradition, learning,

exclusiveness - alas! it was only taking away from the poor the key of

knowledge; and while they themselves entered not by 'the door' into

the Kingdom, they hindered those who would have gone in. And truly so

did they prove that theirs was the inheritance, the 'tradition,' of

guilt in hindering and banishing the Divine teaching of old, and

murdering its Divine messengers.[4302]4302

There was a terrible truth and solemnity in what Jesus spake, and in

the Woe which He denounced on them. The history of the next few months

would bear witness how truly they had taken upon them this tradition

of guilt; and all the after-history of Israel shows how fully this

'Woe' has come upon them. But, after such denunciations, the

entertainment in the Pharisee's house must have been broken up. The

Christ was too terribly in earnest - too mournfully so over those whom

they hindered from entering the Kingdom, to bear with the awful guilt

of their trivialities. With what feelings they parted from Him,

appears from the sequel.

'And when He was come out from thence, the Scribes and the Pharisees

began to press upon Him vehemently, and to provoke Him to speak of

many things; laying wait for Him, to catch something out of His

Mouth.'[4303]4303

CHAPTER XIII.

TO THE DISCIPLES - TWO EVENTS AND THEIR MORAL.

(St. Luke xii. 1 - xiii. 17.)

The record of Christ's last warning to the Pharisees, and of the

feelings of murderous hate which it called forth, is followed by a

summary of Christ's teaching to His disciples. The tone is still that

of warning, but entirely different from that to the Pharisees. It is a

warning of sin that threatened, not of judgment that awaited; it was

for prevention, not in denunciation. That such warnings were most

seasonable, requires scarcely proof. They were prompted by

circumstances around. The same teaching, because prompted by the same

causes, had been mostly delivered, also, on other occasions. Yet there

are notable, though seemingly slight, divergences, accounted for by

the difference of the writers or of the circumstances, and which mark

the independence of the narratives.

1. The first of these Discourses[4304]4304 naturally connects itself

with what had passed at the Pharisee's table, an account of which must

soon have spread. Although the Lord is reported as having addressed

the same language chiefly to the Twelve when sending them on their

first Mission,[4305]4305 [4306]4306 we shall presently mark several

characteristic variations. The address - or so much of it as is

reported, probably only its summary - is introduced by the following

notice of the circumstances: 'In the mean time, when the many

thousands of the people were gathered together, so that they trode

upon each other, He began to say to His disciples: "First [above all,

{hebrew}],[4307]4307 beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is

hypocrisy."' There is no need to point out the connection between this

warning and the denunciation of Pharisaism and traditionalism at the

Pharisee's table. Although the word 'hypocrisy' had not been spoken

there, it was the sum and substance of His contention, that

Pharisaism, while pretending to what it was not, concealed what it

was. And it was this which, like 'leaven,' pervaded the whole system

of Pharisaism. Not that as individuals they were all hypocrites, but

that the system was hypocrisy. And here it is characteristic of

Pharisaism, that Rabbinic Hebrew has not even a word equivalent to the

term 'hypocrisy.' The only expression used refers either to flattery

of, or pretence before men,[4308]4308 not to that unconscious

hypocrisy towards God which our Lord so truly describes as 'the

leaven' that pervaded all the Pharisees said and did. It is against

this that He warned His disciples - and in this, rather than conscious

deception, pretence, or flattery, lies the danger of the Church. Our

common term, 'unreality,' but partially describes it. Its full meaning

can only be gathered from Christ's teaching. But what precise term He

may have used, it is impossible to suggest.[4309]4309

After all, hypocrisy was only self-deception.[4310]4310

'But,[4311]4311 there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed.'

Hence, what they had said in the darkness would be revealed, and what

they had spoken about in the store-rooms[4312]4312 would be proclaimed

on the housetops. Nor should fear influence them.[4313]4313 Fear of

whom? Man could only kill the body, but God held body and soul. And,

as fear was foolish, so was it needless in view of that wondrous

Providence which watched over even the meanest of God's

creatures.[4314]4314 Rather let them, in the impending struggle with

the powers of this world, rise to consciousness of its full import -

how earth's voices would find their echo in heaven. And then this

contest, what was it! Not only opposition to Christ, but, in it inmost

essence, blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Therefore, to succumb in

that contest, implied the deepest spiritual danger.[4315]4315 Nay, but

let them not be apprehensive; their acknowledgment would be not only

in the future; even now, in the hour of their danger, would the Holy

Ghost help them, and give them an answer before their accusers and

judges, whoever they might be - Jews or Gentiles. Thus, if they fell

victims, it would be with the knowledge - not by neglect - of their

Father; here, there, everywhere, in their own hearts, before the

Angels, before men, would He give testimony for those who were His

witnesses.[4316]4316

Before proceeding, we briefly mark the differences between this and

the previous kindred address of Christ, when sending the Apostles on

their Mission.[4317]4317 There (after certain personal directions),

the Discourse began[4318]4318 with what it here closes. There it was

in the form of warning prediction, here in that of comforting

reassurance; there it was near the beginning, here near the close, of

His Ministry. Again, as addressed to the Twelve on their Mission, it

was followed by personal directions and consolations,[4319]4319 and

then, transition was made to the admonition to dismiss fear, and to

speak out publicly what had been told them privately. On the other

hand, when addressing His Peræan disciples, while the same admonition

is given, and partly on the same grounds, yet, as spoken to disciples

rather than to preachers, the reference to the similarity of their

fate with that of Christ is omitted, while, to show the real character

of the struggle, an admonition is added, which in His Galilean

Ministry was given in another connection.[4320]4320 Lastly, whereas

the Twelve were admonished not to fear, and, therefore, to speak

openly what they had learned privately, the Peræan disciples are

forewarned that, although what they had spoken together in secret

would be dragged into the light of greatest publicity, yet they were

not to be afraid of the possible consequences to themselves.

2. The second Discourse recorded in this connection was occasioned by

a request for judicial interposition on the part of Christ. This He

answered by a Parable,[4321]4321 [4322]4322 which will be explained in

conjunction with the other Parables of that period. The outcome of

this Parable, as to the utter uncertainty of this life, and the

consequent folly of being so careful for this world while neglectful

of God, led Him to make warning application to His Peræan

disciples.[4323]4323 Only here the negative injunction that preceded

the Parable, 'beware of covetousness,' is, when addressed to 'the

disciples,' carried back to its positive underlying principle: to

dismiss all anxiety, even for the necessaries of life, learning from

the birds and the flowers to have absolute faith and trust in God, and

to labour for only one thing, the Kingdom of God. But, even in this,

they were not to be careful, but to have absolute faith and trust in

their Father, 'Who was well pleased to give' them 'the

Kingdom.'[4324]4324

With but slight variations the Lord had used the same language, even

as the same admonition had been needed, at the beginning of His

Galilean Ministry, in the Sermon on the Mount.[4325]4325 Perhaps we

may here, also, regard the allusion to the springing flowers as a mark

of time. Only, whereas in Galilee this would mark the beginning of

spring, it would, in the more favoured climate of certain parts of

Peræa, indicate the beginning of December, about the time of the Feast

of the Dedication of the Temple. More important, perhaps, is it to

note, that the expression[4326]4326 rendered in the Authorised and

Revised Versions, 'neither be ye of doubtful mind,' really means,

'neither be ye uplifted,' in the sense of not aiming, or seeking after

great things.[4327]4327 This rendering the Greek word (metewr_zein) is

in accordance with its uniform use in the LXX.,[4328]4328 and in the

Apocrypha; while, on the other hand, it occurs in Josephus and Philo,

in the sense of 'being of a doubtful mind.' But the context here

shows, that the term must refer to the disciples coveting great

things, since only to this the remark could apply, that the Gentile

world sought such things, but that our Father knew what was really

needful for us.

Of deepest importance is the final consolation, to dismiss all care

and anxiety, since the Father was pleased to give to this 'little

flock' the Kingdom. The expression 'flood' carries us back to the

language which Jesus had held ere parting from Jerusalem.[4329]4329

Henceforth this designation would mark His people. Even its occurrence

fixes this Discourse as not a repetition of that which St. Matthew had

formerly reported, but as spoken after the Jerusalem visit. It

designates Christ's people in distinction to their ecclesiastical (or

outward) organisation in a 'fold,' and marks alike their individuality

and their conjunction, their need and dependence, and their relation

to Him as the 'Good Shepherd.' Small and despised though it be in the

eyes of men, 'the little flock' is unspeakably noble, and rich in the

gift of the Father.

These admonitions, alike as against covetousness, and as to absolute

trust and a self-surrender to God, which would count all loss for the

Kingdom, are finally set forth, alike in their present application and

their ultimate and permanent principle, in what we regard as the

concluding part of this Discourse.[4330]4330 Its first sentence:'Sell

that ye have, and give alms,' which is only recorded by St. Luke,

indicates not a general principle, but its application to that

particular period, when the faithful disciple required to follow the

Lord, unencumbered by worldly cares or possessions.[4331]4331 The

general principle underlying it is that expressed by St.

Paul,[4332]4332 and finally resolves itself into this: that the

Christian should have as not holding, and use what he has not for self

nor sin, but for necessity. This conclusion of Christ's Discourse,

also, confirms the inference that it was delivered near the terrible

time of the end. Most seasonable would be here the repetition - though

in slightly different language - of an admonition, given in the

beginning of Christ's Galilean Ministry,[4333]4333 to provide treasure

in heaven, which could neither fail nor be taken away, for, assuredly,

where the treasure was, there also would the heart be.

3. Closely connected with, and yet quite distinct from, the previous

Discourse is that about the waiting attitude of the disciples in

regard to their Master. Wholly detached from the things of the world,

their hearts set on the Kingdom, only one thing should seem worthy

their whole attention, and engage all their thoughts and energies:

their Master! He was away at some joyous feast, and the uncertainty of

the hour of His return must not lead the servants to indulge in

surfeiting, nor to lie down in idleness, but to be faithful to their

trust, and eagerly expectant of their Master. The Discourse itself

consists of three parts and a practical application. itself consists

of three parts and a practical application.

1. The Disciples as Servants in the absence of their Master:[4334]4334

their duty and their reward.[4335]4335 This part, containing what

would be so needful to these Peræan disciples, is peculiar to St.

Luke. The Master is supposed to be absent, at a wedding, a figure

which must not be closely pressed, not being one of the essentials in

the Parable. At most, it points to a joyous occasion, and its mention

may chiefly indicate that such a feast might be protracted, so that

the exact time of the Master's return could not be known to the

servants who waited at home. In these circumstances, they should hold

themselves in readiness, that, whatever hour it might be, they should

be able to open the door at the first knocking. Such eagerness and

devotion of service would naturally meet its reward, and the Master

would, in turn, consult the comfort of those who had not allowed

themselves their evening-meal, nor lain down, but watched for His

return. Hungry and weary as they were from their zeal for Him, He

would now, in turn, minister to their personal comfort. And this

applied to servants who so watched - it mattered not how long, whether

into the second or the third of the watches into which the night was

divided.[4336]4336

The 'Parable' now passes into another aspect of the case, which is

again referred to in the last Discourses of Christ.[4337]4337

Conversely - suppose the other case, of people sleeping: the house

might be broken into. Of course, if one had known the hour when the

thief would come, sleep would not have been indulged in; but it is

just this uncertainty and suddenness - and the Coming of the Christ

into His Kingdom would be equally sudden - which should keep the

people in the house ever on their watch till Christ came.[4338]4338

It was at this particular point that a question of Peter interrupted

the Discourse of Christ. To whom did this 'Parable' apply about 'the

good man' and 'the servants' who were to watch: to the Apostles, or

also to all? From the implied - for it is not an express - answer of

the Lord, we infer, that Peter expected some difference between the

Apostles and the rest of the disciples, whether as regarded the

attitude of the servants that waited, or the reward. From the words of

Christ the former seems the more likely. We can understand how Peter

might entertain the Jewish notion, that the Apostles would come with

the Master from the marriage-supper, rather than wait for His return,

and work while waiting. It is to this that the reply of Christ refers.

If the Apostles or others are rulers, it is as stewards, and their

reward of faithful and wise stewardship will be advance to higher

administration. But as stewards they are servants - servants of

Christ, and ministering servants in regard to the other and general

servants. What becomes them in this twofold capacity is faithfulness

to the absent, yet ever near, Lord, and to their work, avoiding, on

the one hand, the masterfulness of pride and of harshness, and, on the

other, the self-degradation of conformity to evil manners, either of

which would entail sudden and condign punishment in the sudden and

righteous reckoning at His appearing. The 'Parable,' therefore, alike

as to the waiting and the reckoning, applied to work for Christ, as

well as to personal relationship towards Him.

Thus far this solemn warning would naturally be afterwards repeated in

Christ's Last Discourses in Judæa, as equally needful, in view of His

near departure.[4339]4339 But in this Peræan Discourse, as reported by

St. Luke, there now follows what must be regarded, not, indeed, as a

further answer to Peter's inquiry, but as specifically referring to

the general question of the relation between special work and general

discipleship which had been raised. For, in one sense, all disciples

are servants, not only to wait, but to work. As regarded those who,

like the professed stewards or labourers, knew their work, but neither

'made ready,'[4340]4340 nor did according to His Will, their

punishment and loss (where the illustrative figure of 'many' and 'few

stripes' must not be too closely pressed) would naturally be greater

than that of them who knew not, though this also involves guilt, that

their Lord had any will towards them, that is, any work for them.

This, according to a well-understood principle, universally, almost

instinctively, acted upon among men.[4341]4341

2. In the absence of their master! A period this of work, as well as

of waiting; a period of trial also.[4342]4342 Here, also,the two

opening verses, in their evident connection with the subject-matter

under the first head of this Discourse,[4343]4343 but especially with

the closing sentences about work for the Master, are peculiar to St.

Luke's narrative, and fit only into it. The Church had a work to do in

His absence - the work for which He had come. He 'came to cast fire on

earth,' - that fire which was kindled when the Risen Saviour sent the

Holy Ghost, and of which the tongues of fire were the

symbol.[4344]4344 Oh, how He longed,[4345]4345 that it were already

kindled! But between Him and it lay the cold flood of His Passion, the

terrible Passion in which He was to be baptized. Oh, how He felt the

burden of that coming Agony![4346]4346 That fire must they spread:

this was the work in which, as disciples, each one must take part.

Again, in that Baptismal Agony of His they also must be prepared to

share. It was fire: burning up, as well as purifying and giving light.

And here it was in place to repeat to His Peræan disciples the

prediction already addressed to the Twelve when going on their

Mission,[4347]4347 as to the certain and necessary trials connected

with carrying 'the fire' which Christ had cast on earth, even to the

burning up of the closest bonds of association and kinship.[4348]4348

3. Thus far to the disciples. And now for its application to 'the

multitudes'[4349]4349 - although here also He could only repeat what

on a former occasion He had said to the Pharisees.[4350]4350 Let them

not think that all this only concerned the disciples. No; it was a

question between Israel and their Messiah, and the struggle would

involve the widest consequences, alike to the people and the

Sanctuary. Were they so blinded as not 'to know how to interpret the

time'?[4351]4351 Could they not read its signs - they who had no

difficulty in interpreting it when a cloud rose from the sea, or the

sirocco blew from the south?[4352]4352 Why then - and here St. Luke is

again alone in his report[4353]4353 - did they not, in the

circumstances, of themselves judge what was right and fitting and

necessary, in view of the gathering tempest?

What was it? Even that he had told them before in Galilee,[4354]4354

for the circumstances were the same. What common sense and common

prudence would dictate to every one whom his accuser or creditor

hauled before the magistrate: to come to an agreement with him before

it was too late, before sentence had been pronounced and

executed.[4355]4355 Although the illustration must not be pressed as

to details, its general meaning would be the more readily understood

that there was a similar Rabbinic proverb,[4356]4356 although with

very different practical application.

4. Besides these Discourses, two events are recorded before Christ's

departure to the 'Feast of the Dedication.' Each of these led to a

brief Discourse, ending in a Parable.

The first records two circumstances not mentioned by the Jewish

historian Josephus,[4357]4357 nor in any other historical notice of

the time, either by Rabbinic or other writers. This shows, on the one

hand, how terribly common such events must have been, when they could

be so generally omitted from the long catalogue of Pilate's misdeeds

towards the Jews. On the other hand it also evidences that the

narrative of St. Luke was derived from independent, authentic sources

- in other words, the historical character of his narrative - when he

could refer as well known to facts, which are not mentioned in any

other record of the times; and, lastly, that we are not warranted in

rejecting a notice, simply because we find no other mention of it than

on the pages of the Third Gospel.

It appears that, just then, or quite soon afterwards, some persons

told Christ about a number of His own Galileans, whom Pilate had

ordered to be cut down, as we infer, in the Temple, while engaged in

offering their sacrifices,[4358]4358 so that, in the pictorial

language of the East, their blood had mingled with that of their

sacrifices. Clearly, their narration of this event must be connected

with the preceding Discourse of Jesus. He had asked them, whether they

could not discern the signs of the terrible national storm that was

nearing. And it was in reference to this, as we judge, that they

repeated this story. To understand their object, we must attend to the

answer of Christ. It is intended to refute the idea, that these

Galileans had in this been visited by a special punishment of some

special sin against God. Two questions here arise. Since between

Christ's visit to Jerusalem at the Feast of Tabernacles and that at

the Dedication of the Temple no Festival took place, it is most

probable that this event had happened before Christ's visit to

Jerusalem. But in that case it seems most likely - almost certain -

that Christ had heard of it before. If so, or, at any rate, if it was

not quite a recent event, why did these men tell Him of it then and

there? Again, it seems strange that, although the Jews connected

special sins with special punishments, they should have regarded it as

the Divine punishment of a special sin to have been martyred by a

Pilate in the Temple, while engaged in offering sacrifices.

All this becomes quite plain, if we regard these men as trying to turn

the edge of Jesus' warning by a kind of 'Tu quoque' argument. Very

probably these Galileans were thus ruthlessly murdered, because of

their real or suspected connection with the Nationalist movement, of

which Galilee was the focus. It is as if these Jews had said to Jesus:

Yes, signs of the times and of the coming storm! These Galileans of

yours, your own countrymen, involved in a kind of Pseudo-Messianic

movement, a kind of 'signs of the times' rising, something like that

towards which you want us to look - was not their death a condign

punishment? This latter inference they did not express in words, but

implied in their narration of the fact. But the Lord read their

thoughts and refuted their reasoning. For this purpose He adduced

another instance,[4359]4359 when a tower at the Siloam-Pool had fallen

on eighteen persons and killed them, perhaps in connection with that

construction of an aqueduct into Jerusalem by Pilate, which called

forth, on the part of the Jews, the violent opposition, which the

Roman so terribly avenged. As good Jews, they would probably think

that the fall of the tower, which had buried in its ruins these

eighteen persons, who were perhaps engaged in the building of that

cursed structure, was a just judgment of God! For Pilate had used for

it the sacred money which had been devoted to Temple-purposes (the

Qorban),[4360]4360 and many there were who perished in the tumult

caused by the Jewish resistance to this act of profanation. But Christ

argued, that it was as wrong to infer that Divine-judgment had

overtaken His Galilean countrymen, as it would be to judge that the

Tower of Siloam had fallen to punish these Jerusalemites. Not one

party only, nor another; not the supposed Messianic tendency (in the

shape of a national rising), nor, on the other hand, the opposite

direction of absolute submission to Roman domination, was in fault.

The whole nation was guilty; and the coming storm, to the signs of

which He had pointed, would destroy all unless there were spiritual

repentance on the part of the nation. And yet wider than this, and

applying to all time, is the underlying principle, that, when a

calamity befalls a district or an aggregation of individuals, we ought

not to take to ourselves judgment as to its special causation, but to

think spiritually of its general application - not so much seek to

trace what is the character of its connection with a district or

individuals, as to learn its lessons and to regard them as a call

addressed to all. And conversely, also, this holds true in regard to

deliverances.

Having thus answered the implied objection, the Lord next showed, in

the Parable of the Fig-tree,[4361]4361 the need and urgency of

national repentance.[4362]4362

The second event recorded by St. Luke in this connection[4363]4363

recalls the incidents of the early Judæan[4364]4364 and of the

Galilean Ministry.[4365]4365 We observe the same narrow views and

externalism as before in regard to the Sabbath on the part of the

Jewish authorities, and, on the part of Christ, the same wide

principles and spiritual application. If we were in search of evidence

of the Divine Mission of Jesus, we would find it in this contrariety

on so fundamental a point, since no teacher in Israel nor Reformer of

that time - not the most advanced Sadducee - would have defended, far

less originated, the views as to the Sabbath which Christ now

propounded.[4366]4366 Again, if we were in quest of evidence of the

historical truthfulness of the Gospel-narratives, we would find it in

a comparison of the narratives of the three Sabbath-controversies: in

Jerusalem, in Galilee, and in Peræa. In all the spirit was the same.

And, although the differences between them may seem slight, they are

characteristic, and mark, as if they pointed to it with the finger,

the locality and circumstances in which each took place. In Jerusalem

there is neither reasoning nor rebuke on the part of the Jews, but

absolute persecution. There also the Lord enters on the higher

exposition of His action, motives, and Mission.[4367]4367 In Galilee

there is questioning, and cunning intrigue against Him on the part of

the Judæans who dogged His steps. But while no violence can be

attempted against Him, the people do not venture openly to take His

part.[4368]4368 But in Peræa we are confronted by the clumsy zeal of a

country-Archisynagogos (Chief Ruler of a Synagogue), who is very

angry, but not very wise; who admits Christ's healing power, and does

not dare to attack Him directly, but, instead, rebukes, not Christ,

not even the woman who had been healed, but the people who witnessed

it, at the same time telling them to come for healing on other days,

not perceiving, in his narrow-minded bigotry, what this admission

implied. This rustic Ruler had not the cunning, nor even the courage,

of the Judæan Pharisees in Galilee, whom the Lord had formerly

convicted and silenced. Enough, to show this obscure Peræan partisan

of Pharisaism and the like of him their utter folly, and that by their

own admissions.[4369]4369 And presently, not only were His adversaries

ashamed, while in Galilee they went out and held a council against

Him,[4370]4370 but the people were not afraid, as the Galileans had

been in presence of their rulers, and openly rejoiced in the glorious

working of the Christ.

Little more requires to be added about this incident in 'one of the

Synagogues' of Peræa. Let us only briefly recall the scene. Among

those present in this Synagogue had been a poor woman, who for

eighteen years had been a sufferer, as we learn, through demoniac

agency. It is quite true that most, if not all, such diseases were

connected with moral distemper, since demoniac possession was not

permanent, and resistance might have been made in the lucid intervals,

if there had been moral soundness. But it is ungrounded to distinguish

between the 'spirit of infirmity' as the moral and psychical, and her

being 'bent,' as indicating the physical disease,[4371]4371 or even to

describe the latter as a 'permanent curvature of the spine.'[4372]4372

The Greek word here rendered 'infirmity' has passed into Rabbinic

language (Isteniseyah, {hebrew}), and there means, not any particular

disease, but sickliness, sometimes weakliness. In fact, she was, both

physically and morally, not sick, but sickly, and most truly was hers

'a spirit of infirmity,' so that 'she was bowed together, and could in

no wise lift herself up.' For, we mark that hers was not demoniac

possession at all - and yet, though she had not yielded, she had not

effectually resisted, and so she was 'bound' by 'a spirit of

infirmity,' both in body and soul.

We recognise the same 'spirit of infirmity' in the circumstances of

her healing. When Christ, seeing her - probably a fit symbol of the

Peræans in that Synagogue - called her, she came; when He said unto

her, 'Woman, thou hast been loosed[4373]4373 from thy sickliness,' she

was unbound, and yet in her weakliness she answered not, nor

straightened herself, till Jesus 'laid His Hands on her,' and so

strengthened her in body and soul, and then she was immediately 'made

straight, and glorified God.'

As for the Archisynagogos, we have, as already hinted, such

characteristic portraiture of him that we can almost see him:

confused, irresolute, perplexed, and very angry, bustling forward and

scolding the people who had done nothing, yet not venturing to silence

the woman, now no longer infirm - far less, to reprove the great

Rabbi, Who had just done such a 'glorious thing,' but speaking at Him

through those who had been the astounded eye-witnesses. He was easily

and effectually silenced, and all who sympathised with him put to

shame. 'Hypocrites!' spake the Lord - on your own admisions your

practice and your Law condemn your speech. Every one on the Sabbath

looseth his ox or ass, and leads him to the watering. The Rabbinic law

expressly allowed this,[4374]4374 and even to draw the water, provided

the vessel were not carried to the animal.[4375]4375 If, as you admit,

I have the power of 'loosing' from the bonds of Satan, and she has

been so bound these eighteen years, should she - a daughter of Abraham

- not have that done for her which you do for your beasts of burden?

The retort was unanswerable and irresistible; it did what was

intended: it covered the adversaries with shame. And the Peræans in

that Synagogue felt also, at least for the time, the blessed freedom

which had come to that woman. They took up the echoes of her hymn of

praise, and 'rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by

Him.' And He answered their joy by rightly directing it - by setting

before them 'the Kingdom,' which He had come both to preach and to

bring, in all its freeness, reality, power, and all-pervading energy,

as exhibited in the two Parables of the 'Mustard-seed' and 'the

Leaven,' spoken before in Galilee. These were now repeated, as

specially suited to the circumstances: first, to the Miracle they had

witnessed; then, to the contention that had passed; and, lastly, to

their own state of feeling. And the practical application of these

Parables must have been obvious to all.

CHAPTER XIV.

AT THE FEAST OF THE DEDICATION OF THE TEMPLE.

(St. Luke xiii. 22; St. John x. 22-42.)

ABOUT two months had passed since Jesus had left Jerusalem after the

Feast of Tabernacles. Although we must not commit ourselves to such

calculations, we may here mention the computation which identifies the

first day of the Feast of Tabernacles of that year[4376]4376 with

Thursday the 23rd September; the last, 'the Great Day of the Feast,'

with Wednesday the 29th; the Octave of the Feast with the 30th

September; and the Sabbath when the man born blind was healed with the

2nd of October.[4377]4377 In that case, 'the Feast of the Dedication

of the Temple,' which commenced on the 25th day of Chislev, and lasted

eight days, would have begun on Wednesday the 1st, and closed on

Wednesday the 8th December. But, possibly, it may have been a week or

two later. At that Feast, or about two months after He had quitted the

City, we find Christ once more in Jerusalem and in the Temple. His

journey thither seems indicated in the Third Gospel (St. Luke xiii.

22), and is at least implied in the opening words with which St. John

prefaces his narrative of what happened on that occasion.[4378]4378

[4379]4379

As we think of it, there seems special fitness - presently to be

pointed out - in Christ's spending what we regard as the last

anniversary season of His Birth[4380]4380 in the Temple at that Feast.

It was not of Biblical origin, but had been instituted by Judas

Maccabaeus in 164 b.c., when the Temple, which had been desecrated by

Antiochus Epiphanes, was once more purified, and re-dedicated to the

Service of Jehovah.[4381]4381 Accordingly, it was designated as 'the

Dedication of the Altar.'[4382]4382 Josephus[4383]4383 calls it 'The

Lights,'from one of the principal observances at the Feast, though he

speaks in hesitating language of the origin of the festival as

connected with this observance, probably because, while he knew, he

was ashamed to avow, and yet afraid to deny his belief in the Jewish

legend connected with it. The Jews called it Chanukkah, 'dedication'

or 'consecration,' and, in much the same sense, Enkainia in the Greek

of the LXX.,[4384]4384 [4385]4385 and in the New Testament. During the

eight days of the Feast the series of Psalms known as at the

Hallel[4386]4386 was chanted in the Temple, the people responding as

at the Feast of Tabernacles.[4387]4387 Other rites resembled those of

the latter Feast. Thus, originally, the people appeared with

palm-branches.[4388]4388 This, however, does not seem to have been

after-wards observed, while another rite, not mentioned in the Book of

Maccabees - that of illuminating the Temple and private houses -

became characteristic of the Feast. Thus, the two festivals, which

indeed are put in juxtaposition in 2 Macc. x. 6, seem to have been

both externally and internally connected. The Feast of the

'Dedication,' or of 'Lights,' derived from that of Tabernacles its

duration of eight days, the chanting of the Hallel, and the practice

of carrying palm-branches. On the other hand, the rite of the

Temple-illumination may have passed from the Feast of the 'Dedication'

into the observances of that of 'Tabernacles.' Tradition had it, that,

when the Temple-Services were restored by Judas Maccabaeus, the oil

found to have been desecrated. Only one flagon was discovered of that

which was pure, sealed with the very signet of the High-Priest. The

supply proved just sufficient to feed for one day the Sacred

Candlestick, but by a miracle the flagon was continually replenished

during eight days, till a fresh supply could be brought from Thekoah.

In memory of this, it was ordered the following year, that the Temple

be illuminated for eight days on the anniversary of its

'Dedication.'[4389]4389 The Schools of Hillel and Shammai differed in

regard to this, as on most other observances. The former would have

begun the first night with the smallest number of lights, and

increased it every night till on the eighth it was eight times as

large as on the first. The School of Shammai, on the other hand, would

have begun with the largest number, and diminished, till on the last

night it amounted to an eighth of the first. Each party had its own -

not very satisfactory - reasons for its distinctive practice, and its

own adherents.[4390]4390 But the 'Lights' in honour of the Feast were

lit not only in the Temple, but in every home. One would have sufficed

for the whole household on the first evening, but pious householders

lit a light for every inmate of the home, so that, if ten burned on

the first, there would be eighty on the last night of the Festival.

According to the Talmud, the light might be placed at the entrance to

the house or room, or, according to circumstances, in the window, or

even on the table. According to modern practice the light is placed at

the left on entering a room (the Mezuzah is on the right). Certain

benedictions are spoken on lighting these lights, all work is stayed,

and the festive time spent in merriment. The first night is specially

kept in memory of Judith, who is supposed then to have slain

Holofernes, and cheese is freely partaken of as the food of which,

according to legend,[4391]4391 she gave him so largely, to incite him

to thirst and drunkenness.[4392]4392 Lastly, during this Festival, all

fasting and public mourning were prohibited, though some minor acts of

private mourning were allowed.[4393]4393

More interesting, perhaps, than this description of the outward

observances is the meaning of this Festival and its connection with

the Feast of Tabernacles, to both of which reference has already been

made. Like the Feast of Tabernacles, it commemorated a Divine Victory,

which again gave to Israel their good land, after they had once more

undergone sorrows like those of the wilderness; it was another

harvest-feast, and pointed forward to yet another ingathering. As the

once extinguished light was relit in the Temple, and, according to

Scriptural imagery, might that not mean the Light of Israel, the Lamp

of David? - it grew day by day in brightness, till it shone quite out

into the heathen darkness, that once had threatened to quench it. That

He Who purified the Temple, was its True Light, and brought the Great

Deliverance, should (as hinted) have spent the last anniversary season

of His Birth at that Feast in the Sanctuary, shining into their

darkness, seems most fitting, especially as we remember the Jewish

legend, according to which the making of the Tabernacle had been

completed on the 25th Chislev, although it was not set up till the 1st

of Nisan (the Paschal month).[4394]4394

Thoughts of the meaning of this Feast, and of what was associated with

it, will be helpful as we listen to the words which Jesus spake to the

people in 'Solomon's Porch.' There is a pictorialness in the

description of the circumstances, which marks the eyewitness. It is

winter, and Christ is walking in the covered Porch,[4395]4395 in front

of the 'Beautiful Gate,' which formed the principal entrance into the

'Court of the Women.' As he walks up and down, the people are

literally barring His Way - 'came round about' Him. From the whole

circumstances we cannot doubt, that the question which they put: 'How

long holdest Thou us in suspense?' had not in it an element of

truthfulness or genuine inquiry. Their desire, that He should tell

them 'plainly' if He were the Christ, had no other motive than that of

grounding on it an accusation.[4396]4396 The more clearly we perceive

this, the more wonderful appears the forbearance of Christ and the

wisdom of His answer. Briefly he puts aside their hypocrisy. What need

is there of fresh speech? He told them before, and they

'believe[4397]4397 not.' From words He appeals to the mute but

indisputable witness of deeds: the works which He wrought in His

Father's Name. Their non-belief in presence of these facts was due to

their not being of His Sheep. As he had said unto them

before,[4398]4398 it was characteristic of His Sheep (as generally of

every flock in regard to its own shepherd) to hear - recognise, listen

to - His Voice and follow Him. We mark in the words of Christ, a

triplet of double parallelisms concerning the Sheep and the Shepherd,

in ascending climax,[4399]4399 as follows: - [4400]4400

My sheep hear My Voice, And

I know them,

And they follow me: And I

give unto them eternal life:

And they shall never perish. And no one

shall snatch them out of My Hand.

A similar fourfold parallelism with descending and ascending climax,

but of an antithetic character, has been noticed[4401]4401 in Christ's

former Discourse in the Temple (St. John x. 13-15) -

The hireling

Is an hireling, Am the good

Shepherd,

Careth not for the sheep. Know the

sheep,

Fleeth

Lay down My Life.

Richer or more comforting assurance than that recorded above could not

have been given. But something special has here to be marked. The two

first parallelisms always link the promise of Christ to the attitude

of the sheep; not, perhaps, conditionally, for the relation is such as

not to admit conditionalness, either in the form of 'because -

therefore,' or even of 'if - then,' but as a matter of sequence and of

fact. But in the third parallelism there is no reference to anything

on the part of the sheep; it is all promise, and the second clause

only explains and intensifies what is expressed in the first. If it

indicates attack of the fiercest kind and by the strongest and most

cunning of enemies, be they men or devils, it also marks the

watchfulness and absolute superiority of Him Who hath them, as it

were, in His Hand - perhaps a Hebraism for 'power' - and hence their

absolute safety. And, as if to carry twofold assurance of it, He

reminds His hearers that His Work being 'the Father's Commandment,' it

is really the Father's Work, given to Christ to do, and no one could

snatch them out of the Father's Hand. It is a poor cavil, to try to

limit these assurances by seeking to grasp and to comprehend them in

the hollow of our human logic. Do they convey what is commonly called

'the doctrine of perseverance'? Nay! but they teach us, not about our

faith but about His faithfulness, and convey to us assurance

concerning Him rather than ourselves; and this is the only aspect in

which 'the doctrine of perseverance' is either safe, true, or

Scriptural.

But one logical sequence is unavoidable. Rightly understood, it is not

only the last and highest announcement, but it contains and implies

everything else. If the Work of Christ is really that of the Father,

and His Working also that of the Father, then it follows that He 'and

the Father are One' ('one' is in the neuter). This identity of work

(and purpose) implies the identity of Nature (Essence); that of

working, the identity of power.[4402]4402 And so, evidently, the Jews

understood it, when they again took up stones with the intention of

stoning Him - no doubt, because He expressed, in yet more plain terms,

what they regarded as His blasphemy. Once more the Lord appealed from

His Words, which were doubted, to His Works, which were indubitable.

And so He does to all time. His Divine Mission is evidence of His

Divinity. And if His Divine Mission be doubted, He appeals to the

'many excellent works' (kal_ _rga) which He hath 'showed from the

Father,' any one of which might, and, in the case of not a few, had,

served as evidence of His Mission. And when the Jews ignored, as so

many in our days, this line of evidence, and insisted that He had been

guilty of blasphemy, since, being a man, He had made Himself God, the

Lord replied in a manner that calls for our special attention. From

the peculiarly Hebraistic mode of designating a quotation from the

Psalms[4403]4403 as 'written in the Law,'[4404]4404 we gather that we

have here a literal transcript of the very words of our

Lord.[4405]4405 But what we specially wish, is, emphatically, to

disclaim any interpretation of them, which would seem to imply that

Christ had wished to evade their inference: that He claimed to be One

with the Father - and to convey to them, that nothing more had been

meant than what might lawfully be applied to an ordinary man. Such

certainly is not the case. He had claimed to be One with the Father in

work and working: from which, of course, the necessary inference was,

that He was also One with Him in Nature and Power. Let us see whether

the claim was strange. In Ps. lxxxii. 6 the titles 'God' (Elohim) and

'Sons of the Highest' (Beney Elyon) had been given to Judges as the

Representatives and Vicegerents of God, wielding His delegated

authority, since to them had come His Word of authorisation. But here

was authority not transmitted by 'the word,' but personal and direct

consecration, and personal and direct Mission on the part of God. The

comparison made was not with prophets, because they only told the word

and message from God, but with Judges, who, as such, did the very act

of God. If those who, in so acting, had received an indirect

commission, were 'gods,' the very representatives of God,[4406]4406

could it be blasphemy when He claimed to be the Son of God, Who had

received, not authority through a word transmitted through long

centuries, but direct personal command to do the Father's Work; had

been directly and personally consecrated to it by the Father, and

directly and personally sent by Him, not to say, but to do, the work

of the Father? Was it not rather the true and necessary inference from

these premisses?

All would, of course, depend on this, whether Christ really did the

works of the Father.[4407]4407 That was the test; and, as we

instinctively perceive, both rationally and truly. But if He did the

works of His Father, then let them believe, if not the words yet the

works, and thus would they arrive at the knowledge, 'and

understand'[4408]4408 - distinguishing here the act from the

state[4409]4409 - that 'in Me is the Father, and I in the Father.' In

other words, recognizing the Work as that of the Father, they would

come to understand that the father worked in Him, and that the root of

His Work was in the Father.

The stones, that had been taken up, were not thrown, for the words of

Christ rendered impossible the charge of explicit blasphemy which

alone would, according to Rabbinic law, have warranted such summary

vengeance. But 'they sought again to seize Him,' so as to drag Him

before their tribunal. His time, however, had not yet come, 'and He

went forth out of their hand' - how, we know not.

Once more the Jordan rolled between Him and His bitter persecutors.

Far north, over against Galilee, in the place of John's early labours,

probably close to where Jesus Himself had been baptized, was the scene

of His last labours. And those, who so well remembered both the

Baptist and the testimony which he had there borne to the Christ,

recalled it all as they listened to His Words and saw His Works. As

they crowded around Him, both the difference and the accord between

John and Jesus carried conviction to their minds. The Baptist had done

'no sign,'[4410]4410 such as those which Jesus wrought: but all things

which John had spoken of Him, they felt it, were true. And,

undisturbed by the cavils of Pharisees and Scribes, many of these

simple-minded, true-hearted men, far away from Jerusalem, believed on

Him. To adapt a saying of Bengel: they were the posthumous children of

the Baptist. Thus did he, being dead, yet speak. And so will all that

is sown for Christ, though it lie buried and forgotten of men, spring

up and ripen, as in one day, to the deep, grateful, and external joy

of them who had laboured in faith and gone to rest in hope.

CHAPTER XV.

THE SECOND SERIES OF PARABLES - THE TWO PARABLES OF HIM WHO IS

NEIGHBOUR TO

US: THE FIRST, CONCERNING THE LOVE THAT, UNASKED, GIVES IN OUR NEED;

THE

SECOND, CONCERNING THE LOVE WHICH IS ELICITED BY OUR ASKING IN OUR

NEED.

(St. Luke x. 25-37; xi. 5-13.)

THE period between Christ's return from the 'Feast of the Dedication'

and His last entry into Jerusalem, may be arranged into two parts,

divided by the brief visit to Bethany for the purpose of raising

Lazarus from the dead. Even if it were possible, with any certainty,

chronologically to arrange the events of each of these periods, the

variety and briefness of what is recorded would prevent our closely

following them in this narrative. Accordingly, we prefer grouping them

together as the Parables of that period, its Discourses, and its

Events. And the record of the raising of Lazarus may serve as a

landmark between our Summary of the Parables and that of the

Discourses and Events which preceded the Lord's final appearance in

Jerusalem.

These last words help us to understand the necessary difference

between the Parables of this and of the preceding and the following

periods. The Parables of this period look back upon the past, and

forward into the future. Those spoken by the Lake of Galilee were

purely symbolical. They presented unseen heavenly realities under

emblems which required to be translated into earthly language. It was

quite easy to do so, if you possessed the key to the heavenly

mysteries; otherwise, they were dark and mysterious. So to speak, they

were easily read from above downwards. Viewed from below upwards, only

most dim and strangely intertwining outlines could be perceived. It is

quite otherwise with the second series of Parables. They could, as

they were intended, be understood by all. They required no

translation. They were not symbolical but typical, using the word

'type,' not in the sense of involving a predictive element,[4411]4411

but as indicating an example, or, perhaps, more correctly, an

exemplification.[4412]4412 Accordingly, the Parables of this series

are also intensely practical. Lastly, their prevailing character is

not descriptive, but hortatory; and they bring the Gospel, in the

sense of glad tidings to the lost, most closely and touchingly to the

hearts of all who hear them. They are signs in words, as the miracles

are signs in works, of what Christ has come to do and to teach. Most

of them bear this character openly; and even those which do not, but

seem more like warning, have still an undertone of love, as if Divine

compassion lingered in tender pity over that which threatened, but

might yet be averted.

Of the Parables of the third series it will for the present suffice to

say, that they are neither symbolical nor typical, but their

prevailing characteristic is prophetic. As befits their historical

place in the teaching of Christ, they point to the near future. They

are the fast falling, lengthening shadows cast by the events which are

near at hand,

The Parables of the second (or Peræan) series, which are typical and

hortatory, and 'Evangelical' in character, are thirteen in number,

and, with the exception of the last, are either peculiar to, or else

most fully recorded in, the Gospel by St. Luke.

1. The Parable of the Good Samaritan.[4413]4413 - This Parable is

connected with a question, addressed to Jesus by a 'lawyer' - not one

of the Jerusalem Scribes or Teachers, but probably an expert in Jewish

Canon Law,[4414]4414 who possibly made it more or less a profession in

that district, though perhaps not for gain. Accordingly, there is a

marked absence of that rancour and malice which characterised his

colleagues of Judæa. In a previous chapter it has been shown, that

this narrative probably stands in its proper place in the Gospel of

St. Luke.[4415]4415 We have also suggested, that the words of this

lawyer referred, or else that himself belonged, to that small party

among the Rabbinists who, at least in theory, attached greater value

to good works than to study. At any rate, there is no occasion to

impute directly evil motives to him. Knowing the habits of his class,

we do not wonder that he put his question to 'tempt' - test, try - the

great Rabbi of Nazareth. There are many similar instances in Rabbinic

writings of meetings between great Teachers, when each tried to

involve the other in dialectic difficulties and subtle disputations.

Indeed, this was part of Rabbinism, and led to that painful and fatal

trifling with truth, when everything became matter of dialectic

subtlety, and nothing was really sacred. What we require to keep in

view is, that to this lawyer the question which he propounded was only

one of theoretic, not of practical interest, nor matter of deep

personal concern, as it was to the rich young ruler, who, not long

afterwards, addressed a similar inquiry to the Lord.[4416]4416

We seem to witness the opening of a regular Rabbinic contest, as we

listen to this speculative problem: 'Teacher, what having done shall I

inherit eternal life?' At the foundation lay the notion, that eternal

life was the reward of merit, of works: the only question was, what

these works were to be. The idea of guilt had not entered his mind; he

had no conception of sin within. It was the old Judaism of

self-righteousness speaking without disguise: that which was the

ultimate ground of the rejecting and crucifying of the Christ. There

certainly was a way in which a man might inherit eternal life, not

indeed as having absolute claim to it, but (as the Schoolmen might

have said: de congruo) in consequence of God's Covenant on Sinai. And

so our Lord, using the common Rabbinic expression 'what readest thou?'

({hebrew}), pointed him to the Scriptures of the Old Testament.

The reply of the 'lawyer' is remarkable, not only on its own account,

but as substantially, and even literally, that given on two other

occasions by the Lord Himself.[4417]4417 The question therefore

naturally arises, whence did this lawyer, who certainly had not

spiritual insight, derive his reply? As regarded the duty of absolute

love to God, indicated by the quotation of Deut. vi. 5, there could,

of course, be no hesitation in the mind of a Jew. The primary

obligation of this is frequently referred to, and, indeed, taken for

granted, in Rabbinic teaching. The repetition of this command, which

in the Talmud receives the most elaborate and strange

interpretation,[4418]4418 formed part of the daily prayers. When Jesus

referred the lawyer to the Scriptures, he could scarcely fail to quote

this first paramount obligation. Similarly, he spoke as a Rabbinic

lawyer, when he referred in the next place to love to our neighbour,

as enjoined in Lev. xix. 18. Rabbinism is never weary of quoting as

one of the characteristic sayings of its greatest teacher, Hillel

(who, of course, lived before this time), that he had summed up the

Law, in briefest compass, in these words: 'What is hateful to thee,

that do not to another. This is the whole Law; the rest is only its

explanation.'[4419]4419 Similarly, Rabbi Akiba taught, that Lev. xix.

18 was the principal rule, we might almost say, the chief summary of

the Law ({hebrew}).[4420]4420 Still, the two principles just mentioned

are not enunciated in conjunction by Rabbinism, nor seriously

propounded as either containing the whole Law or as securing heaven.

They are also, as we shall presently see, subjected to grave

modifications. One of these, as regards the negative form in which

Hillel put it, while Christ put it positively,[4421]4421 [4422]4422

has been previously noticed. The existence of such Rabbinic

modifications, and the circumstance, already mentioned, that on two

other occasions the answer of Christ Himself to a similar inquiry was

precisely that of this lawyer, suggests the inference, that this

question may have been occasioned by some teaching of Christ, to which

they had just listened, and that the reply of the lawyer may have been

prompted by what Jesus had preached concerning the Law.

If it be asked, why Christ seemed to give His assent to the lawyer's

answer, as if it really pointed to the right solution of the great

question, we reply: No other answer could have been given him. On the

ground of works - if that had been tenable - this was the way to

heaven. To understand any other answer, would have required a sense of

sin; and this could not be imparted by reasoning: it must be

experienced. It is the preaching of the Law which awakens in the mind

a sense of sin.[4423]4423 Besides, if not morally, yet mentally, the

difficulty of this 'way' would soon suggest itself to a Jew. Such, at

least, is one aspect of the counter-question with which 'the lawyer'

now sought to retort on Jesus.

Whatever complexity of motives there may have been - for we know

nothing of the circumstances, and there may have been that in the

conduct or heart of the lawyer which was specially touched by what had

just passed - there can be no doubt as to the maiu object of his

question: 'But who is my neighbour?' He wished 'to justify himself,'

in the sense of vindicating his original question, and showing that it

was not quite so easily settled as the answer of Jesus seemed to

imply. And here it was that Christ could in a 'Parable' show how far

orthodox Judaism was from even a true understanding, much more from

such perfect observance of this Law as would gain heaven. Thus might

He bring even this man to feel his shortcomings and sins, and awaken

in him a sense of his great need. This, of course, would be the

negative aspect of this Parable; the positive is to all time and to

all men.

That question: 'Who is my neighbour?' has ever been at the same time

the outcome of Judaism (as distinguished from the religion of the Old

Testament), and also its curse. On this point it is duty to speak

plainly, even in face of the wicked persecutions to which the Jews

have been exposed on account of it. Whatever modern Judaism may say to

the contrary, there is a foundation of truth in the ancient heathen

charge against the Jews of odium generis humani (hatred of mankind).

God had separated Israel unto Himself by purification and renovation -

and this is the original meaning of the word 'holy' and 'sanctify' in

the Hebrew ({hebrew}). They separated themselves in self-righteousness

and pride - and that is the original meaning of the word 'Pharisee'

and 'Pharisaism' ({hebrew}). In so saying no blame is cast on

individuals; it is the system which is at fault. This question: 'Who

is my neighbour?' frequently engages Rabbinism. The answer to it is

only too clear. If a hypercriticism were to interpret away the

passage[4424]4424 which directs that idolators are not to be delivered

when in imminent danger, while heretics and apostates are even to be

led into it, the painful discussion on the meaning of Exod. xxiii.

5[4425]4425 would place it beyond question. The sum of it is, that,

except to avert hostility, a burden is only to be unloaded, if the

beast that lieth under it belongeth to an Israelite, not if it belong

to a Gentile; and so the expression,[4426]4426 'the ass of him that

hateth thee,' must be understood of a Jewish, and not of a Gentile

enemy ({hebrew}).[4427]4427

It is needless to follow the subject further. But more complete rebuke

of Judaistic narrowness, as well as more full, generous, and spiritual

world-teaching than that of Christ's Parable could not be imagined.

The scenery and colouring are purely local. And here we should

remember, that, while admitting the lawfulness of the widest

application of details for homiletical purposes, we must take care not

to press them in a strictly exegetical interpretation.[4428]4428

Some one coming from the Holy City, the Metropolis of Judaism, is

pursuing the solitary desert-road, those twenty-one miles to Jericho,

a district notoriously insecure, when he 'fell among robbers, who,

having both stripped and inflicted on him strokes, went away leaving

him just as he was,[4429]4429 half dead.' This is the first scene. The

second opens with an expression which, theologically, as well as

exegetically, is of the greatest interest. The word rendered 'by

chance' (sugkur_a) occurs only in this place,[4430]4430 for Scripture

commonly views matters in relation to agents rather than to results.

As already noted,[4431]4431 the real meaning of the word is

'concurrence,' much like the corresponding Hebrew term ({hebrew}). And

better definition could not be given, not, indeed, of 'Providence,'

which is a heathen abstraction for which the Bible has no equivalent,

but for the concrete reality of God's providing. He provides through a

concurrence of circumstances, all in themselves natural and in the

succession of ordinary causation (and this distinguishes it from the

miracle), but the concurring of which is directed and overruled by

Him. And this helps us to put aside those coarse tests of the reality

of prayer and of the direct rule of God, which men sometimes propose.

Such stately ships ride not in such shallow waters.

It was by such a 'concurrence,' that, first a priest, then a Levite

came down that road, when each, successively, 'when he saw him, passed

by over against (him).' It was the principle of questioning, 'Who is

my neighbour?' which led both priest and Levite to such heartless

conduct. Who knew what this wounded man was, and how he came to lie

there: and were they called upon, in ignorance of this, to take all

the trouble, perhaps incur the risk of life, which care of him would

involve? Thus Judaism (in the persons of its chief representatives)

had, by its exclusive attention to the letter, come to destroy the

spirit of the Law. Happily, there came yet another that way, not only

a stranger, but one despised, a semi-heathen Samaritan.[4432]4432 He

asked not who the man was, but what was his need. Whatever the wounded

Jew might have felt towards him, the Samaritan proved a true

'neighbour.' 'He came towards him, and beholding him, he was moved

with compassion.' His resolution was soon taken. He first bound up his

wounds, and then, taking from his travelling provision wine and oil,

made of them, what was regarded as the common dressing for

wounds.[4433]4433 Next, having 'set' (lifted) him on his own beast, he

walked by his side, and brought him to one of those houses of rest and

entertainment, whose designation (pandoce_on) has passed into Rabbinic

language ({hebrew}). These khans, or hostelries, by the side of

unfrequented roads, afforded free lodgment to the traveller. But

generally they also offered entertainment, in which case, of course,

the host, commonly a non-Israelite, charged for the victuals supplied

to man or beast, or for the care taken. In the present instance the

Samaritan seems himself to have tended the wounded man all that

evening. But even thus his care did not end. The next morning, before

continuing his journey, he gave to the host two dinars - about one

shilling and threepence of our money, the amount of a labourer's wages

for two days,[4434]4434 - as it were, two days' wages for his care of

him, with this provision, that if any further expense were incurred,

either because the wounded man was not sufficiently recovered to

travel, or else because something more had been supplied to him, the

Good Samaritan would pay it when he next came that way.

So far the Parable: its lesson 'the lawyer' is made himself to

enunciate. 'Which of these three seems to thee to have become

neighbour of him that fell among the robbers?' Though unwilling to

take the hated name of Samaritan on his lips, especially as the

meaning of the Parable and its anti-Rabbinic bearing were so evident,

the 'lawyer' was obliged to reply, 'He that showed mercy on him,' when

the Saviour finally answered, 'Go, and do thou likewise.'

Some further lessons may be drawn. The Parable implies not a mere

enlargement of the Jewish ideas, but a complete change of them. It is

truly a Gospel-Parable, for the whole old relationship of mere duty is

changed into one of love. Thus, matters are placed on an entirely

different basis from that of Judaism. The question now is not 'Who is

my neighbour?' but 'Whose neighbour am I?' The Gospel answers the

question of duty by pointing us to love. Wouldst thou know who is thy

neighbour? Become a neighbour to all by the utmost service thou canst

do them in their need. And so the Gospel would not only abolish man's

enmity, but bridge over man's separation. Thus is the Parable truly

Christian, and, more than this, points up to Him Who, in our great

need, became Neighbour to us, even at the cost of all He had. And from

Him, as well as by His Word, are we to learn our lesson of love.

2. The Parable which follows in St. Luke's narrative[4435]4435 seems

closely connected with that just commented upon. It is also a story of

a good neighbour who gives in our need, but presents another aspect of

the truth to which the Parable of the Good Samaritan had pointed. Love

bends to our need: this is the objective manifestation of the Gospel.

Need looks up to love, and by its cry elicits the boon which it seeks.

And this is the subjective experience of the Gospel. The one underlies

the story of the first Parable, the other that of the second.

Some such internal connection between the two Parables seems, indeed,

indicated even by the loose manner in which this second Parable is

strung to the request of some disciples to be taught what to

pray.[4436]4436 Like the Parable of the 'Good Samaritan,' it is

typical, and its application would be the more felt, that it not only

points to an exemplification, but appeals to every man's consciousness

of what himself would do in certain given circumstances. The latter

are as follows. A man has a friend who, long after nightfall,

unexpectedly comes to him from a journey. He has nothing in the house,

yet he must provide for his need, for hospitality demands it.

Accordingly, though it be so late, he goes to his friend and neighbour

to ask him for three loaves, stating the case. On the other hand, the

friend so asked refuses, since, at that late hour, he has retired to

bed with his children, and to grant his request would imply not only

inconvenience to himself, but the disturbing of the whole household.

The main circumstances therefore are: Sudden, unthought-of sense of

imperative need, obliging to make what seems an unseasonable and

unreasonable request, which, on the face of it, offers difficulties

and has no claim upon compliance. It is, therefore, not ordinary but,

so to speak, extraordinary prayer, which is here alluded to.

To return to the Parable: the question (abruptly broken off from the

beginning of the Parable in ver. 5), is what each of us would do in

the circumstances just detailed. The answer is implied in what

follows.[4437]4437 It points to continued importunity, which would at

last obtain what it needs. 'I tell you, even if he will not give him,

rising up, because he is his friend, yet at least[4438]4438 on account

of his importunity, he will rise up and give him as many as he

needeth.' This literal rendering will, it is hoped, remove some of the

seeming difficulties of the Parable. It is a gross misunderstanding to

describe it as presenting a mechanical view of prayer: as if it

implied, either that God was unwilling to answer; or else, that

prayer, otherwise unheard, would be answered merely for its

importunity. It must be remembered, that he who is within is a friend,

and that, under circumstances, he would at once have complied with the

request. But, in this case, there were special difficulties, which are

represented as very great; it is midnight; he has retired to bed, and

with his children; the door is locked. And the lesson is, that where,

for some reasons, there are, or seem, special difficulties to an

answer to our prayers (it is very late, the door is no longer open,

the children have already been gathered in), the importunity arising

from the sense of our absolute need, and the knowledge that He is our

Friend, and that He has bread, will ultimately prevail. The difficulty

is not as to the giving, but as the giving then - 'rising up,' and

this is overcome by perseverance, so that (to return to the Parable),

if he will not rise up because he is his friend, yet at least he will

rise because of his importunity, and not only give him 'three' loaves,

but, in general, 'as many as he needeth.'

So important is the teaching of this Parable, that Christ makes

detailed application of it. In the circumstances described a man would

persevere with his friend, and in the end succeed. And, similarly, the

Lord bids us 'ask,' and that earnestly and believingly; 'seek,' and

that energetically and instantly; 'knock,' and that intently and

loudly. Ask - He is a Friend, and we shall 'receive;' 'seek,' it is

there, and we shall 'find;' 'knock,' - our need is absolute, and it

shall be opened to us. But the emphasis of the Parable and its lesson

are in the word 'every one' (p_v). Not only this or that, but 'every

one,' shall so experience it. The word points to the special

difficulties that may be in the way of answer to prayer - the

difficulties of the 'rising up,' which have been previously indicated

in the Parable. These are met by perseverance which indicates the

reality of our need ('ask'), the reality of our belief that the supply

is there ('seek'), and the intensity and energy of our spiritual

longing ('knock'). Such importunity applies to 'every one,' whoever he

be, and whatever the circumstances which would seem to render his

prayer specially difficult of answer. Though he feel that he has not

and needs, he 'ask;' though he have lost - time, opportunities,

mercies - he 'seek;' though the door seem shut, he 'knocks.' Thus the

Lord is helper to 'every one;' but, as for us, let us learn the lesson

from what we ourselves would do in analogous circumstances.

Nay, more than this, God will not decieve by the appearance of what is

not reality. He will even give the greatest gift. The Parabolic

relation is now not that of friends, but of father and son. If the son

asks for bread, will the father give what seems such, but is only a

stone? If he asks for a fish, will he tender him what looks such, but

is a serpent? If he seek an egg, will he hand to him what breeds a

scorpion? The need, the hunger, of the child will not, in answer to

its prayer, receive at the Father's Hands, that which seems, but gives

not the reality of satisfaction - rather is poison. Let us draw the

inference. Such is our conduct - how much more shall our heavenly

Father give His Holy Spirit to them that ask Him. That gift will not

disappoint by the appearance of what is not reality; it will not

deceive either by the promise of what it does not give, or by giving

what would prove fatal. As we follow Christ's teaching, we ask for the

Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit, in leading us to Him, leads us into

all truth, to all life, and to what satisfies all need.

CHAPTER XVI.

THE THREE PARABLES OF WARNING: TO THE INDIVIDUAL, TO THE NATION, AND

TO THE

THEOCRACY - THE FOOLISH RICH MAN - THE BARREN FIG-TREE - THE GREAT

SUPPER.

(St. Luke xii. 13-21; xiii. 6-9; xiv. 16-24.)

The three Parables, which successively follow in St. Luke's Gospel,

may generally be designated as those 'of warning.' This holds

specially true of the last two of them, which refer to the civil and

the ecclesiastical polity of Israel. Each of the three Parables is set

in an historical frame, having been spoken under circumstances which

gave occasion for such illustration.

1. The Parable of the foolish rich man.[4439]4439 It appears, that

some one among them that listened to Jesus conceived the idea, that

the authority of the Great Rabbi of Nazareth might be used for his own

selfish purposes. This was all he had profited, that it seemed to open

possibilities of gain - stirred thoughts of covetousness. But other

inferences also come to us. Evidently, Christ must have attracted and

deeply moved multitudes, or His interposition would not have been

sought; and, equally evidently, what He preached had made upon this

man the impression, that he might possibly enlist Him as his champion.

The presumptive evidence which it affords as regards the effect and

the subject-matter of Christ's preaching is exceedingly interesting.

On the other hand, Christ had not only no legal authority for

interfering, but the Jewish law of inheritance was so clearly defined,

and, we may add, so just, that if this person had any just or good

cause, there could have been no need for appealing to Jesus. Hence it

must have been 'covetousness,' in the strictest sense, which prompted

it - perhaps, a wish to have, besides his own share as a younger

brother, half of that additional portion which, by law, came to the

eldest son of the family.[4440]4440 [4441]4441 Such an attempt for

covetous purposes to make use of the pure unselfish preaching of love,

and to derive profit from His spiritual influence, accounts for the

severity with which Christ rejected the demand, although, as we judge,

He would, under any circumstances, have refused to interfere in purely

civil disputes, with which the established tribunals were sufficient

to deal.

All this accounts for the immediate reference of our Lord to

covetousness, the folly of which He showed by this almost self-evident

principle, too often forgotten - that 'not in the superabounding to

any one [not in that wherein he has more than enough] consisteth his

life, from the things which he possesseth.'[4442]4442 In other words,

that part of the things which a man possesseth by which his life is

sustained, consists not in what is superabundant; his life is

sustained by that which he needs and uses; the rest, the

super-abundance, forms no part of his life, and may, perhaps, never be

of use to him. Why, then, be covetous, or long for more than we need?

And this folly also involves danger. For, the love of these things

will engross mind and heart, and care about them will drive out higher

thoughts and aims. The moral as regarded the Kingdom of God, and the

warning not to lose it for thought of what 'perisheth with the using,'

are obvious.

The Parable itself bears on all these points. It consists of two

parts, of which the first shows the folly, the second the sin and

danger, of that care for what is beyond our present need, which is the

characteristic of covetousness. The rich man is surveying his land,

which is bearing plentifully - evidently beyond its former yield,

since the old provision for storing the corn appears no longer

sufficient. It seems implied - or, we may at least conjecture - that

this was not only due to the labour and care of the master, but that

he had devoted to it his whole thought and energy. More than this, it

seems as if, in the calculations which he now made, he looked into the

future, and saw there progressive increase and riches. As yet, the

harvest was not reaped; but he was already considering what to do,

reckoning upon the riches that would come to him. And so he resolved

to pull down the old, and build larger barns, where he would store his

future possessions. From one aspect there would have been nothing

wrong in an act of almost necessary foresight - only great folly in

thinking, and speaking, and making plans, as if that were already

absolutely his which might never come to him at all, which, was still

unreaped, and might be garnered long after he was dead. His life was

not sustained by that part of his possessions which were the

'superabounding.' But to this folly was also added sin. For, God was

not in all his thoughts. In all his plans for the future - and it was

his folly to make such absolutely - he thought not of God. His whole

heart was set on the acquisition of earthly riches - not on the

service of God. He remembered not his responsibility; all that he had,

was for himself, and absolutely his own to batten upon; 'Soul, thou

hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink,

be merry.' He did not even remember, that there was a God Who might

cut short his years.

So had he spoken in his heart - proud, selfish, self-indulgent,

God-forgetting - as he looked forth upon what was not yet, even in an

inferior sense, his own, but which he already treated as such, and

that in the most absolute sense. And now comes the quick, sharp,

contrast, which is purposely introduced quite abruptly. 'But God said

unto Him' - not by revelation nor through inward presentiment, but,

with awful suddenness, in those unspoken words of fact which cannot be

gainsaid or answered: 'Thou fool! this very night' - which follows on

thy plans and purposings - 'thy soul is required of thee. But, the

things which thou hast prepared, whose shall they be?' Here, with the

obvious evidence of the folly of such state of mind, the Parable

breaks off. Its sinfulness - nay, and beyond this negative aspect of

it, the wisdom of righteousness in laying up the good treasure which

cannot be taken from us, appears in this concluding remark of Christ -

'So is he who layeth up treasure (treasureth) for himself, and is not

rich towards God.'

It was a barbed arrow, we might say, out of the Jewish quiver, but

directed by the Hand of the Lord. For, we read in the Talmud[4443]4443

that a Rabbi told his disciples, 'Repent the day before thy death;'

and when his disciples asked him: 'Does a man know the day of his

death?' he replied, that on that very ground he should repent to-day,

lest he should die to-morrow. And so would all his days be days of

repentance. Again, the son of Sirach wrote:[4444]4444 'There is that

waxeth rich by his wariness and pinching, and this is the portion of

his reward; whereas he saith, I have found rest, and now will eat

continually of my goods; and yet he knoweth not what time shall come

upon him, and that he must leave those things to others, and die.' But

we sadly miss in all this the spiritual application which Christ made.

Similarly, the Talmud,[4445]4445 by a play on the last word

({hebrew}), in the first verse of Psalm xlix., compares man to the

weasel, which laboriously gathers and deposits, not knowing for whom,

while the Midrash[4446]4446 tells a story, how, when a Rabbi returned

from a feast where the Host had made plans of storing his wine for a

future occasion, the Angel of Death appeared to him, grieved for man,

'since you say, thus and thus shall we do in the future, while no one

knoweth how soon he shall be called to die,' as would be the case with

the host of that evening, who would die after the lapse of thirty

days. But once more we ask, where is the spiritual application, such

as was made by Christ? So far from it, the Midrash adds, that when the

Rabbi challenged the Angel to show him the time of his own death, he

received this reply, that he had not dominion over the like of him,

since God took pleasure in their good works, and added to their days!

2. The special warning intended to be conveyed by the Parable of the

Barren Fig-tree[4447]4447 sufficiently appears from the context. As

explained in a previous chapter,[4448]4448 the Lord had not only

corrected the erroneous interpretation which the Jews were giving to

certain recent national occurences, but pointed them to this higher

moral of all such events, that, unless speedy national repentance

followed, the whole people would perish. This Parable offers not

merely an exemplification of this general prediction of Christ, but

sets before us what underlies it: Israel in its relation to God; the

need of repentance; Israel's danger; the nature of repentance, and its

urgency; the relation of Christ to Israel; the Gospel; and the final

judgment on impenitence.

As regards the details of this Parable, we mark that the fig-tree had

been specially planted by the owner in his vineyard, which was the

choicest situation. This, we know, was not unusual. Fig-trees, as well

as palm and olive-trees, were regarded as so valuable, that to cut

them down if they yielded even a small measure of fruit, was popularly

deemed to deserve death at the Hand of God.[4449]4449 Ancient Jewish

writings supply interesting particulars of this tree and its culture.

According to Josephus, in favoured localities the ripe fruit hung on

the tree for ten months of the year,[4450]4450 the two barren months

being probably April and May, before the first of the three crops

which it bore had ripened. The first figs[4451]4451 ripened towards

the end of June, sometimes earlier. The second, which are those now

dried and exported, ripened in August; the third, which were small and

of comparatively little value, in September, and often hung all winter

on the trees. A species (the Benoth Shuach) is mentioned, of which the

fruit required three years for ripening.[4452]4452 The fig-tree was

regarded as the most fruitful of all trees.[4453]4453 On account of

its repeated crops, it was declared not subject to the ordinance which

enjoined that fruit should be left in the corners for the

poor.[4454]4454 Its artificial inoculation was known.[4455]4455 The

practice mentioned in the Parable, of digging about the tree

({hebrew}), and dunging it ({hebrew}), is frequently mentioned in

Rabbinic writings, and by the same designations. Curiously, Maimonides

mentions three years as the utmost limit within which a tree should

bear fruit in the land of Israel.[4456]4456 Lastly, as trees were

regarded as by their roots undermining and deteriorating the

land,[4457]4457 a barren tree would be of threefold disadvantage: it

would yield no fruit; it would fill valuable space, which a

fruit-bearer might occupy; and it would needlessly deteriorate the

land. Accordingly, while it was forbidden to destroy fruit-bearing

trees,[4458]4458 it would, on the grounds above stated, be duty to cut

down a 'barren' or 'empty' tree (Ilan seraq[4459]4459).

These particulars will enable us more fully to understand the details

of the Parable. Allegorically, the fig-tree served in the Old

Testament as emblem of the Jewish nation[4460]4460 - in the Talmud,

rather as that of Israel's lore, and hence of the leaders and the

pious of the people.[4461]4461 The vineyard is in the New Testament

the symbol of the Kingdom of God, as distinct from the nation of

Israel.[4462]4462 Thus far, then, the Parable may be thus translated:

God called Israel as a nation, and planted it in the most favoured

spot: as a fig-tree in the vineyard of His own Kingdom. 'And He came

seeking,' as He had every right to do, 'fruit thereon, and found

none.' It was the third year[4463]4463 that He had vainly looked for

fruit, when He turned to His Vinedresser - the Messiah, to Whom the

vineyard is committed as its King - with this direction: 'Cut it down

- why doth it also deteriorate the soil?' It is barren, though in the

best position; as a fig-tree it ought to bear figs, and here the best;

it fills the place which a good tree might occupy; and besides, it

deteriorates[4464]4464 the soil (literally: {hebrew}). And its three

years' barrenness has established (as before explained) its utterly

hopeless character. Then it is that the Divine Vinedresser, in His

infinite compassion, pleads, and with far deeper reality than either

Abraham or Moses could have entreated, for the fig-tree which Himself

had planted and tended, that it should be spared 'this year also,'

'until then that I shall dig about it, and dung it,' - till He labour

otherwise than before, even by His Own Presence and Words, nay, by

laying to its roots His most precious Blood. 'And if then it bear

fruit' - here the text abruptly breaks off, as implying that in such

case it would, of course, be allowed to remain; 'but if not, then

against[4465]4465 the future (coming) year shalt thou cut it down.'

The Parable needs no further commentation.[4466]4466 In the words of a

recent writer:[4467]4467 'Between the tree and the axe nothing

intervenes but the intercession of the Gardener, Who would make a last

effort, and even His petition applies only to a short and definite

period, and, in case it pass without result, this petition itself

merges in the proposal, "But if not, then cut it down."' How speedily

and terribly the warning came true, not only students of history, but

all men and in all ages have been made to know. Of the lawfulness of a

further application of this Parable to all kindred circumstances of

nation, community, family, nay, even of individuals, it is not

necessary to speak.

3. The third Parable of warning - that of the Great Supper[4468]4468 -

refers not to the political state of Israel, but to their

ecclesiastical status, and their continuance as the possessors and

representatives of the Kingdom of God. It was spoken after the return

of Jesus from the Feast of the Dedication, and therefore carries us

beyond the point in this history which we have reached. Accordingly,

the attendant circumstances will be explained in the sequel. In regard

to these we only note, how appropriately such a warning of Israel's

spiritual danger, in consequence of their hardness of heart,

misrepresentation, and perversion of God's truth, would come at a

Sabbath-meal of the Pharisees, when they lay in wait against Him, and

He first challenged their externalising of God's Day and Law to the

subversion of its real meaning, and then rebuked the self-assertion,

pride, and utter want of all real love on the part of these leaders of

Israel.

What led up to the Parable of 'the Great Supper' happened after these

things: after His healing of the man with the dropsy in sight of them

all on the Sabbath, after His twofold rebuke of their perversion of

the Sabbath-Law, and of those marked characteristics of Pharisaism,

which showed how far they were from bringing forth fruit worthy of the

Kingdom, and how, instead of representing, they represented the

Kingdom, and were utterly unfit ever to do otherwise.[4469]4469 The

Lord had spoken of making a feast, not for one's kindred, nor for the

rich - whether such outwardly, or mentally and spirtually from the

standpoint of the Pharisees - but for the poor and afflicted. This

would imply true spirituality, because that fellowship of giving,

which descends to others in order to raise them as brethren, not

condescends, in order to be raised by them as their Master and

Superior.[4470]4470 And He had concluded with these words: 'And thou

shalt be blessed - because they have not to render back again to thee,

for it shall be rendered back to thee again in the Resurrection of the

Just.'[4471]4471

It was this last clause - but separated, in true Pharisaic spirit,

from that which had preceded, and indicated the motive - on which one

of those present now commented, probably with a covert, perhaps a

provocative, reference to what formed the subject of Christ's constant

teaching: 'Blessed whoso shall eat bread in the Kingdom of Heaven.' An

expression this, which to the Pharisee meant the common Jewish

expectancy of a great feast[4472]4472 at the beginning of the

Messianic Kingdom. So far he had rightly understood, and yet he had

entirely misunderstood, the words of Christ. Jesus had, indeed,

referred to the future retribution of (not, for) deeds of love, among

which He had named as an instance, suggested by the circumstances, a

feast for, or rather brotherly love and fellowship towards, the poor

and suffering. But although the Pharisee referred to the Messianic

Day, his words show that he did not own Jesus as the Messiah. Whether

or not it was the object of his exclamation, as sometimes religious

commonplaces or platitudes are in our days, to interrupt the course of

Christ's rebukes, or, as before hinted, to provoke Him to unguarded

speech, must be left undetermined. What is chiefly apparent is, that

this Pharisee separated what Christ said about the blessings of the

first Resurrection from that with which He had connected them - we do

not say as their condition, but as logically their moral antecedent:

viz., love, in opposition to self-assertion and self-seeking. The

Pharisee's words imply that, like his class, he, at any rate, fully

expected to share in these blessings, as a matter of course, and

because he was a Pharisee. Thus to leave out Christ's anteceding words

was not only to set them aside, but to pervert His saying, and to

place the blessedness of the future on the very opposite basis from

that on which Christ had rested it. Accordingly, it was to this man

personally[4473]4473 that the Parable was addressed.

There can be no difficulty in understanding the main ideas underlying

the Parable. The man who made the 'Great Supper'[4474]4474 was He Who

had, in the Old Testament, prepared 'a feast of fat things.'[4475]4475

The 'bidding many' preceded the actual announcement of the day and

hour of the feast. We understand by it a preliminary intimation of the

feast then preparing, and a general invitation of the guests, who were

the chief people in the city; for, as we shall presently see, the

scene is laid in a city. This general announcement was made in the Old

Testament institutions and prophecies, and the guests bidden were

those in the city, the chief men - not the ignorant and those out of

the way, but the men who knew, and read, and expounded these

prophecies. At last the preparations were ended, and the Master sent

out His Servant, not necessarily to be understood of any one

individual in particular - such as John the Baptist - but referring to

whomsoever He would employ in His Service for that purpose. It was to

intimate to the persons formerly bidden, that everything was now

ready. Then it was that, however differing in their special grounds

for it, or expressing it with more or less courtesy, they were all at

one in declining to come. The feast, to which they had been bidden

some time before, and to which they had apparently agreed to come (at

least, this was implied), was, when actually announced as ready, not

what they had expected, at any rate not what they regarded as more

desirable than what they had, and must give up in order to come to it.

For - and this seems one of the principal points in the Parable - to

come to that feast, to enter into the Kingdom, implies the giving up

of something that seems if not necessary yet most desirable, and the

enjoyment of which appears only reasonable. Be it possession,

business, and pleasure (Stier), or the priesthood, the magistracy, and

the people generally (St. Augustine), or the priesthood, the

Pharisees, and the Scribes, or the Pharisees, the Scribes, and the

self-righteously virtuous, with reference to whom we are specially to

think of the threefold excuse, the main point lies in this, that, when

the time came, they all refused to enter in, each having some valid

and reasonable excuse. But the ultimate ground of their refusal was,

that they felt no real desire, and saw nothing attractive in such a

feast; had no real reverence for the host; in short, that to them it

was not a feast at all, but something much less to be desired than

what they had, and would have been obliged to give up, if they had

complied with the invitation.

Then let the feast - for it was prepared by the goodness and

liberality of the Host - be for those who were in need of it, and to

whom it would be a feast: the poor and those afflicted - the maimed,

and blind, and lame, on whom those great citizens who had been first

bidden would look down. This, with reference to, and in higher

spiritual explanation of, what Christ had previously said about

bidding such to our feast of fellowship and love.[4476]4476

Accordingly, the Servant is now directed to 'go out quickly into the

(larger) streets and the (narrow) lanes of the City,' - a trait which

shows that the scene is laid in 'the City,' the professed habitation

of God. The importance of this circumstance is evident. It not only

explains who the first bidden chief citizens were, but also that these

poor were the despised ignorant, and the maimed, lame, and blind -

such as the publicans and sinners. These are they in 'the streets' and

'lanes;' and the Servant is directed, not only to invite, but to

'bring them in,' as otherwise they might naturally shrink from coming

to such a feast. But even so, 'there is yet room;' for the great Lord

of the house has, in His great liberality, prepared a very great feast

for very many. And so the Servant is once more sent, so that the

Master's 'house may be filled.' But now he is bidden to 'go out,'

outside the City, outside the Theocracy, 'into the highways and

hedges,' to those who travel along the world's great highway, or who

have fallen down weary, and rest by its hedges; into the busy, or else

weary, heathen world. This reference to the heathen world is the more

apparent that, according to the Talmud,[4477]4477 there were commonly

no hedges round the fields of the Jews. And this time the direction to

the Servant is not, as in regard to those naturally bashful outcasts

of the City - who would scarcely venture to the great house - to

'bring them in,' but 'constrain' [without a pronoun] 'to come in,' Not

certainly as indicating their resistance and implying force,[4478]4478

but as the moral constraint of earnest, pressing invitation, coupled

with assurance both of the reality of the feast and of their welcome

to it. For, these wanderers on the world's highway had, before the

Servant came to them, not known anything of the Master of the house,

and all was quite new and unexpected. Their being invited by a Lord

Whom they had not known, perhaps never heard of before, to a City in

which they were strangers, and to a feast for which - as wayfarers, or

as resting by the hedges, or else as working within their enclosure -

they were wholly unprepared, required special urgency, 'a

constraining,' to make them either believe in it, or come to it from

where the messengers found them, and that without preparing for it by

dress or otherwise. And so the house would be filled!

Here the Parable abruptly breaks off. What follows are the words of

our Lord in explanation and application of it to the company then

present: 'For I say unto you, that none of those men which were bidden

shall taste of My supper.' And this was the final answer to this

Pharisee and to those with him at that table, and to all such

perversion of Christ's Words and misapplication of God's Promises as

he and they were guilty of.

CHAPTER XVII.

THE THREE PARABLES OF THE GOSPEL: OF THE RECOVERY OF THE LOST - OF

THE LOST

SHEEP, THE LOST DRACHM, THE LOST SON.

(St. Luke xv.)

A SIMPLE perusal of the three Parables, grouped together in the

fifteenth chapter of St. Luke's Gospel, will convince us of their

connection. Although they treat of 'repentance,' we can scarcely call

them 'The Parables of Repentance;' for, except in the last of them,

the aspect of repentance is subordinate to that of restoration, which

is the moral effect of repentance. They are rather peculiarly

Gospel-Parables 'of the recovery of the lost:' in the first instance,

through the unwearied labour; in the second, through the anxious care,

of the owner; and in the third Parable, through the never-ceasing love

of the Father.

Properly to understand these Parables, the circumstance which elicited

them must be kept in view. As Jesus preached the Gospel of God's call,

not to those who had, as they imagined, prepared themselves for the

Kingdom by study and good works, but as that to a door open, and a

welcome free to all, 'all the publicans and sinners were [constantly]

drawing near to Him.' It has formerly been shown,[4479]4479 that the

Jewish teaching concerning repentance was quite other than, nay,

contrary to, that of Christ. Theirs was not a Gospel to the lost: they

had nothing to say to sinners. They called upon them to 'do

penitence,' and then Divine Mercy, or rather Justice, would have its

reward for the penitent. Christ's Gospel was to the lost as such. It

told them of forgiveness, of what the Saviour was doing, and the

Father purposed and felt for them; and that, not in the future and as

reward of their penitence, but now in the immediate present. From what

we know of the Pharisees, we can scarcely wonder that 'they were

murmuring at Him, saying, This man receiveth "sinners," and eateth

with them.' Whether or not Christ had on this, as on other

occasions,[4480]4480 joined at a meal with such persons - which, of

course, in the eyes of the Pharisees would have been a great

aggravation to His offence - their charge was so far true, that 'this

One,' in contrariety to the principles and practice of Rabbinism,

'received sinners' as such, and consorted with them. Nay, there was

even more than they charged Him with: He not only received them when

they sought Him, but He sought them, so as to bring them to Him; not,

indeed, that they might remain 'sinners,' but that, by seeking and

finding them, they might be restored to the Kingdom, and there might

be joy in heaven over them. And so these are truly Gospel-Parables,

although presenting only some aspects of it.

Besides their subject-matter, these three Parables have some other

points in common. Two things are here of chief interest. They all

proceed on the view that the work of the Father and of Christ, as

regards 'the Kingdom,' is the same; that Christ was doing the work of

the Father, and that they who know Christ know the Father also. That

work was the restoration of the lost; Christ had come to do it, and it

was the longing of the Father to welcome the lost home again. Further,

and this is only second in importance, the lost was still God's

property; and he who had wandered farthest was a child of the Father,

and considered as such. And, although this may, in a wider sense,

imply the general propriety of Christ in all men, and the universal

Fatherhood of God, yet, remembering that this Parable was spoken to

Jews, we, to whom these Parables now come, can scarcely be wrong in

thinking, as we read them, with special thankfulness of our Christian

privileges, as by Baptism numbered among the sheep of His Flock, the

treasure of His Possession, and the children of His Home.[4481]4481

In other particulars there are, however, differences, all the more

marked that they are so finely shaded. These concern the lost, their

restoration, and its results.

1. The Parable of the Lost Sheep. - At the outset we remark that this

Parable and the next, that of the Lost Drachm, are intended as an

answer to the Pharisees. Hence they are addressed to them: 'What man

of you?'[4482]4482 'or what woman?'[4483]4483 just as His late rebuke

to them on the subject of their Sabbath-cavils had been couched:

'Which of you shall have a son or an ox fallen into a well?'[4484]4484

Not so the last Parable, of the Lost Son, in which He passed from

defence, or rather explanation, of His conduct, to its higher reason,

showing that He was doing the work of the Father. Hence, while the

element of comparison (with that which had not been lost) appears in

most detailed form in the first Parable, it is generalised in the

second, and wholly omitted in the third.

Other differences have to be marked in the Parables themselves. In the

first Parable (that of the Lost Sheep) the main interest centres in

the lost; in the second (that of the Lost Drachm), in the search; in

the third, in the restoration. And although in the third Parable the

Pharisees are not addressed, there is the highest personal application

to them in the words which the Father speaks to the elder son - an

application, not so much of warning, as of loving correction and

entreaty, and which seems to imply, what otherwise these Parables

convey, that at least these Pharisees had 'murmured,' not so much from

bitter hostility to Christ, as from spiritual ignorance and

misunderstanding.

Again, these Parables, and especially that of the Lost Sheep, are

evidently connected with the preceding series, that 'of warnings.' The

last of these showed how the poor, the blind, lame, and maimed, nay,

even the wanderers on the world's highway, were to be the guests at

the heavenly Feast. And this, not only in the future, and after long

and laborious preparation, but now, through the agency of the Saviour.

As previously stated, Rabbinism placed acceptance at the end of

repentance, and made it its wages. And this, because it knew not, nor

felt the power of sin, nor yet the free grace of God. The Gospel

places acceptance at the beginning of repentance, and as the free gift

of God's love. And this, because it not only knows the power of sin,

but points to a Saviour, provided of God.

The Lost Sheep is only one among a hundred: not a very great loss. Yet

which among us would not, even from the common motives of ownership,

leave the ninety-and-nine, and go after it, all the more that it has

strayed into the wilderness? And, to take these Pharisees on their own

ground,[4485]4485 should not the Christ have done likewise to the

straying and almost lost sheep of His own flock? Nay, quite generally

and to all time, is this not the very work of the 'Good Shepherd,' and

may we not, each of us, thus draw from it precious comfort? As we

think of it, we remember that it is natural for the foolish sheep so

to wander and stray. And we think not only of those sheep which Jewish

pride and superciliousness had left to go astray, but of our own

natural tendency to wander. And we recall the saying of St. Peter,

which, no doubt, looked back upon this Parable: 'Ye were as sheep

going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of

your souls.'[4486]4486 It is not difficult in imagination to follow

the Parabolic picture: how in its folly and ignorance the sheep

strayed further and further, and at last was lost in solitude and

among stony places; how the shepherd followed and found it, weary and

footsore; and then with tender care lifted it on his shoulder, and

carried it home, gladsome that he had found the lost. And not only

this, but when, after long absence, he returned home with his found

sheep, that now nestled close to its Saviour, he called together his

friends, and bade them rejoice with him over the erst lost and now

found treasure.

It needs not, and would only diminish the pathos of this exquisite

Parable, were we to attempt interpreting its details. They apply

wherever and to whatever they can be applied. Of these three things we

think: of the lost sheep; of the Good Shepherd, seeking, finding,

bearing, rejoicing; and of the sympathy of all who are truly friends -

like-minded with Him. These, then, are the emblems of heavenly things.

In heaven - oh, how different the feeling from that of Pharisaism!

View 'the flock' as do the Pharisees, and divide them into those who

need and who need not repentance, the 'sinners' and the 'righteous,'

as regards man's application of the Law - does not this Parable teach

us that in heaven there shall be joy over the 'sinner that repenteth'

more than over the 'ninety-and-nine' 'righteous,' which 'have not need

of repentance'? And to mark the terrible contrast between the teaching

of Christ and that of the Pharisees; to mark also, how directly from

heaven must have been the message of Jesus, and how poor sinners must

have felt it such, we put down in all its nakedness the message which

Pharisaism brought to the lost. Christ said to them: 'There is joy in

heaven over one sinner that repenteth.' Pharisaism said - and we quote

here literally - 'There is joy before God when those who provoke Him

perish from the world.'[4487]4487

2. In proceeding to the second Parable, that of the Lost Drachm, we

must keep in mind that in the first the danger of being lost arose

from the natural tendency of the sheep to wander.[4488]4488 In the

second Parable it is no longer our natural tendency to which our loss

is attributable. The drachm (about 7 ½d. of our money) has been lost,

as the woman, its owner, was using or counting her money. The loss is

the more sensible, as it is one out of only ten, which constitute the

owner's property. But it is still in the house - not like the sheep

that had gone astray - only covered by the dust that is continually

accumulating from the work and accidents around. And so it is more and

more likely to be buried under it, or swept into chinks and corners,

and less and less likely to be found as time passes. But the woman

lights a lamp, sweeps the house, and seeks diligently, till she has

found it. And then she calleth together those around, and bids them

rejoice with her over the finding of the lost part of her possessions.

And so there is joy in the presence of the Angels over one sinner that

repenteth. The comparison with others that need not such is now

dropped, because, whereas formerly the sheep had strayed - though from

the frowardness of its nature - here the money had simply been lost,

fallen among the dust that accumulates - practically, was no longer

money, or of use; became covered, hidden, and was in danger of being

for ever out of sight, not serviceable, as it was intended to be and

might have been.

We repeat, the interest of this Parable centres in the search, and the

loss is caused, not by natural tendency, but by surrounding

circumstances, which cover up the bright silver, hide it, and render

it useless as regards its purpose, and lost to its owner.

3. If it has already appeared that the two first Parables are not

merely a repetition, in different form, of the same thought, but

represent two different aspects and causes of the 'being lost' - the

essential difference between them appears even more clearly in the

third Parable, that of the Lost Son. Before indicating it in detail,

we may mark the similarity in form, and the contrast in spirit, of

analogous Rabbinic Parables. The thoughtful reader will have noted

this even in the Jewish parallel to the first Parable,[4489]4489 where

the reason of the man following the straying animal is Pharisaic fear

and distrust, lest the Jewish wine which it carried should become

mingled with that of the Gentiles. Perhaps, however, this is a more

apt parallel, when the Midrash[4490]4490 relates how, when Moses fed

the sheep of Jethro in the wilderness, and a kid had gone astray, he

went after it, and found it drinking at a spring. As he thought it

might be weary, he laid it on his shoulder and brought it back, when

God said that, because he had shown pity on the sheep of a man, He

would give him His own sheep, Israel, to feed.[4491]4491 As a parallel

to the second Parable, this may be quoted as similar in form, though

very different in spirit, when a Rabbi notes,[4492]4492 that, if a man

had lost a Sela (drachm) or anything else of value in his house, he

would light ever so many lights ({hebrew}) till he had found what

provides for only one hour in this world. How much more, then, should

he search, as for hidden treasures, for the words of the Law, on which

depends the life of this and of the world to come![4493]4493 And in

regard to the high place which Christ assigned to the repenting

sinner, we may note that, according to the leading Rabbis, the

penitents would stand nearer to God than the 'perfectly righteous'

({hebrew}), since, in Is. lvii. 19, peace was first bidden to those

who had been afar off, and then only to those near. This opinion was,

however, not shared by all, and one Rabbi maintained,[4494]4494 that,

while all the prophets had only prophesied with reference to penitents

(this had been the sole object of their mission), yet, as regarded the

'perfectly righteous,' 'eye hath not seen' O God, beside Thee, what

'He hath prepared' for them.[4495]4495 Lastly, it may, perhaps, be

noted, that the expression 'there is joy before Him' ({hebrew}) is not

uncommon in Jewish writings with reference to events which take place

on earth.

To complete these notes, it may be added that, besides illustrations,

to which reference will be made in the sequel, Rabbinic tradition

supplies a parallel to at least part of the third Parable, that of the

Lost Son. It tells us that, while prayer may sometimes find the gate

of access closed, it is never shut against repentance, and it

introduces a Parable in which a king sends a tutor after his son, who,

in his wickedness, had left the palace, with this message: 'Return, my

son!' to which the latter replied: 'With what face can I return? I am

ashamed!' On which the father sends this message: 'My son, is there a

son who is ashamed to return to his father - and shalt thou not return

to thy father? Thou shalt return.' So, continues the Midrash, had God

sent Jeremiah after Israel in the hour of their sin with the call to

return,[4496]4496 and the comforting reminder that it was to their

Father.[4497]4497

In the Parable of 'the Lost Son,' the main interest centres in his

restoration. It is not now to the innate tendency of his nature, nor

yet to the work and dust in the house that the loss is attributable,

but to the personal, free choice of the individual. He does not stray;

he does not fall aside - he wilfully departs, and under aggravated

circumstances. It is the younger of two sons of a father, who is

equally loving to both, and kind even to his hired servants, whose

home, moreover, is one not only of sufficiency, but of superabundance

and wealth. The demand which he makes for the 'portion of property

falling' to him is founded on the Jewish Law of Inheritance.[4498]4498

Presumably, the father had only these two sons. The eldest would

receive two portions, the younger the third of all movable property.

The father could not have disinherited the younger son, although, if

there had been several younger sons, he might have divided the

property falling to them as he wished, provided he expressed only his

disposition, and did not add that such or such of the children were to

have a less share or none at all. On the other hand, a man might,

during his lifetime, dispose of all his property by gift, as he chose,

to the disadvantage, or even the total loss, of the first-born, or of

any other children; nay, he might give all to strangers.[4499]4499 In

such cases, as, indeed, in regard to all such dispositions, greater

latitude was allowed if the donor was regarded as dangerously ill,

than if he was in good health. In the latter case a legal formality of

actual seizure required to be gone through. With reference to the two

eventualities just mentioned - that of diminishing or taking away the

portion of younger children, and the right of gift - the Talmud speaks

of Testaments,[4500]4500 which bear the name Diyatiqi, as in the New

Testament.[4501]4501 These dispositions might be made either in

writing or orally. But if the share of younger children was to be

diminished or taken away, the disposition must be made by a person

presumably near death (Shekhibh mera). But no one in good health

(Bari) could diminish (except by gift) the legal portion of a younger

son.[4502]4502

It thus appears that the younger son was, by law, fully entitled to

his share of the possessions, although, of course, he had no right to

claim it during the lifetime of his father. That he did so, might have

been due to the feeling that, after all, he must make his own way in

the world; to dislike of the order and discipline of his home; to

estrangement from his elder brother; or, most likely, to a desire for

liberty and enjoyment, with the latent belief that he would succeed

well enough if left to himself. At any rate, his conduct, whatever his

motives, was most heartless as regarded his father, and sinful as

before God. Such a disposition could not prosper. The father had

yielded to his demand, and, to be as free as possible from control and

restraint, the younger son had gone into a far country. There the

natural sequences soon appeared, and his property was wasted in

riotous living. Regarding the demand for his inheritance as only a

secondary trait in the Parable, designed, on the one hand, more

forcibly to bring out the guilt of the son, and, on the other, the

goodness, and afterwards the forgiveness, of the Father, we can

scarcely doubt that by the younger son we are to understand those

'publicans and sinners' against whose reception by, and fellowship

with, Christ the Pharisees had murmured.

The next scene in the history is misunderstood when the objection is

raised, that the young man's misery is there represented as the result

of Providential circumstances rather than of his own misdoing. To

begin with, he would not have been driven to such straits in the

famine, if he had not wasted his substance with riotous living. Again,

the main object is to show, that absolute liberty and indulgence of

sinful desires and passions ended in anything but happiness. The

Providence of God had an important part in this. Far more frequently

are folly and sin punished in the ordinary course of Providence than

by special judgments. Indeed, it is contrary to the teaching of

Christ,[4503]4503 and it would lead to an unmoral view of life, to

regard such direct interpositions as necessary, or to substitute them

for the ordinary government of God. Similarly, for our awakening also

we are frequently indebted to what is called the Providence, but what

is really the manifold working together of the grace, of God. And so

we find special meaning in the occurrence of this famine. That, in his

want, 'he clave[4504]4504 (_koll_qj) to one of the citizens of that

country,' seems to indicate that the man had been unwilling to engage

the dissipated young stranger, and only yielded to his desperate

importunity. This also explains how he employed him in the lowest

menial service, that of feeding swine. To a Jew, there was more than

degradation in this, since the keeping of swine (although perhaps the

ownership rather than the feeding) was prohibited to Israelites under

a curse.[4505]4505 [4506]4506 And even in this demeaning service he

was so evil entreated, that for very hunger he would fain have 'filled

his belly with the carob-pods that the swine did eat.' But here the

same harshness, which had sent him to such employment, met him on the

part of all the people of that country: 'and no man gave unto him,'

even sufficient of such food. What perhaps gives additional meaning to

this description is the Jewish saying: 'When Israel is reduced to the

carob-tree, they become repentant.'[4507]4507 [4508]4508

It was this pressure of extreme want which first showed to the younger

son the contrast between the country and the circumstances to which

his sin had brought him, and the plentiful provision of the home he

had left, and the kindness which provided bread enough and to spare

for even the hired servants. There was only a step between what he

said, 'having come into himself,' and his resolve to return, though

its felt difficulty seems implied in the expression: 'I will arise.'

Nor would he go back with the hope of being reinstated in his position

as son, seeing he had already received, and wasted in sin, his portion

of the patrimony. All he sought was to be made as one of the hired

servants. And, alike from true feeling, and to show that this was all

his pretence, he would preface his request by the confession, that he

had sinned 'against heaven' - a frequent Hebraism for 'against

God'[4509]4509 - and in the sight of his father, and hence could no

longer lay claim to the name of son. The provision of the son he had,

as stated, already spent, the name he no longer deserved. This favour

only would he seek, to be as a hired servant in his father's house,

instead of in that terrible, strange land of famine and harshness.

But the result was far other than he could have expected. When we read

that, 'while he was yet afar off, his father saw him,' we must

evidently understand it in the sense, that his father had been always

on the outlook for him, an impression which is strengthened by the

later command to the servants to 'bring the calf, the fatted

one,'[4510]4510 as if it had been specially fattened against his

return. As he now saw him, 'he was moved with compassion, and he ran,

and he fell on his neck, and covered him with kisses.'[4511]4511 Such

a reception rendered the purposed request, to be made as one of the

hired servants, impossible - and its spurious insertion in the text of

some important manuscripts[4512]4512 affords sad evidence of the want

of spiritual tact and insight of early copyists. The father's love had

anticipated his confession, and rendered its self-spoken sentence of

condemnation impossible. 'Perfect love casteth out fear,' and the hard

thoughts concerning himself and his deserts on the part of the

returning sinner were banished by the love of the father. And so he

only made confession of his sin and wrong - not now as preface to the

request to be taken in as a servant, but as the outgoing of a humbled,

grateful, truly penitent heart. Him whom want had humbled, thought had

brought to himself, and mingled need and hope led a suppliant servant

- the love of a father, which anticipated his confession, and did not

even speak the words of pardon, conquered, and so morally begat him a

second time as his son. Here it deserves special notice, as marking

the absolute contrast between the teaching of Christ and Rabbinism,

that we have in one of the oldest Rabbinic works[4513]4513 a Parable

exactly the reverse of this, when the son of a friend is redeemed from

bondage, not as a son, but to be a slave, that so obedience might be

demanded of him. The inference drawn is, that the obedience of the

redeemed is not that of filial love of pardoned, but the enforcement

of the claim of a master. How otherwise in the Parable and teaching of

Christ!

But even so the story of love has not come to an end. They have

reached the house. And now the father would not only restore the son,

but convey to him the evidence of it, and he would do so before, and

by the servants. The three tokens of wealth and position are to be

furnished him. 'Quickly' the servants are to bring forth the 'stola,'

the upper garment of the higher classes, and that 'the first' - the

best, and this instead of the tattered, coarse raiment of the foreign

swineherd. Similarly, the finger-ring for his hand, and the sandals

for his unshod feet, would indicate the son of the house. And to mark

this still further, the servants were not only to bring these

articles, but themselves to 'put them on' the son, so as thereby to

own his mastership. And yet further, the calf, 'the fatted one' for

this very occasion, was to be killed, and there was to be a joyous

feast, for 'this' his son 'was dead, and is come to life again; was

lost, and is found.'[4514]4514

Thus far for the reception of 'publicans and sinners,' and all in

every time whom it may concern. Now for the other aspect of the

history. While this was going on, so continues the Parable, the elder

brother was still in the field. On his return home, he inquired of a

servant the reason of the festivities which he heard within the house.

Informed that his younger brother had come, and the calf long prepared

against a feast had been killed, because his father had recovered him

'safe and sound,' he was angry, would not go in, and even refused the

request to that effect of the father, who had come out for the

purpose. The harsh words of reproach with which he set forth his own

apparent wrongs could have only one meaning: his father had never

rewarded him for his services. On the other hand, as soon as 'this'

his 'son' - whom he will not even call his brother - had come back,

notwithstanding all his disservice, he had made a feast of joy!

But in this very thing lay the error of the elder son, and - to apply

it - the fatal mistake of Pharisaism. The elder son regarded all as of

merit and reward, as work and return. But it is not so. We mark,

first, that the same tenderness which had welcomed the returning son,

now met the elder brother. He spoke to the angry man, not in the

language of merited reproof, but addressed him lovingly as 'son,' and

reasoned with him. And then, when he had shown him his wrong, he would

fain recall him to better feeling by telling him of the other as his

'brother.'[4515]4515 But the main point is this. There can be here no

question of desert. So long as the son is in His Father's house He

gives in His great goodness to His child all that is the Father's. But

this poor lost one - still a son and a brother - he has not got any

reward, only been taken back again by a Father's love, when he had

come back to Him in the deep misery of his felt need. This son, or

rather, as the other should view him, this 'brother,' had been dead,

and was come to life again; lost, and was found. And over this 'it was

meet to make merry and be glad,' not to murmur. Such murmuring came

from thoughts of work and pay - wrong in themselves, and foreign to

the proper idea of Father and son; such joy, from a Father's heart.

The elder brother's were the thoughts of a servant:[4516]4516 of

service and return; the younger brother's was the welcome of a son in

the mercy and everlasting love of a Father. And this to us, and to all

time!

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE UNJUST STEWARD - DIVES AND LAZARUS - JEWISH AGRICULTURAL NOTES -

PRICES

OF PRODUCE - WRITING AND LEGAL DOCUMENTS - PURPLE AND FINE LINEN -

JEWISH

NOTIONS OF HADES.

(St. Luke xvi.)

Although widely differing in their object and teaching, the last group

of Parables spoken during this part of Christ's Ministry are, at least

outwardly, connected by a leading thought. The word by which we would

string them together is Righteousness. There are three Parables of the

Unrighteous: the Unrighteous Steward, the Unrighteous Owner, and the

Unrighteous Dispenser, or Judge. And these are followed by two other

Parables of the Self-righteous: Self-righteousness in its Ignorance,

and its dangers as regards oneself; and Self-righteousness in its

Harshness, and its dangers as regards others. But when this outward

connection has been marked, we have gone the utmost length. Much more

close is the internal connection between some of them.

We note it, first and chiefly, between the two first Parables.

Recorded in the same chapter,[4517]4517 and in the same connection,

they were addressed to the same audience. True, the Parable of the

Unjust Steward was primarily spoken 'to His disciples,'[4518]4518 that

of Dives and Lazarus to the Pharisees.[4519]4519 But then the audience

of Christ at that time consisted of disciples and Pharisees. And these

two classes in the audience stood in peculiar relation to each other,

which is exactly met in these two Parables, so that the one may be

said to have sprung out of the other. For, the 'disciples,' to whom

the first Parable was addressed, were not primarily the Apostles, but

those 'publicans and sinners' whom Jesus had received, to the great

displeasure of the Pharisees.[4520]4520 Them He would teach concerning

the Mamon of unrighteousness. And, when the Pharisees sneered at this

teaching, He would turn it against them, and show that, beneath the

self-justification,[4521]4521 which made them forget that now the

Kingdom of God was opened to all,[4522]4522 and imagine that they were

the sole vindicators of a Law[4523]4523 which in their everyday

practice they notoriously broke,[4524]4524 there lay as deep sin and

as great alienation from God as that of the sinners whom they

despised. Theirs might not be the Mamon of, yet it might be that for

unrighteousness; and, while they sneered at the idea of such men

making of their Mamon friends that would receive them into everlasting

tabernacles, themselves would experience that in the end a terrible

readjustment before God would follow on their neglect of using for

God, and their employment only for self of such Mamon as was theirs,

coupled as it was with harsh and proud neglect of what they regarded

as wretched, sore-covered Lazarus, who lay forsaken and starving at

their very doors.

It will have been observed, that we lay once more special stress on

the historical connection and the primary meaning of the Parables. We

would read them in the light of the circumstances in which they were

spoken - as addressed to a certain class of hearers, and as referring

to what had just passed. The historical application once ascertained,

the general lessons may afterwards be applied to the widest range.

This historical view will help us to understand the introduction,

connection, and meaning, of the two Parables which have been described

as the most difficult: those of the Unjust Steward,[4525]4525 and of

Dives and Lazarus.

At the outset we must recall, that they were addressed to two

different classes in the same audience. In both the subject is

Unrighteousness. In the first, which is addressed to the recently

converted publicans and sinners, it is the Unrighteous Steward, making

unrighteous use of what had been committed to his administration by

his Master; in the second Parable, which is addressed to the

self-justifying, sneering Pharisees, it is the Unrighteous Possessor,

who uses only for himself and for time what he has, while he leaves

Lazarus, who, in his view, is wretched and sore-covered, to starve or

perish, unheeded, at his very door. In agreement with its object, and

as suited to the part of the audience addressed, the first Parable

points a lesson, while the second furnishes a warning. In the first

Parable we are told, what the sinner when converted should learn from

his previous life of sin; in the second, what the self-deceiving,

proud Pharisee should learn as regarded the life which to him seemed

so fair, but was in reality so empty of God and of love. It follows -

and this is of greatest importance, especially in the interpretation

of the first Parable - that we must not expect to find spiritual

equivalents for each of the persons or incidents introduced. In each

case, the Parable itself forms only an illustration of the lessons,

spoken or implied, which Christ would convey to the one and the other

class in His audience.

I. The Parable of the Unjust Steward. - In accordance with the canon

of interpretation just laid down, we distinguish - 1. The illustrative

Parable.[4526]4526 2. Its moral.[4527]4527 3. Its application in the

combination of the moral with some of the features of the

Parable.[4528]4528

1. The illustrative Parable.[4529]4529 This may be said to converge to

the point brought out in the concluding verse:[4530]4530 the prudence

which characterises the dealings of the children of this world in

regard to their own generation, or, to translate the Jewish forms of

expression into our own phraseology, the wisdom with which those who

care not for the world to come choose the means most effectual for

attaining their worldly objects. It is this prudence by which their

aims are so effectually secured, and it alone, which is set before

'the children of light,' as that by which to learn. And the lesson is

the more practical, that those primarily addressed had hitherto been

among these men of the world. Let them learn from the serpent its

wisdom, and from the dove its harmlessness; from the children of this

world, their prudence as regarded their generation, while, as children

of the new light, they must remember the higher aim for which that

prudence was to be employed. Thus would that Mamon which is 'of

unrighteousness,' and which certainly 'faileth,' become to us treasure

in the world to come - welcome us there, and, so far from 'failing,'

prove permanent - welcome us in everlasting tabernacles. Thus, also,

shall we have made friends of the 'Mamon of unrighteousness,' and

that, which from its nature must fail, become eternal gain - or, to

translate it into Talmudic phraseology, it will be of the things of

which a man enjoys the interest in this world, while the capital

remains for the world to come.

It cannot now be difficult to understand the Parable. Its object is

simply to show, in the most striking manner, the prudence of a worldly

man, who is unrestrained by any other consideration than that of

attaining his end. At the same time, with singular wisdom, the

illustration is so chosen as that its matter (materia), 'the Mamon of

unrighteousness,' may serve to point a life-lesson to those newly

converted publicans and sinners, who had formerly sacrificed all for

the sake, or in the enjoyment of, that Mamon. All else, such as the

question, who is the master and who the steward, and such like, we

dismiss, since the Parable is only intended as an illustration of the

lesson to be afterwards taught.

The connection between this Parable and what the Lord had previously

said concerning returning sinners, to which our remarks have already

pointed, is further evidenced by the use of the term 'wasting'

(diaskorp_zwn), in the charge against the steward, just as the

prodigal son had 'wasted' (diesk_rpise) his substance.[4531]4531 Only,

in the present instance, the property had been entrusted to his

administration. As regards the owner, his designation as 'rich' seems

intended to mark how large was the property committed to the steward.

The 'steward' was not, as in St. Luke xii. 42-46, a slave, but one

employed for the administration cf the rich man's affairs, subject to

notice of dismissal.[4532]4532 He was accused - the term implying

malevolence, but not necessarily a false charge - not of fraud, but of

wasting, probably by riotous living and carelessness, his master's

goods. And his master seems to have convinced himself that the charge

was true, since he at once gives him notice of dismissal. The latter

is absolute, and not made dependent on the 'account of his

stewardship,' which is only asked as, of course, necessary, when he

gives up his office. Nor does the steward either deny the charge or

plead any extenuation. His great concern rather is, during the time

still left of his stewardship, before he gives up his accounts, to

provide for his future support. The only alternative before him in the

future is that of manual labour or mendicancy. But for the former he

has not strength; from the latter he is restrained by shame.

Then it is that his 'prudence' suggests a device by which, after his

dismissal, he may, without begging, be received into the houses of

those whom he has made friends.[4533]4533 It must be borne in mind,

that he is still steward, and, as such, has full power of disposing of

his master's affairs. When, therefore, he sends for one after another

of his master's debtors, and tells each to alter the sum in the bond,

he does not suggest to them forgery or fraud, but, in remitting part

of the debt - whether it had been incurred as rent in kind, or as the

price of produce purchased - he acts, although unrighteously, yet

strictly within his rights. Thus, neither the steward nor the debtors

could be charged with criminality, and the master must have been

struck with the cleverness of a man who had thus secured a future

provision by making friends, so long as he had the means of so doing

(ere his Mamon of unrighteousness failed).

A few archæological notices may help the interpretation of details.

From the context it seems more likely, that the 'bonds,' or rather

'writings,' of these debtors were written acknowledgements of debt,

than, as some have supposed that they were, leases of farms. The debts

over which the steward variously disposed, according as he wished to

gain more or less favour, were considerable. In the first case they

are stated at 'a hundred Bath of oil,' in the second as 'a hundred Cor

of wheat.' In regard to these quantities we have the preliminary

difficulty, that three kinds of measurement were in use in Palestine -

that of the 'Wilderness,' or, the original Mosaic; that of

'Jerusalem,' which was more than a fifth larger; and that of

Sepphoris, probably the common Galilean measurement, which, in turn,

was more than a fifth larger than the Jerusalem measure.[4534]4534 To

be more precise, one Galilean was equal to 3/2 'Wilderness' measures.

Assuming the measurement to have been the Galilean, one Bath[4535]4535

would have been equal to an Attic Metrêtês, or about 39 litres. On the

other hand, the so-called 'Wilderness measurement' would correspond

with the Roman measures, and, in that case, the 'Bath' would be the

same as the Amphora, or amount to a little less than 26

litres.[4536]4536 The latter is the measurement adopted by

Josephus.[4537]4537 [4538]4538 In the Parable, the first debtor was

owing 100 of these 'Bath,' or, according to the Galilean measurement,

about 3,900 litres of oil. As regards the value of a Bath of oil,

little information can be derived from the statements of Josephus,

since he only mentions prices under exceptional circumstances, either

in particularly plentiful years,[4539]4539 or else at a time of war

and siege.[4540]4540 In the former, an Amphora, or 26 litres, of oil

seems to have fetched about 9d.; but it must be added, that, even in

such a year, this represents a rare stroke of business, since the oil

was immediately afterwards re-sold for eight times the amount, and

this - 3s. for half an Amphora of about 13 litres - would probably

represent an exceptionally high war-price. The fair price for it would

probably have been 9d. For the Mishnah informs us, that the ordinary

'earthenware casks' (the Gerabh) held each 2 Seah, or 48 Log, or about

26 litres.[4541]4541 Again, according to a notice in the

Talmud,[4542]4542 100 such 'casks,' or, 200 Seah, were sold for 10

(presumably gold) dinars, or 250 silver dinars, equal to about 7l.

10s. of our money. And as the Bath (= 3 Seah) held a third more than

one of those 'casks,' or Gerabhin, the value of the 100 Bath of oil

would probably amount to about 10l. of our money, and the remission of

the steward, of course, to 5l.

The second debtor owed 'a hundred Cor of wheat' - that is, in dry

measure, ten times the amount of the oil of the first debtor, since

the Cor was ten Ephah or Bath, the Ephah three Seah, the Seah six

Qabh, and the Qabh four Log. This must be borne in mind, since the dry

and the fluid measures were precisely the same; and here, also, their

threefold computation (the 'Wilderness,' the 'Jerusalem,' and the

'Galilean') obtained. As regards the value of wheat, we

learn[4543]4543 that, on an average, four Seah of seed were expected

to produce one Cor - that is, seven and a half times their amount; and

that a field 1,500 cubits long and 50 wide was expected to grow a Cor.

The average price of a Cor of wheat, bought uncut, amounted to about

25 dinars, or 15s. Striking an average between the lowest prices

mentioned[4544]4544 and the highest,[4545]4545 we infer that the price

of 3 Seah or an Ephah would be from two shillings to half-a-crown, and

accordingly of a Cor (or 10 Ephah) from 20 to 25 shillings (probably

this is rather more than it would cost). On this computation the

hundred Cor would represent a debt of from 100l. to 125l., and the

remission of the steward (of 20 Cor), a sum of from 20l. to 25l.

Comparatively small as these sums may seem, they are in reality large,

remembering the value of money in Palestine, which, on a low

computation, would be five times as great as in our own

country.[4546]4546 These two debtors are only mentioned as instances,

and so the unjust steward would easily secure for himself friends by

the 'Mamon of unrighteousness,' the term Mamon,[4547]4547 we may note,

being derived from the Syriac and Rabbinic word of the same kind

({hebrew}, from {hebrew}={hebrew}, {hebrew}, to apportion).[4548]4548

Another point on which acquaintance with the history and habits of

those times throws light is, how the debtors could so easily alter the

sum mentioned in their respective bonds. For, the text implies that

this, and not the writing of a new bond, is intended; since in that

case the old one would have been destroyed, and not given back for

alteration. It would be impossible, within the present limits, to

enter fully on the interesting subject of writing, writing-materials,

and written documents among the ancient Jews.[4549]4549 Suffice it to

give here the briefest notices.

The materials on which the Jews wrote were of the most divers kind:

leaves, as of olives, palms, the carob, &c.; the rind of the

pomegranate, the shell of walnuts, &c.; the prepared skins of animals

(leather and parchment); and the product of the papyrus, used long

before the time of Alexander the Great for the manufacture of paper,

and known in Talmudic writings by the same name, as Papir[4550]4550 or

Apipeir,[4551]4551 but more frequently by that of Nayyar - probably

from the stripes (Nirin) of the plant of which it was made.[4552]4552

But what interests us more, as we remember the 'tablet' (pinak_dion)

on which Zacharias wrote the name of the future Baptist,[4553]4553 is

the circumstance that it bears not only the same name, Pinaqes or

Pinqesa, but that it seems to have been of such common use in

Palestine.[4554]4554. It consisted of thin pieces of wood (the Luach)

fastened or strung together. The Mishnah[4555]4555 enumerates three

kinds of them: those where the wood was covered with

papyrus,[4556]4556 those where it was covered with wax, and those

where the wood was left plain to be written on with ink. The latter

was of different kinds. Black ink was prepared of soot (the Deyo), or

of vegetable or mineral substances.[4557]4557 Gum Arabic and Egyptian

(Qumos and Quma) and vitriol (Qanqanthos) seem also to have been

used[4558]4558 in writing. It is curious to read of writing in colours

and with red ink or Siqra,[4559]4559 and even of a kind of sympathetic

ink, made from the bark of the ash, and brought out by a mixture of

vitriol and gum.[4560]4560 We also read of a gold-ink, as that in

which the copy of the Law was written which, according to the legend,

the High-Priest had sent to Ptolemy Philadelphus for the purpose of

being translated into Greek by the LXX.[4561]4561 But the Talmud

prohibits copies of the Law in gold letters,[4562]4562 or more

probably such in which the Divine Name was written in gold

letters.[4563]4563 [4564]4564 In writing, a pen, Qolemos, made of reed

(Qaneh[4565]4565) was used, and the reference in an Apostolic

Epistle[4566]4566 to writing 'with ink and pen' (di_ m_lanov ka_

kal_mou) finds even its verbal counterpart in the Midrash, which

speaks of Milanin and Qolemin (ink and pens). Indeed, the public

'writer' - a trade very common in the East[4567]4567 - went about with

a Qolemos, or reed-pen, behind his ear, as a badge of his

employment.[4568]4568 [4569]4569 With the reed-pen we ought to mention

its necessary accompaniments: the penknife,[4570]4570 the inkstand

(which, when double, for black and red ink, was sometimes made of

earthenware, Qalamarim[4571]4571), and the ruler[4572]4572 - it being

regarded by the stricter set as unlawful to write any words of Holy

Writ on any unlined material, no doubt to ensure correct writing and

reading.[4573]4573 [4574]4574

In all this we have not referred to the practice of writing on leather

specially prepared with salt and flour,[4575]4575 nor to the Qelaph,

or parchment in the stricter sense.[4576]4576 For we are here chiefly

interested in the common mode of writing, that on the Pinaqes, or

'tablet,' and especially on that covered with wax. Indeed, a little

vessel holding wax was generally attached to it (Pinaqes sheyesh bo

beth Qibbul shaavah[4577]4577). On such a tablet they wrote, of

course, not with a reed-pen, but with a stylus, generally of iron.

This instrument consisted of two parts, which might be detached from

each other: the hard pointed 'writer' (Kothebh), and the 'blotter'

(Mocheq) which was flat and thick for smoothing out letters and words

which had been written or rather graven in the wax.[4578]4578 There

can be no question that acknowledgments of debt, and other

transactions, were ordinarily written down on such wax-covered

tablets; for not only is direct reference made to it,[4579]4579 but

there are special provisions in regard to documents where there are

such erasures, or rather effacements: such as, that they require to be

noted in the document,[4580]4580 under what conditions and how the

witnesses are in such cases to affix their signatures,[4581]4581 just

as there are particular injunctions how witnesses who could not write

are to affix their mark.

But although we have thus ascertained that 'the bonds' in the Parable

must have been written on wax - or else, possibly, on parchment -

where the Mocheq, or blotter, could easily efface the numbers, we have

also evidence that they were not, as so often, written on 'tablets'

(the Pinaques). For, the Greek term, by which these 'bonds' or

'writings' are designated in the Parable (gr_mmata[4582]4582), is the

same as is sometimes used in Rabbinic writings (Gerammation) for an

acknowledgment of debt;[4583]4583 [4584]4584 the Hebraised Greek word

corresponding to the more commonly used (Syriac) term Shitre (Shetar),

which also primarily denotes 'writings,' and is used specifically for

such acknowledgments.[4585]4585 [4586]4586 Of these there were two

kinds. The most formal Shetar was not signed by the debtor at all, but

only by the witnesses, who were to write their names (or marks)

immediately (not more than two lines) below the text of the document,

to prevent fraud. Otherwise, the document would not possess legal

validity. Generally, it was further attested by the

Sanhedrin[4587]4587 of three, who signed in such manner as not to

leave even one line vacant.[4588]4588 Such a document contained the

names of creditor and debtor, the amount owing, and the date, together

with a clause attaching the property of the debtor. In fact, it was a

kind of mortgage; all sale of property being, as with us, subject to

such a mortgage,[4589]4589 which bore the name Acharayuth (probably,

'guarantee'[4590]4590) When the debt was paid, the legal obligation

was simply returned to the debtor; if paid in part, either a new bond

was written, or a receipt given, which was called Shobher[4591]4591 or

Tebhara, because it 'broke' the debt.

But in many respects different were those bonds which were

acknowledgements of debt for purchases made, such as we suppose those

to have been which are mentioned in the Parable. In such cases it was

not uncommon to dispense altogether with witnesses, and the document

was signed by the debtor himself. In bonds of this kind, the creditor

had not the benefit of a mortgage in case of sale. We have expressed

our belief that the Parable refers to such documents, and we are

confirmed in this by the circumstance that they not only bear a

different name from the more formal bonds (the Shitre), but one which

is perhaps the most exact rendering of the Greek term

({hebrew},[4592]4592 a 'writing of hand,' 'note of hand'[4593]4593).

For completeness' sake we add, in regard to the farming of land, that

two kinds of leases were in use. Under the first, called Shetar

Arisuth, the lessee (Aris = o_rov[4594]4594) received a certain

portion of the produce. He might be a lessee for life, for a specified

number of years, or even a hereditary tiller of the ground; or he

might sub-let it to another person.[4595]4595 Under the second kind of

lease, the farmer - or Meqabbel - entered into a contract for payment

either in kind, when he undertook to pay a stipulated and unvarying

amount of produce, in which case he was called a Chokher (Chakhur or

Chakhira[4596]4596), or else a certain annual rental in money, when he

was called a Sokher.[4597]4597

2. From this somewhat lengthened digression, we return to notice the

moral of the Parable.[4598]4598 It is put in these words: 'Make to

yourselves friends out of [by means of] the Mamon of unrighteousness,

that, when it shall fail,[4599]4599 they may receive you into

everlasting tabernacles.' From what has been previously stated, the

meaning of these words offers little serious difficulty. We must again

recall the circumstances, that they were primarily addressed to

converted publicans and sinners, to whom the expression 'Mamon of

unrighteousness' - of which there are close analogies, and even an

exact transcript[4600]4600 in the Targum - would have an obvious

meaning. Among us, also, there are not a few who may feel its aptness

as they look back on the past, while to all it carries a much needed

warning. Again, the addition of the definite article leaves no doubt,

that 'the everlasting tabernacles' mean the well-known heavenly home;

in which sense the term 'tabernacle' is, indeed, already used in the

Old Testament.[4601]4601 [4602]4602 But as a whole we regard it (as

previously hinted) as an adaptation to the Parable of the well-known

Rabbinic saying, that there were certain graces of which a man enjoyed

the benefit here, while the capital, so to speak, remained for the

next world. And if a more literal interpretation were demanded, we

cannot but feel the duty incumbent on those converted publicans, nay,

in a sense, on us all, to seek to make for ourselves of the Mamon - be

it of money, of knowledge, of strength, or opportunities, which to

many has, and to all may so easily, become that 'of unrighteousness' -

such lasting and spiritual application: gain such friends by means of

it, that, 'when it fails,' as fail it must when we die, all may not be

lost, but rather meet us in heaven. Thus would each deed done for God

with this Mamon become a friend to greet us as we enter the eternal

world.

3. The suitableness both of the Parable and of its application to the

audience of Christ appears from its similarity to what occurs in

Jewish writings. Thus, the reasoning that the Law could not have been

given to the nations of the world, since they have not observed the

seven Noachic commandments (which Rabbinism supposes to have been

given to the Gentiles), is illustrated by a Parable in which a king is

represented as having employed two administrators (Apiterophin); one

over the gold and silver, and the other over the straw. The latter

rendered himself suspected, and - continues the Parable - when he

complained that he had not been set over the gold and silver, they

said unto him: Thou fool, if thou hast rendered thyself suspected in

regard to the straw, shall they commit to thee the treasure of gold

and silver?[4603]4603 And we almost seem to hear the very words of

Christ: 'He that is faithful[4604]4604 in that which is least, is

faithful also in much,' in this of the Midrash: 'The Holy One, blessed

be His Name, does not give great things to a man until he has been

tried in a small matter;' which is illustrated by the history of Moses

and of David, who were both called to rule from the faithful guiding

of sheep.[4605]4605

Considering that the Jewish mind would be familiar with such modes of

illustration, there could have been no misunderstanding of the words

of Christ. These converted publicans might think - and so may some of

us - that theirs was a very narrow sphere of service, one of little

importance; or else, like the Pharisees, and like so many others among

us, that faithful administration of the things of this world ('the

Mamon of unrighteousness') had no bearing on the possession of the

true riches in the next world. In answer to the first difficulty,

Christ points out that the principle of service is the same, whether

applied to much or to little; that the one was, indeed, meet

preparation for, and, in truth, the test of the other.[4606]4606 'He

that is faithful' - or, to paraphrase the word (pist_v), he that has

proved himself, is accredited (answering to {hebrew}) - 'in the least,

is also faithful [accredited] in much; and who in the least is unjust

is also in much unjust.' Therefore, if a man failed in faithful

service of God in his worldly matters - in the language of the

Parable, if he were not faithful in the Mamon of unrighteousness -

could he look for the true Mamon, or riches of the world to come?

Would not his unfaithfulness in the lower stewardship imply unfitness

for the higher? And - still in the language of the Parable - if they

had not proved faithful in mere stewardship, 'in that which was

another's,' could it be expected that they would be exalted from

stewardship to proprietorship? And the ultimate application of all was

this, that dividedness was impossible in the service of God.[4607]4607

It is impossible for the disciple to make separation between spiritual

matters and worldly, and to attempt serving God in the one and Mamon

in the other. There is absolutely no such distinction to the disciple,

and our common usage of the words secular and spiritual is derived

from a terrible misunderstanding and mistake. To the secular, nothing

is spiritual; and to the spiritual, nothing is secular: No servant can

serve two Masters; ye cannot serve God and Mamon.

II. The Parable of Dives and Lazarus.[4608]4608 - Although primarily

spoken to the Pharisees, and not to the disciples, yet, as will

presently appear, it was spoken for the disciples. The words of Christ

had touched more than one sore spot in the hearts of the Pharisees.

This consecration of all to God as the necessary condition of high

spiritual service, and then of higher spiritual standing - as it were

'ownership' - such as they claimed, was a very hard saying. It touched

their covetousness. They would have been quite ready to hear, nay,

they believed that the 'true' treasure had been committed to their

trust. But that its condition was, that they should prove themselves

God-devoted in 'the unrighteous Mamon,' faithful in the employment of

it in that for which it was entrusted to their stewardship, this was

not to be borne. Nor yet, that such prospects should be held out to

publicans and sinners, while they were withheld from those who were

the custodians of the Law and of the Prophets. But were they faithful

to the Law? And as to their claim of being the 'owners,' the Parable

of the Rich Owner and of his bearing would exhibit how unfaithful they

were in 'much' as well as in 'little,' in what they claimed as owners

as well as in their stewardship - and this, on their own showing of

their relations to publicans and sinners: the Lazarus who lay at their

doors.

Thus viewed, the verses which introduce the second Parable (that of

Dives and Lazarus) will appear, not 'detached sayings,' as some

commentators would have us believe, but most closely connected with

the Parable to which they form the Preface. Only, here especially,

must we remember, that we have only Notes of Christ's Discourse, made

years before by one who had heard it, and containing the barest

outline - as it were, the stepping-stones - of the argument as it

proceeded. Let us try to follow it. As the Pharisees heard what Christ

said, their covetousness was touched. It is said, moreover, that they

derided Him - literally, 'turned up their noses at Him.'[4609]4609 The

mocking gestures, with which they pointed to His publican-disciples,

would be accompanied by mocking words in which they would extol and

favourably compare their own claims and standing with that of those

new disciples of Christ. Not only to refute but to confute, to

convict, and, if possible, to convince them, was the object of

Christ's Discourse and Parable. One by one their pleas were taken up

and shown to be utterly untenable. They were persons who by outward

righteousness and pretences sought to appear just before men, but God

knew their hearts; and that which was exalted among men, their

Pharisaic standing and standing aloof, was abomination before

Him.[4610]4610 These two points form the main subject of the Parable.

Its first object was to show the great difference between the 'before

men' and the 'before God;' between Dives as he appears to men in this

world, and as he is before God and will be in the next world. Again,

the second main object of the Parable was to illustrate that their

Pharisaic standing and standing aloof - the bearing of Dives in

reference to a Lazarus - which was the glory of Pharisaism before men,

was an abomination before God. Yet a third object of the Parable was

in reference to their covetousness, the selfish use which they made of

their possessions - their Mamon. But a selfish was an unrighteous use;

and, as such, would meet with sorer retribution than in the case of an

unfaithful steward.

But we leave for the prseent the comparative analysis of the Parable

to return to the introductory words of Christ. Having shown that the

claims of the Pharisees and their standing aloof from poor sinners

were an abomination before God, Christ combats these grounds of their

bearing, that they were the custodians and observers of the Law and of

the Prophets, while those poor sinners had no claims upon the Kingdom

of God. Yes - but the Law and the Prophets had their terminus ad quem

in John the Baptist, who 'brought the good tidings of the Kingdom of

God.' Since then 'every one' had to enter it by personal resolution

and 'force.'[4611]4611 Yes - it was true that the Law could not fail

in one tittle of it.[4612]4612 But, notoriously and in everyday life,

the Pharisees, who thus spoke of the Law and appealed to it, were the

constant and open breakers of it. Witness here their teaching and

practice concerning divorce, which really involved a breach of the

seventh commandment.[4613]4613

Thus, when bearing in mind that, as previously stated, we have here

only the 'heads,' or rather the 'stepping stones,' of Christ's

argument - from notes by a hearer at the time, which were afterwards

given to St. Luke - we clearly perceive, how closely connected are the

seemingly disjointed sentences which preface the Parable, and how

aptly they introduce it. The Parable itself is strictly of the

Pharisees and their relation to the 'publicans and sinners' whom they

despised, and to whose stewardship they opposed thoughts of their own

proprietorship. With infinite wisdom and depth the Parable tells in

two directions: in regard to their selfish use of the literal riches -

their covetousness - and in regard to their selfish use of the

figurative riches: their Pharisaic righteousness, which left poor

Lazarus at their door to the dogs and to famine, not bestowing on him

aught from their supposed rich festive banquets.

On the other hand, it will be necessary in the interpretation of this

Parable to keep in mind, that its Parabolic details must not be

exploited, nor doctrines of any kind derived from them, either as to

the character of the other world, the question of the duration of

future punishments, or the possible moral improvement of those in

Gehinnom. All such things are foreign to the Parable, which is only

intended as a type, or exemplification and illustration, of what is

intended to be taught. And, if proof were required, it would surely be

enough to remind ourselves, that this Parable is addressed to the

Pharisees, to whom Christ would scarcely have communicated details

about the other world, on which He was so reticent in His teaching to

the disciples. The Parable naturally falls into three parts.

1. Dives and Lazarus before and after death,[4614]4614 or the contrast

between 'before men' and 'before God;' the unrighteous use of riches -

literal and figurative; and the relations of the Pharisaic Dives to

the publican Lazarus, as before men and as before God: the 'exalted

among men' an 'abomination before God.' And the application of the

Parable is here the more telling, that alms were so highly esteemed

among the Pharisees, and that the typical Pharisee is thus set before

them as, on their own showing, the typical sinner.

The Parable opens by presenting to us 'a rich man' 'clothed in purple

and byssus, joyously faring every day in splendor.' All here is in

character. His dress is described as the finest and most costly, for

byssus and purple were the most expensive materials, only inferior to

silk, which, if genuine and unmixed - for at least three kinds of silk

are mentioned in ancient Jewish writings - was worth its weight in

gold. Both byssus - of which it is not yet quite certain, whether it

was of hemp or cotton - and purple were indeed manufactured in

Palestine, but the best byssus (at least at that time[4615]4615) came

from Egypt and India. The white garments of the High-Priest on the Day

of Atonement were made of it.[4616]4616 To pass over exaggerated

accounts of its costliness,[4617]4617 the High-Priest's dress of

Pelusian linen for the morning service of the Day of Atonement was

said to have cost about 36l.; that of Indian linen for the evening of

the same day about 24l. Of course, this stuff would, if of

home-manufacture, whether made in Galilee or in Judæa,[4618]4618 be

much cheaper. As regarded purple, which was obtained from the coasts

of Tyre,[4619]4619 wool of violet-purple was sold about that period by

weight[4620]4620 at the rate of about 3l. the Roman pound, though it

would, of course, considerably vary in price.

Quite in accordance with this luxuriousness - unfortunately not

uncommon among the very high-placed Jews, since the Talmud (though, no

doubt, exaggeratedly) speaks of the dress of a corrupt High-Priest as

having cost upwards of 300l.[4621]4621 - was the feasting every day,

the description of which conveys the impression of company, merriment,

and splendour. All this is, of course, intended to set forth the

selfish use which this man made of his wealth, and to point the

contrast of his bearing towards Lazarus. Here also every detail is

meant to mark the pitiableness of the case, as it stood out before

Dives. The very name - not often mentioned in any other real, and

never in any other Parabolic story - tells it: Lazarus, Laazar, a

common abbreviation of Elazar, as it were, 'God help him!' Then we

read that he 'was cast'[4622]4622 (_b_bljto) at his gateway, as if to

mark that the bearers were glad to throw down their unwelcome

burden.[4623]4623 Laid there, he was in full view of the Pharisee as

he went out or came in, or sat in his courtyard. And as he looked at

him, he was covered with a loathsome disease; as he heard him, he

uttered a piteous request to be filled with what fell from the rich

man's table. Yet nothing was done to help his bodily misery, and, as

the word 'desiring' (_piqum_n) implies, his longing for the 'crumbs'

remained unsatisfied. So selfish in the use of his wealth was Dives,

so wretched Lazarus in his view; so self-satisfied and unpitying was

the Pharisee, so miserable in his sight and so needy the publican and

sinner. 'Yea, even the dogs came and licked his sores' - for it is not

to be understood as an alleviation, but as an aggravation of his ills,

that he was left to the dogs, which in Scripture are always

represented as unclean animals.

So it was before men. But how was it before God? There the relation

was reversed. The beggar died - no more of him here. But the Angels

'carried him away into Abraham's bosom.' Leaving aside for the

present[4624]4624 the Jewish teaching concerning the 'after death,' we

are struck with the sublime simplicity of the figurative language used

by Christ, as compared with the wild and sensuous fancies of later

Rabbinic teaching on the subject. It is, indeed, true, that we must

not look in this Parabolic language for Christ's teaching about the

'after death.' On the other hand, while He would say nothing that was

essentially divergent from, at least, the purest views entertained on

the subject at that time - since otherwise the object of the Parabolic

illustration would have been lost - yet, whatever He did say must,

when stripped of its Parabolic details, be consonant with fact. Thus,

the carrying up of the soul of the righteous by Angels is certainly in

accordance with Jewish teaching, though stripped of all legendary

details, such as about the number and the greetings of the

Angels.[4625]4625 But it is also fully in accordance with Christian

thought of the ministry of Angels. Again, as regards the expression

'Abraham's bosom,' it occurs, although not frequently, in Jewish

writings.[4626]4626 [4627]4627 On the other hand, the appeal to

Abraham as our father is so frequent, his presence and merits are so

constantly invoked; notably, he is so expressly designated as he who

receives ({hebrew}) the penitent into Paradise,[4628]4628 that we can

see how congruous especially to the higher Jewish teaching, which

dealt not in coarsely sensuous descriptions of Gan Eden, or Paradise,

the phrase 'Abraham's bosom' must have been. Nor surely can it be

necessary to vindicate the accord with Christian thinking of a

figurative expression, that likens us to children lying lovingly in

the bosom of Abraham as our spiritual father.

2. Dives and Lazarus after death:[4629]4629 The 'great contrast' fully

realised, and how to enter into the Kingdom. - Here also the main

interest centres in Dives. He also has died and been buried. Thus ends

all his exaltedness before men. The next scene is in Hades or Sheol,

the place of the disembodied spirits before the final Judgment. It

consists of two divisions: the one of consolation, with all the

faithful gathered unto Abraham as their father; the other of fiery

torment. Thus far in accordance with the general teaching of the New

Testament. As regards the details, they evidently represent the views

current at the time among the Jews. According to them, the Garden of

Eden and the Tree of Life were the abode of the blessed.[4630]4630

Nay, in common belief, the words of Gen. ii. 10: 'a river went out of

Eden to water the garden,' indicated that this Eden was distinct from,

and superior to, the garden in which Adam had been originally

placed.[4631]4631 With reference to it, we read that the righteous in

Gan Eden see the wicked in Gehinnom, and rejoice;[4632]4632 and,

similarly, that the wicked in Gehinnom see the righteous sitting

beautified in Gan Eden, and their souls are troubled.[4633]4633 Still

more marked is the parallelism in a legend told[4634]4634 about two

wicked companions, of whom one had died impenitent, while the other on

seeing it had repented. After death, the impenitent in Gehinnom saw

the happiness of his former companion, and murmured. When told that

the difference of their fate was due to the other's penitence, he

wished to have space assigned for it, but was informed that this life

(the eve of the Sabbath) was the time for making provision for the

next (the Sabbath). Again, it is consonant with what were the views of

the Jews, that conversations could be held between dead persons, of

which several legendary instances are given in the Talmud.[4635]4635

[4636]4636 The torment, especially of thirst, of the wicked, is

repeatedly mentioned in Jewish writings. Thus, in one place,[4637]4637

the fable of Tantalus is apparently repeated. The righteous is seen

beside delicious springs, and the wicked with his tongue parched at

the brink of a river, the waves of which are constantly receding from

him.[4638]4638 But there is this very marked and characteristic

contrast, that in the Jewish legend the beatified is a Pharisee, while

the sinner tormented with thirst is a Publican! Above all, and as

marking the vast difference between Jewish ideas and Christ's

teaching, we notice that there is no analogy in Rabbinic writings to

the statement in the Parable, that there is a wide and impassable gulf

between Paradise and Gehenna.

To return to the Parable. When we read that Dives in torments 'lifted

up his eyes,' it was, no doubt, for help, or, at least, alleviation.

Then he first perceived and recognised the reversed relationship. The

text emphatically repeats here: 'And he,' - literally, this one (ka_

a_tov), as if now, for the first time, he realised, but only to

misunderstand and misapply it, how easily superabundance might

minister relief to extreme need - 'calling (viz., upon = invoking)

said: "Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus."' The

invocation of Abraham, as having the power, and of Abraham as

'Father,' was natural on the part of a Jew. And our Lord does not here

express what really was, but only introduces Jews as speaking in

accordance with the popular notions. Accordingly, it does not

necessarily imply on the part of Dives either glorification of carnal

descent (gloriatio carnis, as Bengel has it), nor a latent idea that

he might still dispose of Lazarus. A Jew would have appealed to

'Father Abraham' under such or like circumstances, and many analogous

statements might be quoted in proof. But all the more telling is it,

that the rich Pharisee should behold in the bosom of Abraham, whose

child he specially claimed to be, what, in his sight, had been poor

Lazarus, covered with moral sores, and, religiously speaking, thrown

down outside his gate - not only not admitted to the fellowship of his

religious banquet, but not even to be fed by the crumbs that fell from

his table, and to be left to the dogs. And it was the climax of the

contrast that he should now have to invoke, and that in vain, his

ministry, seeking it at the hands of Abraham. And here we also recall

the previous Parable about making, ere it fail, friends by means of

the Mamon of unrighteousness, that they may welcome us in the

everlasting tabernacles.

It should be remembered that Dives now limits his request to the

humblest dimensions, asking only that Lazarus might be sent to dip the

tip of his finger in the cooling liquid, and thus give him even the

smallest relief. To this Abraham replies, though in a tone of pity:

'Child,' yet decidedly - showing him, first, the rightness of the

present position of things; and, secondly, the impossibility of any

alteration, such as he had asked. Dives had, in his lifetime, received

his good things; that had been his things, he had chosen them as his

part, and used them for self, without communicating of them. And

Lazarus had received evil things. Now Lazarus was comforted, and Dives

in torment. It was the right order - not that Lazarus was comforted

because in this world he had suffered, nor yet that Dives was in

torment because in this world he had had riches. But Lazarus received

there the comfort which had been refused to him on earth, and the man

who had made this world his good, and obtained there his portion, of

which he had refused even the crumbs to the most needy, now received

the meet reward of his unpitying, unloving, selfish life. But, besides

all this, which in itself was right and proper, Dives had asked what

was impossible: no intercourse could be held between Paradise and

Gehenna, and on this account[4639]4639 a great and impassable chasm

existed between the two, so that, even if they would, they could not,

pass from heaven to hell, nor yet from hell to those in bliss. And,

although doctrinal statements should not be drawn from Parabolic

illustrations, we would suggest that, at least so far as this Parable

goes, it seems to preclude the hope of a gradual change or transition

after a life lost in the service of sin and self.

3. Application of the Parable,[4640]4640 showing how the Law and the

Prophets cannot fail, and how we must now press into the Kingdom. It

seems a strange misconception on the part of some commentators, that

the next request of Dives indicates a commencing change of mind on his

part. To begin with, this part of the Parable is only intended to

illustrate the need, and the sole means of conversion to God - the

appeal to the Law and the Prophets being the more apt that the

Pharisees made their boast of them, and the refusal of any special

miraculous interposition the more emphatic, that the Pharisees had

been asking for 'a sign from heaven.' Besides, it would require more

than ordinary charity to discover a moral change in the desire that

his brothers might - not be converted, but not come to that place of

torment!

Dismissing, therefore, this idea, we now find Dives pleading that

Lazarus might be sent to his five brothers, who, as we infer, were of

the same disposition and life as himself had been, to 'testify unto

them' - the word implying more than ordinary, even earnest, testimony.

Presumably, what he so earnestly asked to be attested was, that he,

Dives, was in torment; and the expected effect, not of the testimony

but of the mission of Lazarus,[4641]4641 whom they are supposed to

have known, was, that these, his brothers, might not come to the same

place. At the same time, the request seems to imply an attempt at

self-justification, as if, during his life, he had not had sufficient

warning. Accordingly, the reply of Abraham is no longer couched in a

tone of pity, but implies stern rebuke of Dives. They need no

witness-bearer: they have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them.

If testimony be needed, their has been given, and it is sufficient - a

reply this, which would specially appeal to the Pharisees. And when

Dives, now, perhaps, as much bent on self-justification as on the

message to his brothers, remonstrates that, although they had not

received such testimony, yet 'if one come to them from the dead,' they

would repent, the final, and, as, alas! history has shown since the

Resurrection of Christ, the true answer is, that 'if they hear not

[give not hearing to] Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be

influenced[4642]4642 [moved: their intellects to believe, their wills

to repent], if one rose from the dead.'

And here the Parable, and the warning to the Pharisees, abruptly break

off. When next we hear the Master's voice,[4643]4643 it is in loving

application to the disciples of some of the lessons which were implied

in what He had spoken to the Pharisees.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE THREE LAST PARABLES OF THE PERÆAN SERIES: THE UNRIGHTEOUS

JUDGE - THE

SELF-RIGHTEOUS PHARISEE AND THE PUBLICAN - THE UNMERCIFUL SERVANT

(St. Luke xviii. 1-14; St. Matt. xviii. 23-35.)

If we were to seek confirmation of the suggestion, that these last and

the two preceding Parables are grouped together under a common

viewpoint, such as that of Righteousness, the character and position

of the Parables now to be examined would supply it. For, while the

Parable of the Unjust Judge evidently bears close affinity to those

that had preceded - especially to that of him who persisted in his

request for bread[4644]4644 - it evidently refers not, as the other,

to man's present need, but to the Second Coming of Christ. The prayer,

the perseverance, the delay, and the ultimate answer of which it

speaks, are all connected with it.[4645]4645 Indeed, it follows on

what had passed on this subject immediately before - first, between

the Pharisees and Christ,[4646]4646 and then between Christ and the

disciples.[4647]4647

Again, we must bear in mind that between the Parable of Dives and

Lazarus and that of the Unjust Judge, not indeed, a great interval of

time, but most momentous events, had intervened. These were: the visit

of Jesus to Bethany, the raising of Lazarus, the Jerusalem council

against Christ, the flight to Ephraim,[4648]4648 a brief stay and

preaching there, and the commencement of His last journey to

Jerusalem.[4649]4649 During this last slow journey from the borders of

Galilee to Jerusalem, we suppose the Discourses[4650]4650 and the

Parable about the Coming of the Son of Man to have been spoken. And

although such utterances will be best considered in connection with

Christ's later and full Discourses about 'The Last Things,' we readily

perceive, even at this stage, how, when He set His Face towards

Jerusalem, there to be offered up, thoughts and words concerning the

'End' may have entered into all His teaching, and so have given

occasion for the questions of the Pharisees and disciples, and for the

answers of Christ, alike by Discourse and in Parable.

The most common and specious, but also the most serious mistake take

in reference to the Parable of 'the Unjust Judge,' is to regard it as

implying that, just as the poor widow insisted in her petition and was

righted because of her insistence, so the disciples should persist in

prayer and would be heard because of their insistence. But this is an

entirely false interpretation. When treating of the Parable of the

Unrighteous Steward, we disclaimed all merely mechanical ideas of

prayer, as if God heard us for our many repetitions. This error must

here also be carefully avoided. The inference from the Parable is not,

that the Church will be ultimately vindicated because she perseveres

in prayer, but that she so perseveres, because God will surely right

her cause: it is not, that insistence in prayer is the cause of its

answer, but that the certainty of that which is asked for should lead

to continuance in prayer, even when all around seems to forbid the

hope of answer. This is the lesson to be learned from a comparison of

the Unjust Judge with the Just and Holy God in His dealings with His

own. If the widow persevered, knowing that, although no other

consideration, human or Divine, would influence the Unjust Judge, yet

her insistence would secure its object, how much more should we 'not

faint,' but continue in prayer, who are appealing to God, Who has His

people and His cause at heart, even though He delay, remembering also

that even this is for their sakes who pray. And this is fully

expressed in the introductory words. 'He spake also a Parable to them

with reference[4651]4651 to the need be (pr_v t_ de_n) of

their[4652]4652 always praying and not fainting.'[4653]4653

The remarks just made will remove what otherwise might seem another

serious difficulty. If it be asked, how the conduct of the Unjust

Judge could serve as illustration of what might be expected from God,

we answer, that the lesson in the Parable is not from the similarity

but from the contrast between the Unrighteous human and the Righteous

Divine Judge. 'Hear what the Unrighteous Judge saith. But God [mark

the emphatic position of the word], shall He not indeed [o_ m_]

vindicate [the injuries of, do judgment for] His elect . . .?' In

truth, this mode of argument is perhaps the most common in Jewish

Parables, and occurs on almost every page of ancient Rabbinic

commentaries. It is called the Qal vaChomer, 'light and heavy,' and

answers to our reasoning a fortiori or de minore ad majus (from the

less to the greater).[4654]4654 According to the Rabbis, ten instances

of such reasoning occur in the Old Testament[4655]4655

itself.[4656]4656 Generally, such reasoning is introduced by the words

Qal vaChomer; often it is prefaced by, Al achath Kammah veKammah,

'against one how much and how much,' that is, 'how much more.' Thus,

it is argued that, 'if a King of flesh and blood' did so and so, shall

not the King of Kings, &c.; or, if the sinner received such and such,

shall not the righteous, &c.? In the present Parable the reasoning

would be: 'If the Judge of Unrighteousness' said that he would

vindicate, shall not the Judge of all Righteousness do judgment on

behalf of His Elect? In fact, we have an exact Rabbinic parallel to

the thought underlying, and the lesson derived from, this Parable.

When describing, how at the preaching of Jonah Nineveh repented and

cried to God, His answer to the loud persistent cry of the people is

thus explained: 'The bold (he who is unabashed) conquers even a wicked

person [to grant him his request], how much more the All-Good of the

world!'[4657]4657

The Parable opens by laying down as a general principle the necessity

and duty of the Disciples always to pray - the precise meaning being

defined by the opposite, or limited clause: 'not to faint,' that is,

not 'to become weary.'[4658]4658 The word 'always' must not be

understood in respect of time, as if it meant continuously, but at all

times, in the sense of under all circumstances, however apparently

adverse, when it might seem as if an answer could not come, and we

would therefore be in danger of 'fainting' or becoming weary. This

rule applies here primarily to that 'weariness' which might lead to

the cessation of prayer for the Coming of the Lord, or of expectancy

of it, during the long period when it seems as if He delayed His

return, nay, as if increasingly there were no likelihood of it. But it

may also be applied to all similar circumstances, when prayer seems so

long unanswered that weariness in praying threatens to overtake us.

Thus, it is argued, even in Jewish writings, that a man should never

be deterred from, nor cease praying, the illustration by Qal vaChomer

being from the case of Moses, who knew that it was decreed he should

not enter the land, and yet continued praying about it.[4659]4659

The Parable introduces to us a Judge in a city, and a widow. Except

where a case was voluntarily submitted for arbitration rather than

judgment, or judicial advice was sought of a sage, one man could not

have formed a Jewish tribunal. Besides, his mode of speaking and

acting is inconsistent with such a hypothesis. He must therefore have

been one of the Judges, or municipal authorities, appointed by Herod

or the Romans, perhaps a Jew, but not a Jewish Judge. Possibly, he may

have been a police-magistrate, or one who had some function of that

kind delegated to him. We know that, at least in Jerusalem, there were

two stipendiary magistrates (Dayyaney Gezeroth[4660]4660 whose duty it

was to see to the observance of all police-regulations and the

prevention of crime. Unlike the regular Judges, who attended only on

certain days and hours,[4661]4661 and were unpaid, these magistrates

were, so to speak, always on duty, and hence unable to engage in any

other occupation. It was probably for this reason that they were paid

out of the Temple-Treasury,[4662]4662 and received so large a salary

as 225l., or, if needful, even more.[4663]4663 On account of this,

perhaps also for their unjust exactions, Jewish wit designated them,

by a play on the words, as Dayyaney Gezeloth - Robber-Judges, instead

of their real title of Dayyaney Gezeroth (Judges of Prohibitions, or

else of Punishments).[4664]4664 It may have been that there were such

Jewish magistrates in other places also. Josephus speaks of local

magistracies.[4665]4665 [4666]4666 At any rate there were in every

locality police-officials, who watched over order and law.[4667]4667

The Talmud speaks in very depreciatory terms of these 'village-Judges'

(Dayyaney deMegista), in opposition to the town tribunals (Bey Davar),

and accuses them of ignorance, arbitrariness, and covetousness, so

that for a dish of meat they would pervert justice.[4668]4668 Frequent

instances are also mentioned of gross injustice and bribery in regard

to the non-Jewish Judges in Palestine.

It is to such a Judge that the Parable refers - one who was

consciously, openly, and avowedly[4669]4669 inaccessible to the

highest motive, the fear of God, and not even restrained by the lower

consideration of regard for public opinion. It is an extreme case,

intended to illustrate the exceeding unlikelihood of justice being

done. For the same purpose, the party seeking justice at his hands is

described as a poor, unprotected widow. But we must also bear in mind,

in the interpretation of this Parable, that the Church, whom she

represents, is also widowed in the absence of her Lord. To return -

this widow 'came' to the Unjust Judge (the imperfect tense in the

original indicating repeated, even continuous coming), with the urgent

demand to be vindicated of her adversary, that is, that the Judge

should make legal inquiry, and by a decision set her right as against

him at whose hands she was suffering wrong. For reasons of his own he

would not; and this continued for a while. At last, not from any

higher principle, nor even from regard for public opinion - both of

which, indeed, as he avowed to himself, had no weight with him - he

complied with her request, as the text (literally translated) has it:

'Yet at any rate[4670]4670 because this widow troubleth me, I will do

justice for her, lest, in the end, coming she bruise me,'[4671]4671 -

do personal violence to me, attack me bodily. Then follows the grand

inference from it: If the 'Judge of Unrighteousness' speak thus, shall

not the Judge of all Righteousness - God - do judgment, vindicate [by

His Coming to judgment and so setting right the wrong done to His

Church] 'His Elect, which cry to Him day and night, although He suffer

long on account of them' - delay His final interposition of judgment

and mercy, and that, not as the Unjust Judge, but for their own sakes,

in order that the number of the Elect may all be gathered in, and they

fully prepared?

Difficult as the rendering of this last clause admittedly is, our

interpretation of it seems confirmed by the final application of this

Parable.[4672]4672 Taking the previous verse along with it, we

wouldhave this double Parallelism: 'But God, shall He not vindicate

[do judgment on behalf of] His Elect?'[4673]4673 'I tell you, that He

will do judgment on behalf of them shortly' - this word being chosen

rather than 'speedily' (as in the A. and R.V.), because the latter

might convey the idea of a sudden interposition, such as is not

implied in the expression. This would be the first Parallelism; the

second this: 'Although He suffer long [delay His final interposition]

on account of them' (verse 7), to which the second clause of verse 8

would correspond, as offering the explanation and vindication: 'But

the Son of Man, when He have come, shall He find the faith upon the

earth?' It is a terribly sad question, as put by Him Who is the

Christ: After all this long-suffering delay, shall He find the faith

upon the earth - intellectual belief on the part of one class, and on

the part of the Church the faith of the heart which trusts in, longs,

and prays, because it expects and looks for His Coming, all

undisturbed by the prevailing unbelief around, only quickened by it to

more intensity of prayer! Shall He find it? Let the history of the

Church, nay, each man's heart, make answer!

2. The Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican, which

follows,[4674]4674 is only internally connected with that of 'the

Unjust Judge.' It is not unrighteousness, but of self-righteousness -

and this, both in its positive and negative aspects: as trust in one's

own state, and as contempt of others. Again, it has also this

connection with the previous Parable, that, whereas that of the

Unrighteous Judge pointed to continuance, this to humility in prayer.

The introductory clause shows that it has no connection in point of

time with what had preceded, although the interval between the two

may, of course, have been very short. Probably, something had taken

place, which is not recorded, to occasion this Parable, which, if not

directly addressed to the Pharisees,[4675]4675 is to such as are of

Pharisaic spirit. It brings before us two men going up to the Temple -

whether 'at the hour of prayer,' or otherwise, is not stated.

Remembering that, with the exception of the Psalms for the day and the

interval for a certain prescribed prayer, the service in the Temple

was entirely sacrificial, we are thankful for such glimpses, which

show that, both in the time of public service, and still more at other

times, the Temple was made the place of private prayer.[4676]4676 On

the present occasion the two men, who went together to the entrance of

the Temple, represented the two religious extremes in Jewish society.

To the entrance of the Temple, but no farther, did the Pharisee and

the Publican go together. Within the sacred enclosure - before God,

where man should least have made it, began their separation. 'The

Pharisee put himself by himself,[4677]4677 and prayed thus: O God, I

thank Thee that I am not as the rest of men - extortioners, unjust,

adulterers - nor also as this Publican [there].' Never, perhaps, were

words of thanksgiving spoken in less thankfulness than these. For,

thankfulness implies the acknowledgement of a gift; hence, a sense of

not having had ourselves what we have received; in other words, then,

a sense of our personal need, or humility. But the very first act of

this Pharisee had been to separate himself from all the other

worshippers, and notably from the Publican, whom, as his words show,

he had noticed, and looked down upon. His thanksgiving referred not to

what he had received, but to the sins of others by which they were

separated from him, and to his own meritorious deeds by which he was

separated from them. Thus, his words expressed what his attitude

indicated; and both were the expression, not of thankfulness, but of

boastfulness. It was the same as their bearing at the feast and in

public places; the same as their contempt and condemnation of 'the

rest of men,' and especially 'the publicans;' the same that even their

designation - 'Pharisees,' 'Separated ones,' implied. The 'rest of

men' might be either the Gentiles, or, more probably, the common

unlearned people, the Am haArets, whom they accused or suspected of

every possible sin, according to their fundamental principle: 'The

unlearned cannot be pious.' And, in their sense of that term, they

were right - and in this lies the condemnation of their righteousness.

And, most painful though it be, remembering the downright earnestness

and zeal of these men, it must be added that, as we read the Liturgy

of the Synagogue, we come ever and again upon such and similar

thanksgiving - that they are 'not as the rest of men.'[4678]4678

But this was not all. From looking down upon others the Pharisee

proceeded to look up to himself. Here Talmudic writings offer painful

parallelisms. They are full of references to the merits of the just,

to 'the merits and righteousness of the fathers,' or else of Israel in

taking upon itself the Law. And for the sake of these merits and of

that righteousness, Israel, as a nation, expects general acceptance,

pardon, and temporal benefits[4679]4679 - for, all spiritual benefits

Israel as a nation, and the pious in Israel individually, possess

already, nor do they need to get them from heaven, since they can and

do work them out for themselves. And here the Pharisee in the Parable

significantly dropped even the form of thanksgiving. The religious

performances which he enumerated are those which mark the Pharisee

among the Pharisees: 'I fast twice a week, and I give tithes of all

that I acquire.'[4680]4680 The first of these was in pursuance of the

custom of some 'more righteous than the rest,' who, as previously

explained, fasted on the second and fifth days of the week (Mondays

and Thursdays).[4681]4681 But, perhaps, we should not forget that

these were also the regular market days, when the country-people came

to the towns, and there were special Services in the Synagogues, and

the local Sanhedrin met - so that these saints in Israel would, at the

same time, attract and receive special notice for their fasts. As for

the boast about giving tithes of all that he acquired - and not merely

of his land, fruits, &c. - it has already been explained,[4682]4682

that this was one of the distinctive characteristics of 'the sect of

the Pharisees.' Their practice in this respect may be summed up in

these words of the Mishnah:[4683]4683 'He tithes all that he eats, all

that he sells, and all that he buys, and he is not a guest with an

unlearned person [Am haArets, so as not possibly to partake of what

may have been left untithed].'

Although it may not be necessary, yet one or two quotations will help

to show how truly this picture of the Pharisee was taken from life.

Thus, the following prayer of a Rabbi is recorded: 'I thank Thee, O

Lord my God, that Thou hast put my part with those who sit in the

Academy, and not with those who sit at the corners [money-changers and

traders]. For, I rise early and they rise early: I rise early to the

words of the Law, and they to vain things. I labour and they labour: I

labour and receive a reward, they labour and receive no reward. I run

and they run: I run to the life of the world to come, and they to the

pit of destruction.'[4684]4684 Even more closely parallel is this

thanksgiving, which a Rabbi puts into the mouth of Israel: 'Lord of

the world, judge me not as those who dwell in the big towns [such as

Rome]: among whom there is robbery, and uncleanness, and vain and

false swearing.'[4685]4685 Lastly, as regards the boastful spirit of

Rabbinism, we recall such painful sayings as those of Rabbi Simeon ben

Jochai, to which reference has already been made[4686]4686 - notably

this, that if there were only two righteous men in the world, he and

his son were these; and if only one, it was he![4687]4687

The second picture, or scene, in the Parable sets before us the

reverse state of feeling from that of the Pharisee. Only, we must bear

in mind, that, as the Pharisee is not blamed for his giving of thanks,

nor yet for his good-doing, real or imaginary, so the prayer of the

Publican is not answered, because he was a sinner. In both cases what

decides the rejection or acceptance of the prayer is, whether or not

it was prayer. The Pharisee retains the righteousness which he had

claimed for himself, whatever its value; and the Publican receives the

righteousness which he asks: both have what they desire before God. If

the Pharisee 'stood by himself,' apart from others, so did the

Publican: 'standing afar off,' viz. from the Pharisee - quite far

back, as became one who felt himself unworthy to mingle with God's

people. In accordance with this: 'He would not so much as

lift[4688]4688 his eyes to heaven,' as men generally do in prayer,

'but smote his[4689]4689 breast' - as the Jews still do in the most

solemn part of their confession on the Day of Atonement - 'saying, God

be merciful to me the sinner.' The definite article is used to

indicate that he felt, as if he alone were a sinner - nay, the sinner.

Not only, as has been well remarked,[4690]4690 'does he not think of

any one else' (de nemine alio homine cogitat), while the Pharisee had

thought of every one else; but, as he had taken a position not in

front of, but behind, every one else, so, in contrast to the Pharisee,

who had regarded every one but himself as a sinner, the Publican

regarded every one else as righteous compared with him 'the sinner.'

And, while the Pharisee felt no need, and uttered no petition, the

Publican felt only need, and uttered only petition. The one appealed

to himself for justice, the other appealed to God for mercy.

More complete contrast, therefore, could not be imagined. And once

more, as between the Pharisee and the Publican, the seeming and the

real, that before men and before God, there is sharp contrast, and the

lesson which Christ had so often pointed is again set forth, not only

in regard to the feelings which the Pharisees entertained, but also to

the gladsome tidings of pardon to the lost: 'I say unto you, This man

went down to his house justified above the other' [so according to the

better reading, pa_ _ke_non]. In other words, the sentence of

righteousness as from God with which the Publican went home was above,

far better than, the sentence of righteousness as pronounced by

himself, with which the Pharisee returned. This saying casts also

light on such comparisons as between 'the righteous' elder brother and

the pardoned prodigal, or the ninety-nine that 'need no repentance'

and the lost that was found, or, on such an utterance as this: 'Except

your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and

Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of

Heaven.'[4691]4691 And so the Parable ends with the general principle,

so often enunciated: 'For every one that exalteth himself shall be

abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.' And with this

general teaching of the Parable fully accords the instruction of

Christ to His disciples concerning the reception of little children,

which immediately follows. [4692]4692

3. The Parable with which this series closes - that of the Unmerciful

Servant,[4693]4693 can be treated more briefly, since the

circumstances leading up to it have already been explained in chapter

iii. of this Book. We are now reaching the point where the solitary

narrative of St. Luke again merges with those of the other

Evangelists. That the Parable was spoken before Christ's final journey

to Jerusalem, appears from St. Matthew's Gospel.[4694]4694 On the

other hand, as we compare what in the Gospel by St. Luke follows on

the Parable of the Pharisee and Publican[4695]4695 with the

circumstances in which the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant is

introduced, we cannot fail to perceive inward connection between the

narratives of the two Evangelists, confirming the conclusion, arrived

at on other grounds, that the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant

belongs to the Peræan series, and closes it.

Its connection with the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican lies

in this, that Pharisaic self-righteousness and contempt of others may

easily lead to unforgiveness and unmercifulness, which are utterly

incompatible with a sense of our own need of Divine mercy and

forgiveness. And so in the Gospel of St. Matthew this Parable follows

on the exhibition of a self-righteous, unmerciful spirit, which would

reckon up how often we should forgive, forgetful of our own need of

absolute and unlimited pardon at the hands of God[4696]4696 - a

spirit, moreover, of harshness, that could look down upon Christ's

'little ones,' in forgetfulness of our own need perhaps of cutting off

even a right hand or foot to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.[4697]4697

In studying this Parable, we must once more remind ourselves of the

general canon of the need of distinguishing between what is essential

in a Parable, as directly bearing on its lessons, and what is merely

introduced for the sake of the Parable itself, to give point to its

main teaching. In the present instance, no sober interpreter would

regard of the essence of the Parable the King's command to sell into

slavery the first debtor, together with his wife and children. It is

simply a historical trait, introducing what is analogous circumstances

might happen in real life, in order to point the lesson, that a man's

strict desert before God is utter hopeless, and eternal ruin and loss.

Similarly, when the promise of the debtor is thus introduced: 'Have

patience with me, and I will pay thee all,' it can only be to complete

in a natural manner the first part of the Parabolic history and to

prepare for the second, in which forbearance is asked by a

fellow-servant for the small debt which he owes. Lastly, in the same

manner, the recall of the King's original forgiveness of the great

debtor can only be intended to bring out the utter incompatibility of

such harshness towards a brother on the part of one who has been

consciously forgiven by God his great debt.

Thus keeping apart the essentials of the Parable from the accidents of

its narration, we have three distinct scenes, or parts, in this story.

In the first, our new feelings towards our brethren are traced to our

new relation towards God, as the proper spring of all our thinking,

speaking, and acting. Notably, as regards forgiveness, we are to

remember the Kingdom of God: 'Therefore has the Kingdom of God become

like' - 'therefore:' in order that thereby we may learn the duty of

absolute, not limited, forgiveness - not that of 'seven,' but of

'seventy times seven.' And now this likeness of the Kingdom of Heaven

is set forth in the Parable of 'a man, a King' (as the Rabbis would

have expressed it, 'a king of flesh and blood'), who would 'make his

reckoning' (sunairein) 'with his servants' - certainly not his

bondservants, but probably the governors of his provinces, or those

who had charge of the revenue and finances. 'But after he had begun to

reckon' - not necessarily at the very beginning of it - 'one was

brought to him, a debtor of ten thousand talents.' Reckoning them only

as Attic talents (1 talent = 60 minas = 6,000 dinars) this would

amount to the enormous sum of about two and a quarter millions

sterling. No wonder, that one who during his administration had been

guilty of such peculation, or else culpable negligence, should, as the

words 'brought to him' imply, have been reluctant to face the king.

The Parable further implies, that the debt was admitted; and hence, in

the course of ordinary judicial procedure - according to the Law of

Moses,[4698]4698 and the universal code of antiquity - that 'servant,'

with his family and all his property, was ordered to be

sold,[4699]4699 and the returns paid into the treasury.

Of course, it is not suggested that the 'payment' thus made had met

his debt. Even this would, if need were, confirm the view, previously

expressed, that this trait belongs not to the essentials of the

Parable, but to the details of the narrative. So does the promise,

with which the now terrified 'servant,' as he cast himself at the feet

of the King, supported his plea for patience: 'I will pay thee all.'

In truth, the narrative takes no notice of this, but, on the other

hand, states: 'But, being moved with compassion, the lord of that

servant released him [from the bondage decreed, and which had

virtually begun with his sentence], and the debt forgave he

him.'[4700]4700 A more accurate representation of our relation to God

could not be made. We are the debtors of our heavenly King, Who has

entrusted to us the administration of what is His, and which we have

purloined or misused, incurring an unspeakable debt, which we can

never discharge, and of which, in the course of justice, unending

bondage, misery, and utter ruin would be the proper sequence. But, if

in humble repentance we cast ourselves at His Feet, He is ready, in

infinite compassion, not only to release us from meet punishment, but

- O blessed revelation of the Gospel! - to forgive us the debt.

It is this new relationship to God which must be the foundation and

the rule for our new relationship towards our fellow-servants. And

this brings us to the second part, or scene in this Parable. Here the

lately pardoned servant finds one of his fellow-servants, who owes him

the small sum of 100 dinars, about 4l. 10s. Mark now the sharp

contrast, which is so drawn as to give point to the Parable. In the

first case, it was the servant brought to account, and that before the

King; here it is a servant finding and that his fellowservant; in the

first case, he owed talents, in the second dinars (a six-thousandth

part of them); in the first, ten thousand talents; in the second, one

hundred dinars. Again, in the first case payment is only demanded,

while in the second the man takes his fellow-servant by the throat - a

not uncommon mode of harshness on the part of Roman creditors - and

says: 'Pay what,' or according to the better reading, 'if thou owest

anything.' And, lastly, although the words of the second debtor are

almost the same[4701]4701 as those in which the first debtor besought

the King's patience, yet no mercy is shown, but he is 'cast' [with

violence] into prison, till he have paid what was due.[4702]4702

It can scarcely be necessary to show the incongrousness or the guilt

of such conduct. But this is the object of the third part, or scene,

in the Parable. Here - again for the sake of pictorialness - the other

servants are introduced as exceedingly sorry, no doubt about the fate

of their fellow-servant, especially in the circumstances of the case.

Then they come to their lord, and 'clearly set forth,' or 'explain'

(diasafe_n) what had happened, upon which the Unmerciful Servant is

summoned, and addressed as 'wicked servant,' not only because he had

not followed the example of his lord, but because, after having

received such immense favour as the entire remission of his debt on

entreating his master, to have refused to the entreaty of his

fellow-servant even a brief delay in the payment of a small sum,

argued want of all mercy and positive wickedness. And the words are

followed by the manifestations of righteous anger. As he has done, so

is it done to him - and this is the final application of the

Parable.[4703]4703 He is delivered to the 'tormentors,' not in the

sense of being tormented by them, which would scarcely have been just,

but in that of being handed over to such keepers of the prison, to

whom criminals who were to be tortured were delivered, and who

executed such punishment on them: in other words he is sent to the

hardest and severest prison, there to remain till he should pay all

that was due by him - that is, in the circumstances, for ever. And

here we may again remark, without drawing any dogmatic inferences from

the language of the Parable, that it seems to proceed on these two

assumptions: that suffering neither expiates guilt, nor in itself

amends the guilty, and that as sin has incurred a debt that can never

be discharged, so the banishment, or rather the loss and misery of it,

will be endless.

We pause to notice, how near Rabbinism has come to this Parable, and

yet how far it is from its sublime teaching. At the outset we recall

that unlimited forgiveness - or, indeed, for more than the farthest

limit of three times - was not the doctrine of Rabbinism. It did,

indeed, teach how freely God would forgive Israel, and it introduces a

similar Parable of a debtor appealing to his creditor, and receiving

the fullest and freest release of mercy,[4704]4704 and it also draws

from it the moral, that man should similarly show mercy: but it is not

the mercy of forgiveness from the heart, but of forgiveness of money

debts to the poor,[4705]4705 or of various injuries,[4706]4706 and the

mercy of benevolence and beneficence to the wretched.[4707]4707 But,

however beautifully Rabbinism at times speaks on the subject, the

Gospel conception of forgiveness, even as that of mercy, could only

come by blessed experience of the infinitely higher forgiveness, and

the incomparably greater mercy, which the pardoned sinner has received

in Christ from our Father in Heaven.

But to us all there is the deepest seriousness in the warning against

unmercifulness; and that, even though we remember that the case here

referred to is only that of unwillingness to forgive from the heart an

offending brother who actually asks for it. Yet, if not the sin, the

temptation to it is very real to us all - perhaps rather unconsciously

to ourselves than consciously. For, how often is our forgiveness in

the heart, as well as from the heart, narrowed by limitations and

burdened with conditions; and is it not of the very essence of

sectarianism to condemn without mercy him who does not come up to our

demands - ay, and until he shall have come up to them to the uttermost

farthing?

CHAPTER XX.

CHRIST'S DISCOURSES IN PERÆA - CLOSE OF THE PERÆAN MINISTRY

(St. Luke xiii. 23-30, 31-35; xiv. 1-11, 25-35; xvii. 1-10.)

From the Parables we now turn to such Discourses of the Lord as belong

to this period of His Ministry. Their consideration may be the more

brief, that throughout we find points of correspondence with previous

or later portions of His teaching.

Thus, the first of these Discourses, of which we have an

outline,[4708]4708 recalls some passages in the 'Sermon on the

Mount,'[4709]4709 as well as what our Lord had said on the occasion of

healing the servant of the centurion.[4710]4710 But, to take the first

of these parallelisms, the differences are only the more marked for

the similarity of form. These prove incontestably, not only the

independence of the two Evangelists[4711]4711 in their narratives,

but, along with deeper underlying unity of thought in the teaching of

Christ, its different application to different circumstances and

persons. Let us mark this in the Discourse as outlined by St. Luke,

and so gain fresh evidential confirmation of the trustworthiness of

the Evangelic records.

The words of our Lord, as recorded by St. Luke,[4712]4712 are not

spoken, as in 'The Sermon on the Mount,' in connection with His

teaching to His disciples, but are in reply to a question addressed to

Him by some one - we can scarcely doubt, a representative of the

Pharisees:[4713]4713 'Lord, are they few, the saved ones [that are

being saved]?' Viewed in connection with Christ's immediately

preceding teaching about the Kingdom of God in its wide and deep

spread, as the great Mustard-Tree from the tiniest seed, and as the

Leaven hid, which pervaded three measures of meal, we can scarcely

doubt that the word 'saved' bore reference, not to the eternal state

of the soul, but to admission to the benefits of the Kingdom of God -

the Messianic Kingdom, with its privileges and its judgments, such as

the Pharisees understood it. The question, whether 'few' were to be

saved, could not have been put from the Pharisaic point of view, if

understood of personal salvation;[4714]4714 while, on the other hand,

if taken as applying to part in the near-expected Messianic Kingdom,

it has its distinct parallel in the Rabbinic statement, that, as

regarded the days of the Messiah (His Kingdom), it would be similar to

what it had been at the entrance into the land of promise, when only

two (Joshua and Caleb), out of all that generation, were allowed to

have part in it.[4715]4715 Again, it is only when understanding both

the question of this Pharisee and the reply of our Lord as applying to

the Kingdom of the Messiah - though each viewing 'the Kingdom' from

his own standpoint - that we can understand the answering words of

Christ in their natural and obvious sense, without either straining or

adding to them a dogmatic gloss, such as could not have occurred to

His hearers at the time.[4716]4716

Thus viewed, we can mark the characteristic differences between this

Discourse and the parallels in 'the Sermon on the Mount,' and

understand their reason. As regarded entrance into the Messianic

Kingdom, this Pharisee, and those whom he represented, are told, that

this Kingdom was not theirs, as a matter of course - their question as

to the rest of the world being only, whether few or many would share

in it - but that all must 'struggle[4717]4717 [agonise] to enter in

through the narrow door.'[4718]4718 When we remember, that in 'the

Sermon on the Mount' the call was only to 'enter in,' we feel that we

have now reached a period, when the access to 'the narrow door' was

obstructed by the enmity of so many, and when it needed 'violence' to

break through, and 'take the Kingdom' 'by force.'[4719]4719 This

personal breaking through the opposing multitude, in order to enter in

through the narrow door, was in opposition to the many - the Pharisees

and Jews generally - who were seeking to enter in, in their own way,

never doubting success, but who would discover their terrible mistake.

Then, 'when once the Master of the house is risen up,' to welcome His

guests to the banquet, and has shut to the door, while they, standing

without, vainly call upon Him to open it, and He replies: 'I know you

not whence ye are,' would they begin to remind Him of those

covenant-privileges on which, as Israel after the flesh, they had

relied ('we have eaten and drunk in Thy presence, and Thou hast taught

in our streets'). To this He would reply by a repetition of His former

words, now seen to imply a disavowal of all mere outward privileges,

as constituting a claim to the Kingdom, grounding alike His disavowal

and His refusal to open on their inward contrariety to the King and

His Kingdom: 'Depart from Me, all ye workers of iniquity.' It was a

banquet to the friends of the King: the inauguration of His Kingdom.

When they found the door shut, they would, indeed, knock, in the

confident expectation that their claims would at once be recognised,

and they admitted. And when the Master of the house did not recognise

them, as they had expected, and they reminded Him of their outward

connection, He only repeated the same words as before, since it was

not outward but inward relationship that qualified the guests, and

theirs was not friendship, but antagonism to Him. Terrible would then

be their sorrow and anguish, when they would see their own patriarchs

('we have eaten and drunk in Thy Presence') and their own prophets

('Thou hast taught in our streets') within, and yet themselves were

excluded from what was peculiarly theirs - while from all parts of the

heathen world the welcome guests would flock to the joyous feast. And

here pre-eminently would the saying hold good, in opposition to

Pharisaic claims and self-righteousness: 'There are last which shall

be first, and there are first which shall be last.'[4720]4720

As a further characteristic difference from the parallel passage in

'the Sermon on the Mount,' we note, that there the reference seems not

to any special privileges in connection with the Messianic Kingdom,

such as the Pharisees expected, but to admission into the Kingdom of

Heaven generally.[4721]4721 In regard to the latter also the highest

outward claims would be found unavailing; but the expectation of

admission was grounded rather on what was done, than on mere

citizenship and its privileges. And here it deserves special notice,

that in St. Luke's Gospel, where the claim is that of

fellow-citizenship ('eaten and drunk in Thy Presence, and Thou hast

taught in our streets'), the reply is made, 'I know you not whence ye

are;' while in 'the Sermon on the Mount,' where the claim is of what

they had done in His Name, they are told: 'I never knew you.' In both

cases the disavowal emphatically bears on the special plea which had

been set up. With this, another slight difference may be connected,

which is not brought out in the Authorised or in the Revised Version.

Both in the 'Sermon on the Mount'[4722]4722 and in St. Luke's

Gospel,[4723]4723 they who are bidden depart are designated as

'workers of iniquity.' But, whereas, in St. Matthew's Gospel the term

(_nom_a) really means 'lawlessness,' the word used in that of St. Luke

should be rendered 'unrighteousness'[4724]4724 (_dik_a). Thus, the one

class are excluded, despite the deeds which they plead, for their real

contrariety to God's Law; the other, despite the plea of citizenship

and privileges, for their unrighteousness.[4725]4725 And here we may

also note, as a last difference between the two Gospels, that in the

prediction of the future bliss from which they were to be excluded,

the Gospel of St. Luke, which had reported the plea that He had

'taught' in their 'streets,' adds, as it were in answer, to the names

of the Patriarchs,[4726]4726 mention of 'all the prophets.'

2. The next Discourse, noted by St. Luke,[4727]4727 had been spoken

'in that very day,'[4728]4728 as the last. It was occasioned by a

pretended warning of 'certain of the Pharisees' to depart from Peræa,

which, with Galilee, was the territory of Herod Antipas, as else the

Tetrarch would kill Him. We have previously[4729]4729 shown reason for

supposing secret intrigues between the Pharisaic party and Herod, and

attributing the final imprisonment of the Baptist, at least in part,

to their machinations. We also remember, how the conscience of the

Tetrarch connected Christ with His murdered Forerunner, and that

rightly, since, at least so far as the Pharisees wrought on the fears

of that intensely jealous and suspicious prince, the imprisonment of

John was as much due to his announcement of the Messiah as to the

enmity of Herodias. On these grounds we can easily understand that

Herod should have wished to see Jesus,[4730]4730 not merely to gratify

curiosity, nor in obedience to superstitious impulses, but to convince

himself, whether He was really what was said of Him, and also to get

Him into his power. Probably, therefore, the danger of which these

Pharisees spoke might have been real enough, and they might have

special reasons for knowing of it. But their suggestion, that Jesus

should depart, could only have proceeded from a ruse to get Him Out of

Peræa, where, evidently, His works of healing[4731]4731 were largely

attracting and influencing the people.

But if our Lord would not be deterred by the fears of His disciples

from going into Judæa,[4732]4732 feeling that each one had his

appointed working day, in the light of which he was safe, and during

the brief duration of which he was bound to 'walk,' far less would He

recede before His enemies. Pointing to their secret intrigues, He bade

them, if they chose, go back to 'that fox,' and give to his low

cunning, and to all similar attempts to hinder or arrest His Ministry,

what would be a decisive answer, since it unfolded what He clearly

forsaw in the near future. 'Depart?'[4733]4733 - yes, 'depart' ye to

tell 'that fox,' I have still a brief and an appointed time[4734]4734

to work, and then 'I am perfected,' in the sense in which we all

readily understand the expression, as applying to His Work and

Mission. 'Depart!' 'Yes, I must "depart," or go My brief appointed

time: I know that at the goal of it is death, yet not at the hands of

Herod, but in Jerusalem, the slaughter-house of them that "teach in

her streets."'

And so, remembering that this message to Herod was spoken in the very

day, perhaps the very hour that He had declared how falsely 'the

workers of wickedness' claimed admission on account of the 'teaching

in their streets,' and that they would be excluded from the

fellowship, not only of the fathers, but of 'all the prophets' whom

they called their own - we see peculiar meaning in the reference to

Jerusalem as the place where all the prophets perished.[4735]4735 One,

Who in no way indulged in illusions, but knew that He had an appointed

time, during which He would work, and at the end of which He would

'perish,' and where He would so perish, could not be deterred either

by the intrigues of the Pharisees nor by the thought of what a Herod

might attempt - not do, which latter was in far other hands. But the

thought of Jerusalem - of what it was, what it might have been, and

what would come to it - may well have forced from the lips of Him, Who

wept over it, a cry of mingled anguish, love, and warning.[4736]4736

It may, indeed, be, that these very words, which are reported by St.

Matthew in another, and manifestly most suitable,

connection,[4737]4737 [4738]4738 are here quoted by St. Luke, because

they fully express the thought to which Christ here first gave

distinct utterance. But some such words, we can scarcely doubt, He did

speak even now, when pointing to His near Decease in Jerusalem.

3. The next in order of the Discourses recorded by St. Luke[4739]4739

is that which prefaced the Parable of 'the Great Supper,' expounded in

a previous chapter.[4740]4740 The Rabbinic views on the Sabbath-Law

have been so fully explained, that a very brief commentation will here

suffice. It appears, that the Lord condescended to accept the

invitation to a Sabbath-meal in the house 'of one of the Rulers of the

Pharisees' - perhaps one of the Rulers of the Synagogue in which they

had just worshipped, and where Christ may have taught. Without here

discussing the motives for this invitation, its acceptance was

certainly made use of to 'watch Him.' And the man with the dropsy had,

no doubt, been introduced for a treacherous purpose, although it is

not necessary to suppose that he himself had been privy to it. On the

other hand, it is characteristic of the gracious Lord, that, with full

knowledge of their purpose, He sat down with such companions, and that

He did His Work of power and love unrestrained by their evil thoughts.

But, even so, He must turn their wickedness also to good account. Yet

we mark, that He first dismissed the man healed of the dropsy before

He reproved the Pharisees.[4741]4741 It was better so - for the sake

of the guests, and for the healed man himself, whose mind quite new

and blessed Sabbath-thoughts would fill, to which all controversy

would be jarring.

And, after his departure, the Lord first spake to them, as was His

wont, concerning their misapplication of the Sabbath-Law, to which,

indeed, their own practice gave the lie. They deemed it unlawful 'to

heal' on the Sabbath-day, though, when He read their thoughts and

purposes as against Him, they would not answer His question on the

point.[4742]4742 And yet, if 'a son,[4743]4743 or even an ox,' of any

of them, had 'fallen into a pit,' they would have found some valid

legal reason for pulling him out! Then, as to their Sabbath-feast, and

their invitation to Him, when thereby they wished to lure Him to evil

- and, indeed, their much-boasted hospitality: all was characteristic

of these Pharisees - only external show, with utter absence of all

real love; only self-assumption, pride, and self-righteousness,

together with contempt of all who were regarded as religiously or

intellectually beneath them - chiefly of 'the unlearned' and

'sinners,' those in 'the streets and lanes' of their city, whom they

considered as 'the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the

blind.'[4744]4744 Even among themselves there was strife about 'the

first places' - such as, perhaps, Christ had on that occasion

witnessed,[4745]4745 amidst mock professions of humility, when,

perhaps, the master of the house had afterwards, in true Pharisaic

fashion, proceeded to re-arrange the guests according to their

supposed dignity. And even the Rabbis had given advice to the same

effect as Christ's[4746]4746 - and of this His words may have reminded

them.[4747]4747

But further - addressing him who had so treacherously bidden Him to

this feast, Christ showed how the principle of Pharisaism consisted in

self-seeking, to the necessary exclusion of all true love. Referring,

for the fuller explanation of His meaning,[4748]4748 to a previous

chapter,[4749]4749 we content ourselves here with the remark, that

this self-seeking and self-righteousness appeared even in what,

perhaps, they most boasted of - their hospitality. For, if in an

earlier Jewish record we read the beautiful words: 'Let thy house be

open towards the street, and let the poor be the sons of thy

house,'[4750]4750 we have, also, this later comment on them,[4751]4751

that Job had thus had his house opened to the four quarters of the

globe for the poor, and that, when his calamities befell him, he

remonstrated with God on the ground of his merits in this respect, to

which answer was made, that he had in this matter come very far short

of the merits of Abraham. So entirely self-introspective and

self-seeking did Rabbinism become, and so contrary was its outcome to

the spirit of Christ, the inmost meaning of Whose Work, as well as

Words, was entire self-forgetfulness and self-surrender in love.

4. In the fourth Discourse recorded by St. Luke,[4752]4752 we pass

from the parenthetic account of that Sabbath-meal in the house of the

'Ruler of the Pharisees,' back to where the narrative of the

Pharisees' threat about Herod and the reply of Jesus had left

us.[4753]4753 And, if proof were required of the great influence

exercised by Jesus, and which, as we have suggested, led to the

attempt of the Pharisees to induce Christ to leave Peræa, it would be

found in the opening notice,[4754]4754 as well as in the Discourse

itself which He spoke. Christ did depart - from that place, though not

yet from Peræa; but with Him 'went great multitudes.' And, in view of

their professed adhesion, it was needful, and now more emphatically

than ever, to set before them all that discipleship really involved,

alike of cost and of strength - the two latter points being

illustrated by brief 'Parables' (in the wider sense of that term).

Substantially, it was only what Christ had told the Twelve, when He

sent them on their first Mission.[4755]4755 Only it was now cast in a

far stronger mould, as befitted the altered circumstances, in the near

prospect of Christ's condemnation, with all that this would involve to

His followers.

At the outset we mark, that we are not here told what constituted the

true disciple, but what would prevent a man from becoming such. Again,

it was now no longer (as in the earlier address to the Twelve), that

he who loved the nearest and dearest of earthly kin more than Christ -

and hence clave to such rather than to Him - was not worthy of Him;

nor that he who did not take his cross and follow after Him was not

worthy of the Christ. Since then the enmity had ripened, and

discipleship become impossible without actual renunciation of the

nearest relationship, and, more than that, of life itself.[4756]4756

Of course, the term 'hate' does not imply hatred of parents or

relatives, or of life, in the ordinary sense. But it points to this,

that, as outward separation, consequent upon men's antagonism to

Christ, was before them in the near future, so, in the present, inward

separation, a renunciation in mind and heart, preparatory to that

outwardly, was absolutely necessary. And this immediate call was

illustrated in twofold manner. A man who was about to begin building a

tower, must count the cost of his undertaking.[4757]4757 It was not

enough that he was prepared to defray the expense of the foundations;

he must look to the cost of the whole. So must they, in becoming

disciples, look not on what was involved in the present following of

Christ, but remember the cost of the final acknowledgement of Jesus.

Again, if a king went to war, common prudence would lead him to

consider whether his forces were equal to the great contest before

him; else it were far better to withdraw in time, even though it

involved humiliation, from what, in view of his weakness, would end in

miserable defeat.[4758]4758 So, and much more, must the intending

disciple make complete inward surrender of all, deliberately counting

the cost, and, in view of the coming trial, ask himself whether he

had, indeed, sufficient inward strength - the force of love to Christ

- to conquer. And thus discipleship, then, and, in measure, to all

time, involves the necessity of complete inward surrender of

everything for the love of Christ, so that if, and when, the time of

outward trial comes, we may be prepared to conquer in the

fight.[4759]4759 He fights well, who has first fought and conquered

within.

Or else, and here Christ breaks once more into that pithy Jewish

proverb - only, oh! how aptly, applying it to His disciples - 'Salt is

good;' 'salt, if it have lost its savour, wherewith shall it be

salted?'[4760]4760 We have preferred quoting the proverb in its Jewish

form,[4761]4761 [4762]4762 to show its popular origin. Salt in such

condition was neither fit to improve the land, nor, on the other hand,

to be mixed with the manure. The disciple who had lost his

distinctiveness would neither benefit the land, nor was he even fit,

as it were, for the dunghill, and could only be cast out. And so, let

him that hath ears to hear, hear the warning!

5. We have still to consider the last Discourses of Christ before the

raising of Lazarus.[4763]4763 As being addressed to the

disciples,[4764]4764 we have to connect them with the Discourse just

commented upon. In point of fact, part of these admonitions had

already been spoken on a previous occasion, and that more fully, to

the disciples in Galilee.[4765]4765 Only we must again bear in mind

the difference of circumstances. Here, they immediately precede the

raising of Lazarus,[4766]4766 and they form the close of Christ's

public Ministry in Peræa. Hence they come to us as Christ's parting

admonitions to His Peræan followers.

Thus viewed, they are intended to impress on the new disciples these

four things: to be careful to give no offence;[4767]4767 to be careful

to take no offence;[4768]4768 to be simple and earnest in their faith,

and absolutely to trust its all-prevailing power;[4769]4769 and yet,

when they had made experience of it, not to be elated, but to remember

their relation to their Master, that all was in His service, and that,

after all, when everything had been done, they were but unprofitable

servants.[4770]4770 In other words, they urged upon the disciples

holiness, love, faith, and service of self-surrender and humility.

Most of these points have been already considered, when explaining the

similar admonitions of Christ in Galilee.[4771]4771 The four parts of

this Discourse are broken by the prayer of the Apostles, who had

formerly expressed their difficulty in regard to these very

requirements:[4772]4772 'Add unto us faith.' It was upon this that the

Lord spake to them, for their comfort, of the absolute power of even

the smallest faith,[4773]4773 and of the service and humility of

faith.[4774]4774 The latter was couched in a Parabolic form, well

calculated to impress on them those feelings which would keep them

lowly. They were but servants; and, even though they had done their

work, the Master expected them to serve Him, before they sat down to

their own meal and rest. Yet meal and rest there would be in the end.

Only, let there not be self-elation, nor weariness, nor impatience;

but let the Master and His service be all in all. Surely, if ever

there was emphatic protest against the fundamental idea of Pharisaism,

as claiming merit and reward, it was in the closing admonition of

Christ's public Ministry in Peræa: 'When ye shall have done all those

things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants; we

have done that which was our duty to do.'

And with these parting words did He most effectually and for ever

separate, in heart and spirit, the Church from the Synagogue.

CHAPTER XXI.

THE DEATH AND THE RAISING OF LAZARUS - THE QUESTION OF MIRACLES AND

OF THIS

MIRACLE OF MIRACLES - VIEWS OF NEGATIVE CRITICISM ON THIS HISTORY -

JEWISH

BURYING-RITES AND SEPULCHRES.

(St. John xi. 1-54.)

From listening to the teaching of Christ, we turn once more to follow

His working. It will be remembered, that the visit to Bethany divides

the period from the Feast of the Dedication to the last Paschal week

into two parts. It also forms the prelude and preparation for the

awful events of the End. For, it was on that occasion that the members

of the Sanhedrin formally resolved on His Death. It now only remained

to settle and carry out the plans for giving effect to their purpose.

This is one aspect of it. There is yet another and more solemn one.

The raising of Lazarus marks the highest point (not in the

Manifestation, but) in the ministry of our Lord; it is the climax in a

history where all is miraculous - the Person, the Life, the Words, the

Work. As regards Himself, we have here the fullest evidence alike of

His Divinity and Humanity; as regards those who witnessed it, the

highest manifestation of faith and of unbelief. Here, on this height,

the two ways finally meet and part. And from this high point - not

only from the resolution of the Sanhedrists, but from the raising of

Lazarus - we have our first clear outlook on the Death and

Resurrection of Christ, of which the raising of Lazarus was the

typical prelude. From this height, also, have we an outlook upon the

gathering of the Church at His empty Tomb, where the precious words

spoken at the grave of Lazarus received their full meaning - till

Death shall be no more. But chiefly do we now think of it as the

Miracle of Miracles in the history of the Christ. He had, indeed,

before this raised the dead; but it had been in far-off Galilee, and

in circumstances essentially different. But now it would be one so

well known as Lazarus, at the very gates of Jerusalem, in the sight of

all men, and amidst surroundings which admitted not of mistake or

doubt. If this Miracle be true, we instinctively feel all is true; and

Spinoza was right in saying,[4775]4775 that if he could believe the

raising of Lazarus, he would tear to shreds his system, and humbly

accept the creed of Christians.

But is it true? We have reached a stage in this history when such a

question, always most painful, might seem almost uncalled for. For,

gradually and with increasing clearness, we have learned the

trustworthiness of the Evangelic records; and, as we have followed

Him, the conviction has deepened into joyous assurance, that He, Who

spake, lived, and wrought as none other, is in very deed the Christ of

God. And yet we ask ourselves here this question again, on account of

its absolute and infinite importance; because this may be regarded as

the highest and decisive moment in this History; because, in truth, it

is to the historical faith of the Church what the great Confession of

Peter was to that of the disciples. And, although such an inquiry may

seem like the jarring of a discord in Heaven's own melody, we pursue

it, feeling that, in so doing, we are not discussing what is doubtful,

but rather setting forth the evidence of what is certain, for the

confirmation of the faith of our hearts, and, as we humbly trust, for

the establishment of the faith as it is in Jesus.

At the outset, we must here once more meet, however briefly, the

preliminary difficulty in regard to Miracles, of which the raising of

Lazarus is, we shall not say, the greatest - for comparison is not

possible on such a point - but the most notable. Undoubtedly, a

Miracle runs counter, not only to our experience, but to the facts on

which our experience is grounded; and can only be accounted for by a

direct Divine interposition, which also runs counter to our

experience, although it cannot logically be said to run counter to the

facts on which that experience is grounded. Beyond this it is

impossible to go, since the argument on other grounds than of

experience, be it phenomenal [observation and historical information]

or real [knowledge of laws and principles] - would necessitate

knowledge alike of all the laws of Nature and of all the secrets of

Heaven.

On the other hand (as indicated in a previous part[4776]4776), to

argue this point only on the ground of experience (phenomenal or

real), were not only reasoning à priori, but in a vicious circle. It

would really amount to this: A thing has not been, because it cannot

be; and it cannot be, because, so far as I know, it is not and has not

been. But, to deny on such à priori prejudgment the possibility of

Miracles, ultimately involves a denial of a Living, Reigning God. For,

the existence of a God implies at least the possibility, in certain

circumstances it may be the rational necessity, of Miracles. And the

same grounds of experience, which tell against the occurrence of a

Miracle, would equally apply against belief in a God. We have as

little ground in experience (of a physical kind) for the one as for

the other. This is not said to deter inquiry, but for the sake of our

argument. For, we confidently assert and challenge experiment of it,

that disbelief in a God, or Materialism, involves infinitely more

difficulties, and that at every step and in regard to all things, than

the faith of the Christian.

But we instinctively feel that such a Miracle as the raising of

Lazarus calls for more than merely logical formulas. Heart and mind

crave for higher than questions of what may be logically possible or

impossible. We want, so to speak, living evidence, and we have it. We

have it, first of all, in the Person of the Incarnate God, Who not

only came to abolish death, but in Whose Presence the continuance of

disease and death was impossible. And we have it also in the narrative

of the event itself. It were, indeed, an absurd demand to prove a

Miracle, since to do so were to show that it was not a Miracle. But we

may be rationally asked these three things: first, to show, that no

other explanation is rationally possible than that which proceeds on

the ground of its being a Miracle; secondly, to show, that such a view

of it is consistent with itself and with all the details of the

narrative; and, thirdly, that it is harmonious with what precedes and

what follows the narrative. The second and third of these arguments

will be the outcome of our later study of the history of this event;

the first, that no other explanation of the narrative is rationally

possible, must now be briefly attempted.

We may here dismiss, as what would not be entertained by any one

familiar with historical inquiries, the idea that such a narrative

could be an absolute invention, ungrounded on any fact. Again, we may

put aside as repugnant to, at least English, common sense, the theory

that the narrative is consistent with the idea that Lazarus was not

really dead (so, the Rationalists). Nor would any one, who had the

faintest sympathy with the moral standpoint of the Gospels, entertain

the view of M. Renan,[4777]4777 that it was all a 'pious fraud'

concocted between all parties, and that, in order to convert Jerusalem

by a signal miracle, Lazarus had himself dressed up as a dead body and

laid in the family tomb. Scarcely more rational is M. Renan's latest

suggestion, that it was all a misunderstanding: Martha and Mary having

told Jesus the wish of friends, that He should do some notable miracle

to convince the Jews, and suggesting that they would believe if one

rose from the dead, when He had replied, that they would not believe

even if Lazarus rose from his grave - and that tradition had

transformed this conversation into an actual event! Nor, finally,

would English common sense readily believe (with Baur), that the whole

narrative was an ideal composition to illustrate what must be regarded

as the metaphysical statement: 'I am the Resurrection and the Life.'

Among ourselves, at least, no serious refutation of these and similar

views can be necessary.

Nor do the other theories advanced require lengthened discussion. The

mythical explanation of Strauss is, that as the Old Testament had

recorded instances of raising from the dead, so Christian tradition

must needs ascribe the same to the Messiah. To this (without repeating

the detailed refutation made by Renan and Baur), it is sufficient to

reply: The previous history of Christ had already offered such

instances, why needlessly multiply them? Besides, if it had been 'a

legend,' such full and minute details would not have been introduced,

and while the human element would have been suppressed, the miraculous

would have been far more accentuated. Only one other theory on the

subject requires notice: that the writer of the Fourth Gospel, or

rather early tradition, had transformed the Parable of Dives and

Lazarus into an actual event. In answer, it is sufficient to say:

first, that (as previously shown) there is no connection between the

Lazarus of the Parable and him of Bethany; secondly, that, if it had

been a Parable transformed, the characters chosen would not have been

real persons, and that they were such is evident from the mention of

the family in different circumstances in the three Synoptic

Gospels,[4778]4778 of which the writer of the Fourth Gospel was fully

aware.[4779]4779 Lastly, as Godet remarks, whereas the Parable closes

by declaring that the Jews would not believe even if one rose from the

dead, the Narrative closes on this wise:[4780]4780 'Many therefore of

the Jews, which came to Mary and beheld that which He did, believed on

Him.'[4781]4781

In view of these proposed explanations, we appeal to the impartial

reader, whether any of them rationally accounts for the origin and

existence of this history in Apostolic tradition? On the other hand,

everything is clear and consistent on the supposition of the

historical truth of this narrative: the minuteness of details; the

vividness and pictorialness of the narrative: the characteristic

manner in which Thomas, Martha, and Mary speak and act, in accordance

with what we read of them in the other Gospels or in other parts of

this Gospel; the Human affection of the Christ; the sublime simplicity

and majesty of the manner of the Miracle; and the effects of it on

friend and foe. There is, indeed, this one difficulty (not objection),

that the event is not mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. But we know

too little of the plan on which the Gospels, viewed as Lives of

Christ, were constructed, to allow us to draw any sufficient inference

from the silence of the Synoptists, whilst we do know that the Judæan

and Jerusalem Ministry of Christ, except so far as it was absolutely

necessary to refer to it, lay outside the plan of the Synoptic

Gospels, and formed the special subject of that by St. John. Lastly,

we should remember, that in the then state of thought the introduction

of another narrative of raising from the dead could not have seemed to

them of such importance as it appears to us in the present state of

controversy - more especially, since it was soon to be followed by

another Resurrection, the importance and evidential value of which far

overshadowed such an event as the raising of Lazarus. Their Galilean

readers had the story of the raising of the window's son at Nain, and

of Jairus' daughter at Capernaum; and the Roman world had not only all

this, but the preaching of the Resurrection, and of pardon and life in

the Name of the Risen One, together with ocular demonstration of the

miraculous power of those who preached it. It remained for the beloved

disciple, who alone stood under the Cross, alone to stand on that

height from which he had first full and intense outlook upon His

Death, and the Life which sprang from it, and flowed into all the

world.

We may now, undisturbed by preliminary objections, surrender ourselves

to the sublimeness and solemnity of this narrative. Perhaps the more

briefly we comment on it the better.

It was while in Peræa, that this message suddenly reached the Master

from the well-remembered home at Bethany, 'the village of Mary' - who,

although the younger, is for obvious reasons first mentioned in this

history - 'and her sister Martha,' concerning their (younger) brother

Lazarus: 'Lord, behold he whom Thou lovest is sick!' They are

apparently the very words which 'the sisters' bade their messenger

tell. We note as an important fact to be stored in our memory, that

the Lazarus, who had not even been mentioned in the only account

preserved to us of a previous visit of Christ to Bethany,[4782]4782 is

described as 'he whom Christ loved.' What a gap of untold events

between the two visits of Christ to Bethany - and what modesty should

it teach us as regards inferences from the circumstance that certain

events are not recorded in the Gospels! The messenger was apparently

dismissed by Christ with this reply: 'This sickness is not unto death,

but for the glory of God, in order that the Son of God may be

glorified thereby.' We must here bear in mind, that this answer was

heard by such of the Apostles as were present at the time.[4783]4783

They would naturally infer from it that Lazarus would not die, and

that his restoration would glorify Christ, either as having foretold

it, or prayed for it, or effected it by His Will. Yet its true meaning

- even, as we now see, its literal interpretation, was, that its final

upshot was not to be the death of Lazarus, but that it was to be for

the glory of God, in order that Christ as the Son of God might be made

manifest. And we learn, how much more full are the Words of Christ

than they often appear to us; and how truly, and even literally, they

may bear quite another meaning than appears to our honest

misapprehension of them - a meaning which only the event, the future,

will disclose.

And yet, probably at the very time when the messenger received his

answer, and ere he could have brought it to the sisters, Lazarus was

already dead! Nor - and this should be especially marked - did this

awaken doubt in the minds of the sisters. We seem to hear the very

words which at the time they said to each other when each of them

afterwards repeated it to the Lord: 'Lord, if Thou hadst been here, my

brother would not have died.'[4784]4784 They probably thought the

message had reached Him too late, that Lazarus would have lived if

Christ had been appealed to in time, or had been able to come - at any

rate, if He had been there. Even in their keenest anguish, there was

no failure of trust, no doubt, no close weighing of words on their

part - only the confidence of love. Yet all this while Christ knew

that Lazarus had died, and still He continued two whole days where He

was, finishing His work. And yet - and this is significantly noted

before anything else, alike in regard to His delay and to His

after-conduct - He 'loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus.' Had

there been no after-history, or had it not been known to us, or before

it became known, it might have seemed otherwise - and in similar

circumstances it often does seem otherwise to us. And again, what

majestic calm, what Self-restraint of Human affections and sublime

consciousness of Divine Power in this delay: it is once more Christ

asleep, while the disciples are despairing, in the bark almost swamped

in the storm! Christ is never in haste: least of all, on His errands

of love. And He is never in haste, because He is always sure.

It was only after these two days that Christ broke silence as to His

purposes and as to Lazarus. Though thoughts of him must have been

present with the disciples, none dared ask aught, although not from

misgiving, nor yet from fear. This also of faith and of confidence. At

last, when His work in that part had been completed, He spoke of

leaving, but even so not of going to Bethany, but into Judæa. For, in

truth, His work in Bethany was not only geographically, but really,

part of His work in Judæa; and He told the disciples of His purpose,

just because He knew their fears and would teach them, not only for

this but for every future occasion, what principle applied to them.

For when, in their care and affection, they reminded the 'Rabbi' - and

the expression here almost jars on us - that the Jews 'were even now

seeking to stone' Him, He replied by telling them, in figurative

language, that we have each our working day from God, and that while

it lasts no foe can shorten it or break up or work. The day had twelve

hours, and while these lasted no mishap would befall him that walked

in the way [he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this

world]. It was otherwise when the day was past and the night had come.

When our God-given day has set, and with it the light been withdrawn

which hitherto prevented our stumbling - then, if a man went in his

own way and at his own time, might such mishap befall him, 'because,'

figuratively as to light in the night-time, and really as to guidance

and direction in the way, 'the light is not in him.'

But this was only part of what Jesus said to His disciples in

preparation for a journey that would issue in such tremendous

consequences. He next spoke of Lazarus, their 'friend,' as 'fallen

asleep' - in the frequent Jewish (as well as Christian) figurative

sense of it,[4785]4785 and of His going there to wake him out of

sleep. The disciples would naturally connect this mention of His going

to Lazarus with His proposed visit to Judæa, and, in their eagerness

to keep Him from the latter, interposed that there could be no need

for going to Lazarus, since sleep was, according to Jewish notions,

one of the six,[4786]4786 or, according to others,[4787]4787 five

symptoms or crises in recovery from dangerous illness. And when the

Lord then plainly stated it, 'Lazarus died,' adding, what should have

aroused their attention, that for their sakes He was glad He had not

been in Bethany before the event, because now that would come which

would work faith in them, and proposed to go to the dead Lazarus -

even then, their whole attention was so absorbed by the certainty of

danger to their loved Teacher, that Thomas had only one thought: since

it was to be so, let them go and die with Jesus. So little had they

understood the figurative language about the twelve hours on which

God's sun shone to light us on our way; so much did they need the

lesson of faith to be taught them in the raising of Lazarus!

We already know the quiet happy home of Bethany.[4788]4788 When Jesus

reached it, 'He found' - probably from those who met Him by the

way[4789]4789 [4790]4790 - that Lazarus had been already four days in

the grave. According to custom, he would be buried the same day that

he had died.[4791]4791 Supposing his death to have taken place when

the message for help was first delivered, while Jesus continued after

that two whole days in the place where He was, this would leave about

a day for His journey from Peræa to Bethany. We do not, indeed, know

the exact place of His stay; but it must have been some well-known

centre of activity in Peræa, since the sisters of Bethany had no

difficulty in sending their messenger. At the same time we also infer

that, at least at this period, some kind of communication must have

existed between Christ and His more intimate disciples and friends,

such as the family of Bethany - by which they were kept informed of

the general plan of His Mission-journeys, and of any central station

of His temporary sojourn. If Christ at that time occupied such a

central station, we can the more readily understand how some of His

Galilean disciples may, for a brief space, have been absent at their

Galilean homes when the tidings about Lazarus arrived. Their absence

may explain the prominent position taken by Thomas; perhaps, also, in

part, the omission of this narrative from the Synoptic Gospels. One

other point may be of interest. Supposing the journey to Bethany to

have occupied a day, we would suggest the following as the order of

events. The messenger of the Sisters left Bethany on the Sunday (it

could not have been on the Sabbath), and reached Jesus on the Monday.

Christ continued in Peræa other two days, till Wednesday, and arrived

at Bethany on Thursday. On Friday the meeting of the Sanhedrists

against Christ took place, while He rested in Bethany on the Friday,

and, of course, on the Sabbath, and returned to Peræa and 'Ephraim' on

the Sunday.

This may be a convenient place for adding to the account already

given,[4792]4792 in connection with the burying of the widow's son at

Nain, such further particulars of the Jewish observances and

rites,[4793]4793 as may illustrate the present history. Referring to

the previous description, we resume, in imagination, our attendance at

the point where Christ met the bier at Nain and again gave life to the

dead. But we remember that, as we are now in Judæa, the hired mourners

- both mourning-men (for there were such) and mourning-women - would

follow, and not, as in Galilee, precede, the body.[4794]4794 From the

narrative we infer that the burial of Lazarus did not take place in a

common burying-ground, which was never nearer a town than 50

cubits,[4795]4795 dry and rocky places being chosen in preference.

Here the graves must be at least a foot and a half apart. It was

deemed a dishonour to the dead to stand on, or walk over, the turf of

a grave. Roses and other flowers seem to have been planted on

graves.[4796]4796 But cemeteries, or common burying-places, appear in

earliest times to have been used only for the poor,[4797]4797 or for

strangers.[4798]4798 In Jerusalem there were also two places where

executed criminals were buried.[4799]4799 All these, it is needless to

say, were outside the City. But there is abundant evidence, that every

place had not its own burying-ground; and that, not unfrequently,

provision had to be made for the transport of bodies. Indeed, a

burying-place is not mentioned among the ten requisites for every

fully-organised Jewish community.[4800]4800 The names given, both to

the graves and to the burying-place itself, are of interest. As

regards the former, we mention such as 'the house of

silence;'[4801]4801 'the house of stone;'[4802]4802 'the hostelry,'

or, literally, 'place where you spend the night;' 'the couch;' 'the

resting-place;' 'the valley of the multitude,' or 'of the dead.' The

cemetery was called 'the house of graves;'[4803]4803 or 'the court of

burying;' and 'the house of eternity.' By a euphemism, 'to die' was

designated as 'going to rest,' 'been completed;' 'being gathered to

the world' or 'to the home of light;' 'being withdrawn,' or 'hidden.'

Burial without coffin seems to have continued the practice for a

considerable time, and rules are given how a pit, the size of the

body, was to be dug, and surrounded by a wall of loose stones to

prevent the falling in of earth. When afterwards earth-burials had to

be vindicated against the Parsee idea of cremation, Jewish divines

more fully discussed the question of burial, and described the

committal of the body to the ground as a sort of expiation.[4804]4804

It was a curious later practice, that children who had died a few days

after birth were circumcised on their graves. Children not a month old

were buried without coffin or mourning, and, as some have thought, in

a special place.[4805]4805 In connection with a recent controversy it

is interesting to learn that, for the sake of peace, just as the poor

and sick of the Gentiles might be fed and nursed as well as those of

the Jews, so their dead might be buried with those of the Jews, though

not in their graves.[4806]4806 On the other hand, a wicked person

should not be buried close to a sage.[4807]4807 Suicides were not

accorded all the honours of those who had died a natural death, and

the bodies of executed criminals were laid in a special place, whence

the relatives might after a time remove their bones.[4808]4808 The

burial terminated by casting earth on the grave.[4809]4809

But, as already stated, Lazarus was, as became his station, not laid

in a cemetery, but in his own private tomb in a cave - probably in a

garden, the favourite place of interment. Though on terms of close

friendship with Jesus, he was evidently not regarded as an apostate

from the Synagogue. For, every indignity was shown at the burial of an

apostate; people were even to array themselves in white festive

garments to make demonstration of joy.[4810]4810 Here, on the

contrary, as we gather from the sequel, every mark of sympathy,

respect, and sorrow had been shown by the people in the district and

by friends in the neighbouring Jerusalem. In such case it would be

regarded as a privilege to obey the Rabbinic direction of accompanying

the dead, so as to show honour to the departed and kindness to the

survivors. As the sisters of Bethany were 'disciples,' we may well

believe that some of the more extravagant demonstrations of grief

were, if not dispensed with, yet modified. We can scarcely believe,

that the hired 'mourners' would alternate between extravagant praises

of the dead and calls upon the attendants to lament;[4811]4811 or

that, as was their wont, they would strike on their breast, beat their

hands, and dash about their feet,[4812]4812 or break into wails and

mournings songs, alone or in chorus.[4813]4813 In all probability,

however, the funeral oration would be delivered - as in the case of

all distinguished persons[4814]4814 - either in the house,[4815]4815

or at one of the stations where the bearers changed, or at the

burying-place; perhaps, if they passed it, in the Synagogue.[4816]4816

It has previously been noted, what extravagant value was, in later

times, attached to these orations, as indicating both a man's life on

earth and his place in heaven.[4817]4817 The dead was supposed to be

present, listening to the words of the speaker and watching the

expression on the face of the hearers. It would serve no good purpose

to reproduce fragments from these orations.[4818]4818 Their character

is sufficiently indicated by the above remarks.[4819]4819

When thinking of these tombs in gardens,[4820]4820 we so naturally

revert to that which for three days held the Lord of Life, that all

details become deeply interesting. And it is, perhaps, better to give

them here rather than afterwards to interrupt, by such inquiries, our

solemn thoughts in presence of the Crucified Christ. Not only the

rich, but even those moderately well-to-do, had tombs of their own,

which probably were acquired and prepared long before they were

needed, and treated and inherited as private and personal

property.[4821]4821 In such caves, or rock-hewn tombs, the bodies were

laid, having been anointed with many spices,[4822]4822 with

myrtle,[4823]4823 aloes, and, at a later period, also with hyssop,

rose-oil, and rose-water. The body was dressed and, at a later period,

wrapped, if possible, in the worn cloths in which originally a Roll of

the Law had been held.[4824]4824 The 'tombs' were either 'rock-hewn'

or natural 'caves'[4825]4825 or else large walled vaults, with niches

along the sides. Such a 'cave' or 'vault' of 4 cubits' (6 feet) width,

6 cubits' (9 feet) length, and 4 cubits' (6 feet) height, contained

'niches' for eight bodies - three on each of the longitudinal sides,

and two at the end opposite the entrance. Each 'niche' was 4 cubits (6

feet) long, and had a height of seven and a width of six handbreadths.

As these burying 'niches' were hollowed out in the walls they were

called Kukhin.[4826]4826 The larger caves or vaults were 6 cubits (9

feet) wide, and 8 cubits (12 feet) long, and held thirteen bodies -

four along each side-wall, three opposite to, and one on either side

of the entrance.[4827]4827 These figures apply, of course, only to

what the Law required, when a vault had been contracted for. When a

person constructed one for himself, the dimensions of the walls and

the number of Kukhin might, of course, vary. At the entrance to the

vault was 'a court' 6 cubits (9 feet) square, to hold the bier and its

bearers. Sometimes two 'caves' opened on this 'court.' But it is

difficult to decide whether the second 'cave,' spoken of, was intended

as an ossary[4828]4828 (ossarium). Certain it is, that after a time

the bones were collected and put into a box or coffin, having first

been anointed with wine and oil, and being held together by wrappings

of cloths.[4829]4829 This circumstance explains the existence of the

mortuary chests, or osteophagi, so frequently found in the tombs of

Palestine by late explorers, who have been unable to explain their

meaning.[4830]4830 This unclearness[4831]4831 is much to be regretted,

when we read, for example, of such a 'chest' as found in a cave near

Bethany.[4832]4832 One of the explorers[4833]4833 has discovered on

them fragments of Hebrew inscriptions. Up to the present, only few

Hebrew memorial inscriptions have been discovered in Palestine. The

most interesting are those in or near Jerusalem, dating from the first

century b.c. to the first a.d.[4834]4834 There are, also, many

inscriptions found on Jewish tombs out of Palestine (in Rome, and

other places), written in bad Greek or Latin, containing, perhaps, a

Hebrew word, and generally ending with shalom, 'peace,' and adorned

with Jewish symbols, such as the Seven-branched Candlestick, the Ark,

the festive emblems of the Feast of Tabernacles, and others.[4835]4835

In general, the advice not to read such inscriptions,[4836]4836 as it

would affect the sight, seems to imply the common practice of having

memorial inscriptions in Hebrew. They appear to have been graven

either on the lid of the mortuary chest, or on the Golel, or great

stone 'rolled' at the entrance to the vault, or to the 'court' leading

into it, or else on the inside walls of yet another erection, made

over the vaults of the wealthy,[4837]4837 and which was supposed to

complete the burying-place, or Qebher.

These small buildings surmounting the graves may have served as

shelter to those who visited the tombs. They also served as

'monuments,'[4838]4838 of which we read in the Bible, in the

Apocrypha,[4839]4839 and in Josephus.[4840]4840 [4841]4841 In Rabbinic

writings they are frequently mentioned, chiefly by the name

Nephesh,[4842]4842 'soul,' 'person' - transferred in the sense of

'monument,'[4843]4843 or, by the more Scriptural name of

bamah,[4844]4844 or, by the Greco-Aramaic,[4845]4845 or the Hebrew

designation for a building generally. But of gravestones with

inscriptions we cannot find any record in Talmudic works. At the same

time, the place where there was a vault or a grave was marked by a

stone, which was kept whitened,[4846]4846 to warn the passer-by

against defilement.[4847]4847

We are now able fully to realise all the circumstances and

surroundings in the burial and raising of Lazarus.

Jesus had come to Bethany. But in the house of mourning they knew it

not. As Bethany was only about fifteen furlongs - or about two miles -

from Jerusalem, many from the City, who were on terms of friendship

with what was evidently a distinguished family, had come in obedience

to one of the most binding Rabbinic directions - that of comforting

the mourners. In the funeral procession the sexes had been separated,

and the practice probably prevailed even at that time for the women to

return alone from the grave. This may explain why afterwards the women

went and returned alone to the Tomb of our Lord. The mourning, which

began before the burial,[4848]4848 had been shared by the friends who

sat silent on the ground, or were busy preparing the mourning meal. As

the company left the dead, each had taken leave of the deceased with a

'Depart in peace!'[4849]4849 Then they had formed into lines, through

which the mourners passed amidst expressions of sympathy, repeated (at

least seven times) as the procession halted on the return to the house

of mourning.[4850]4850 Then began the mourning in the house, which

really lasted thirty days, of which the first three were those of

greatest, the others, during the seven days, or the special week of

sorrow, of less intense mourning. But on the Sabbath, as God's holy

day, all mourning was intermitted - and so 'they rested on the

Sabbath, according to the commandment.'

In that household of disciples this mourning would not have assumed

such violent forms, as when we read that the women were in the habit

of tearing out their hair,[4851]4851 or of a Rabbi who publicly

scourged himself.[4852]4852 But we know how the dead would be spoken

of. In death the two worlds were said to meet and kiss.[4853]4853 And

now they who had passed away beheld God.[4854]4854 They were at rest.

Such beautiful passages as Ps. cxii. 6, Prov. x. 7,[4855]4855 Is. xi.

10, last clause, and Is. lvii. 2,[4856]4856 were applied to them. Nay,

the holy dead should be called 'living.' In truth, they knew about us,

and unseen still surrounded us.[4857]4857 Nor should they ever be

mentioned without adding a blessing on their memory.[4858]4858

In this spirit, we cannot doubt, the Jews were now 'comforting' the

sisters. They may have repeated words like those quoted as the

conclusion of such a consolatory speech:[4859]4859 'May the Lord of

consolations ({hebrew}) comfort you! Blessed be He Who comforteth the

mourners!' But they could scarcely have imagined how literally a wish

like this was about to be fulfilled. For, already, the message had

reached Martha, who was probably in one of the outer apartments of the

house: Jesus is coming! She hastened to meet the Master. Not a word of

complaint, not a murmur, nor doubt, escaped her lips - only what

during those four bitter days these two sisters must have been so

often saying to each other, when the luxury of solitude was allowed

them, that if He had been there their brother would not have died. And

even now - when it was all too late - when they had not received what

they had asked of Him by their messenger, it must have been, because

He had not asked it, though he had said that this sickness was not

unto death; or else because he had delayed to work it till He would

come. And still she held fast by it, that even now God would give Him

whatsoever He asked. Or, did they mean more: were they such words of

unconscious prophecy, or sight and sound of heavenly things, as

sometimes come to us in our passion of grief, or else winged thoughts

of faith too soon beyond our vision? They could not have been the

expression of any real hope of the miracle about to take place, or

Martha would not have afterwards sought to arrest Him, when He bade

them roll away the stone. And yet is not even so, that, when that

comes to us which our faith had once dared to suggest, if not to hope,

we feel as if it were all too great and impossible, that a very

physical 'cannot be' separates us from it?

It was in very truth and literality that the Lord meant it, when He

told Martha her brother would rise again, although she understood His

Words of the Resurrection at the Last Day. In answer, Christ pointed

out to her the connection between Himself and the Resurrection; and,

what He spoke, that He did when He raised Lazarus from the dead. The

Resurrection and the Life are not special gifts either to the Church

or to humanity, but are connected with the Christ - the outcome of

Himself. The Resurrection of the Just and the General Resurrection are

the consequence of the relation in which the Church and humanity in

general stand to the Christ. Without the Christ there would have been

no Resurrection. Most literally He is the Resurrection and the Life -

and this, the new teaching about the Resurrection, was the object and

the meaning of the raising of Lazarus. And thus is this raising of

Lazarus the outlook, also, upon His own Resurrection, Who is 'the

first-fruits from the dead.'

And though the special, then present, application, or rather

manifestation of it, would be in the raising of Lazarus - yet this

teaching, that accompanied it, is to 'all believers:' 'He that

believeth in Me, even if [though] he die, shall live; and whosoever

liveth and believeth in Me shall not die for ever'[4860]4860 (unto the

Æon) - where possibly we might, for commentation, mentally insert the

sign of a pause ( - ) between the words 'die' and 'for ever,' or 'unto

the Æon.' It is only when we think of the meaning of Christ's previous

words, as implying that the Resurrection and the Life are the outcome

of Himself, and come to us only through Him and in Him, that we can

understand the answer of Martha to His question: 'Believest thou

this?' Yea, Lord, I have believed that thou art the Christ, the Son of

God [with special reference to the original message of

Christ[4861]4861], He that cometh into the world ['the Coming One into

the world'[4862]4862 = the world's promised, expected, come Saviour].

What else passed between them we can only gather from the context. It

seems that the Master 'called' for Mary. This message Martha now

hasted to deliver, although 'secretly.' Mary was probably sitting in

the chamber of mourning, with its upset chairs and couches, and other

melancholy tokens of mourning, as was the custom; surrounded by many

who had come to comfort them; herself, we can scarcely doubt, silent,

her thoughts far away in that world to, and of which the Master was to

her 'the Way, the Truth, and the Life.' As she heard of His coming and

call, she rose 'quickly,' and the Jews followed her, under the

impression that she was again going to visit, and to sweep at the tomb

of her brother. For, it was the practice to visit the grave,

especially during the first three days.[4863]4863 When she came to

Jesus, where He still stood, outside Bethany, she was forgetful of all

around. It was, as if sight of Him melted what had frozen the tide of

her feelings. She could only fall at His Feet, and repeat the poor

words with which she and her sister had these four weary days tried to

cover the nakedness of their sorrow: poor words of consolation, and

poor words of faith, which she did not, like her sister, make still

poorer of by adding the poverty of her hope to that of her faith - the

poverty of the future to that of the past and present. To Martha that

had been the maximum, to Mary it was the minimum of her faith; for the

rest, it was far, far better to add nothing more, but simply to

worship at His Feet.

It must have been a deeply touching scene: the outpouring of her

sorrow, the absoluteness of her faith, the mute appeal of her tears.

And the Jews who witnessed it were moved as she, and wept with her.

What follows is difficult to understand; still more difficult to

explain: not only from the choice of language, which is peculiarly

difficult, but because its difficulty springs from the yet greater

difficulty of expressing what it is intended to describe. The

expression, 'groaned in spirit,' cannot mean that Christ 'was moved

with indignation in the spirit,' since this could not have been the

consequence of witnessing the tears of Mary and what, we feel sure,

was the genuine emotion of the Jews. Of the various

interpretations,[4864]4864 that commends itself most to us, which

would render the expression: 'He vehemently moved His Spirit and

troubled Himself.' One, whose insight into such questions is

peculiarly deep, has reminded us[4865]4865 that 'the miracles of the

Lord were not wrought by the simple word of power, but that in a

mysterious way the element of sympathy entered into them. He took away

the sufferings and diseases of men in some sense by taking them upon

Himself.' If, with this most just view of His Condescension to, and

union with, humanity as its Healer, by taking upon Himself its

diseases, we combine the statement formerly made about the

Resurrection, as not a gift or boon but the outcome of Himself - we

may, in some way, not understand, but be able to gaze into, the

unfathomed depth of that The anthropic fellow-suffering which was both

vicarious and redemptive, and which, before He became the Resurrection

to Lazarus, shook His whole inner Being, when, in the words of St.

John, 'He vehemently moved His Spirit and troubled Himself.'

And now every trait is in accord. 'Where have ye laid him?' So truly

human - as if He, Who was about to raise the dead, needed the

information where he had been laid; so truly human, also, in the

underlying tenderness of the personal address, and in the absorption

of the whole Theanthropic energy on the mighty burden about to be

lifted and lifted away. So, also, as they bade Him come and see, were

the tears that fell from Him (_d_krusen), not like the violent

lamentation (_klausen) that burst from Him at sight and prophetic view

of doomed Jerusalem.[4866]4866 Yet we can scarcely think that the Jews

rightly interpreted it, when they ascribed it only to His love for

Lazarus. But surely there was not a touch either of malevolence or of

irony, only what we feel to be quite natural in the circumstances,

when some of them asked it aloud: 'Could not this One, Which opened

the eyes of the blind, have wrought so that [in order] this one also

should not die?' Scarcely was it even unbelief. They had so lately

witnessed in Jerusalem that Miracle, such as had 'not been heard'

'since the world began;'[4867]4867 that it seemed difficult to

understand how, seeing there was the will (in His affection for

Lazarus), there was not the power - not to raise him from the dead,

for that did not occur to them, but to prevent his dying. Was there,

then, a barrier in death? And it was this, and not indignation, which

once more caused that Theanthropic recurrence upon Himself, when again

'He vehemently moved His Spirit.'

And now they were at the cave which was Lazarus' tomb. He bade them

roll aside the great stone which covered its entrance.[4868]4868

Amidst the awful pause which preceded obedience, one voice only was

raised. It was that of Martha. Jesus had not spoken of raising

Lazarus. But what was about to be done? She could scarcely have

thought that He merely wished to gaze once more upon the face of the

dead. Something nameless had seized her. She dared not believe; she

dared not disbelieve. Did she, perhaps, not dread a failure, but feel

misgivings, when thinking of Christ as in presence of commencing

corruption before these Jews - and yet, as we so often, still love Him

even in unbelief? It was the common Jewish idea that corruption

commenced on the fourth day, that the drop of gall, which had fallen

from the sword of the Angel and caused death, was then working its

effect, and that, as the face changed, the soul took its final leave

from the resting-place of the body.[4869]4869 Only one sentence Jesus

spake of gentle reproof, of reminder of what He had said to her just

before, and of the message He had sent when first He heard of Lazarus'

illness,[4870]4870 but, oh so full of calm majesty and consciousness

of Divine strength. And now the stone was rolled away. We all feel

that the fitting thing here was prayer - yet not petition, but

thanksgiving that the Father 'heard' Him, not as regarded the raising

of Lazarus, which was His Own Work, but in the ordering and arranging

of all the circumstances - alike the petition and the thanksgiving

having for their object them that stood by, for He knew that the

Father always heard Him: that so they might believe, that the Father

had sent Him. Sent of the Father - not come of Himself, not sent of

Satan - and sent to do His Will!

And in doing this Will, He was the Resurrection and the Life. One loud

command spoken into that silence; one loud call to that sleeper; one

flash of God's Own Light into that darkness, and the wheels of life

again moved at the outgoing of The Life. And, still bound hand and

foot with graveclothes ['bands,' Takhrikhin], and his face with the

napkin, Lazarus stood forth, shuddering and silent, in the cold light

of earth's day. In that multitude, now more pale and shuddering than

the man bound in the graveclothes, the Only One majestically calm was

He, Who before had been so deeply moved and troubled Himself, as He

now bade them 'Loose him, and let him go.'

We know no more. Holy Writ in this also proves its Divine authorship

and the reality of what is here recorded. The momentarily lifted veil

has again fallen over the darkness of the Most Holy Place, in which is

only the Ark of His Presence and the cloudy incense of our worship.

What happened afterwards, how they loosed him, what they said, what

thanks, or praise, or worship, the sisters spoke, and what were

Lazarus' first words, we know not. And better so. Did Lazarus remember

aught of the late past, or was not rather the rending of the grave a

real rending from the past: the awakening so sudden, the transition so

great, that nothing of the bright vision remained, but its impress -

just as a marvellously beautiful Jewish legend has it, that before

entering this world, the soul of a child has seen all of heaven and

hell, of past, present, and future; but that, as the Angel strikes it

on the mouth to waken it into this world, all of the other has passed

from the mind? Again we say: We know not - and it is better so.

And here abruptly breaks off this narrative. Some of those who had

seen it believed on Him; others hurried back to Jerusalem to tell it

to the Pharisees. Then was hastily gathered a meeting of the

Sanhedrists,[4871]4871 not to judge Him, but to deliberate what was to

be done. That He was really doing these miracles, there could be no

question among them. Similarly, all but one or two had no doubt as to

the source of these miracles. If real,[4872]4872 they were of Satanic

agency - and all the more tremendous they were, the more certainly so.

But whether really of Satanic power, or merely a Satanic delusion, one

thing, at least, was evident, that, if He were let alone, all men

would believe on Him? And then, if He headed the Messianic movement of

the Jews as a nation, alike the Jewish City and Temple, and Israel as

a nation, would perish in the fight with Rome. But what was to be

done? They had not the courage of, though the wish for, judicial

murder, till he who was the High-Priest, Caiaphas, reminded them of

the well-known Jewish adage, that it 'is better one man should die,

than the community perish.'[4873]4873 Yet, even so, he who spoke was

the High-Priest; and for the last time, ere in speaking the sentence

he spoke it for ever as against himself and the office he held, spake

through him God's Voice, not as regards the counsel of murder, but

this, that His Death should be 'for that nation' - nay, as St. John

adds, not only for Israel, but to gather into one fold all the now

scattered children of God.

This was the last prophecy in Israel; with the sentence of death on

Israel's true High-Priest died prophecy in Israel, died Israel's

High-Priesthood. It had spoken sentence upon itself.

This was the first Friday of dark resolve. Henceforth it only needed

to concert plans for carrying it out. Some one, perhaps Nicodemus,

sent word of the secret meeting and resolution of the Sanhedrists.

That Friday and the next Sabbath Jesus rested in Bethany, with the

same majestic calm which He had shown at the grave of Lazarus. Then He

withdrew, far away to the obscure bounds of Peræa and Galilee, to a

city of which the very location is now unknown.[4874]4874 And there He

continued with His disciples, withdrawn from the Jews - till He would

make His final entrance into Jerusalem.

CHAPTER XXII.

ON THE JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM - DEPARTURE FROM EPHRAIM BY WAY OF

SAMARIA AND

GALILEE - HEALING OF TEN LEPERS - PROPHETIC DISCOURSE OF THE COMING

KINGDOM

- ON DIVORCE: JEWISH VIEWS OF IT - THE BLESSING TO LITTLE CHILDREN

(St. Matt. xix. 1, 2; St. Mark x.1; St. Luke xvii. 11; St. Luke xvii.

12-19; St. Matt. xix. 3-12; St. Mark x. 2-12; St. Matt. xix. 13-15;

St. Mark x. 13-16; St. Luke xviii. 15-17.)

The brief time of rest and quiet converse with His disciples in the

retirement of Ephraim was past, and the Saviour of men prepared for

His last journey to Jerusalem. All the three Synoptic Gospels mark

this, although with varying details.[4875]4875 From the mention of

Galilee by St. Matthew, and by St. Luke of Samaria and Galilee - or

more correctly, 'between (along the frontiers of) Samaria and

Galilee,' we may conjecture that, on leaving Ephraim, Christ made a

very brief detour along the northern frontier to some place at the

southern border of Galilee - perhaps to meet at a certain point those

who were to accompany him on his final journey to Jerusalem. This

suggestion, for it is no more, is in itself not improbable, since some

of Christ's immediate followers might naturally wish to pay a brief

visit to their friends in Galilee before going up to Jerusalem. And it

is further confirmed by the notice of St. Mark,[4876]4876 that among

those who had followed Christ there were 'many women which came up

with Him unto Jerusalem.' For, we can scarcely suppose that these

'many women' had gone with Him in the previous autumn from Galilee to

the Feast of Tabernacles, nor that they were with Him at the Feast of

the Dedication, or had during the winter followed Him through Peræa,

nor yet that they had been at Bethany.[4877]4877 All these

difficulties are obviated if, as suggested, we suppose that Christ had

passed from Ephraim along the border of Samaria to a place in Galilee,

there to meet such of His disciples as would go up with Him to

Jerusalem. The whole company would then form one of those festive

bands which travelled to the Paschal Feast, nor would there be

anything strange or unusual in the appearance of such a band, in this

instance under the leadership of Jesus.

Another and deeply important notice, furnished by SS. Matthew and

Mark, is, that during this journey through Peræa, 'great multitudes'

resorted to, and followed Him, and that 'He healed'[4878]4878 and

'taught them.'[4879]4879 This will account for the incidents and

Discourses by the way, and also how, from among many deeds, the

Evangelists may have selected for record what to them seemed the most

important or novel, or else best accorded with the plans of their

respective narratives.[4880]4880

Thus, to begin with, St. Luke alone relates the very first incident by

the way,[4881]4881 and the first Discourse.[4882]4882 Nor is it

difficult to understand the reason of this. To one who, like St.

Matthew, had followed Christ in His Galilean Ministry, or, like St.

Mark, had been the penman of St. Peter, there would be nothing so

peculiar or novel in the healing of lepers as to introduce this on the

overcrowded canvas of the last days. Indeed, they had both already

recorded what may be designated as a typical healing of

lepers.[4883]4883 But St. Luke had not recorded such healing before;

and the restoration of ten at the same time would seem to the 'beloved

physician' matter, not only new in his narrative, but of the deepest

importance. Besides, we have already seen, that the record of the

whole of this East-Jordan Ministry is peculiar to St. Luke; and we can

scarcely doubt that it was the result of personal inquiries made by

the Evangelist on the spot, in order to supplement what might have

seemed to him a gap in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark. This

would explain his fulness of detail as regards incidents, and, for

example, the introduction of the history of Zacchæus, which to St.

Mark, or rather to St. Peter, but especially to St. Matthew (himself

once a publican), might appear so like that which they had so often

witnessed and related, as scarcely to require special narration. On

the same ground we account for the record by St. Luke of Christ's

Discourse predictive of the Advent of the Messianic Kingdom.[4884]4884

This Discourse is evidently in its place at the beginning of Christ's

last journey to Jerusalem. But the other two Evangelists merge it in

the account of the fuller teaching on the same subject during the last

days of Christ's sojourn on earth.[4885]4885

It is a further confirmation of our suggestion as to the road taken by

Jesus, that of the ten lepers whom, at the outset of His journey, He

met when entering into a village, one was a Samaritan. It may have

been that the district was infested with leprosy; or these lepers may,

on tidings of Christ's approach, have hastily gathered there. It was,

as fully explained in another place,[4886]4886 in strict accordance

with Jewish Law, that these lepers remained both outside the village

and far from Him to Whom they now cried for mercy. And, without either

touch or even command of healing, Christ bade them go and show

themselves as healed to the priests. For this it was, as will be

remembered, not necessary to repair to Jerusalem. Any priest might

declare 'unclean' or 'clean' provided the applicants presented

themselves singly, and not in company,[4887]4887 for his

inspection.[4888]4888 And they went at Christ's bidding, even before

they had actually experienced the healing! So great was their faith,

and, may we not almost infer, the general belief throughout the

district, in the power of 'the Master.' And as they went, the new life

coursed in their veins. Restored health began to be felt, just as it

ever is, not before, nor yet after believing, but in the act of

obedience of a faith that has not yet experienced the blessing.

But now the characteristic difference between these men appeared. Of

the ten, equally recipients of the benefit, the nine Jews continued

their way - presumably to the priests - while the one Samaritan in the

number at once turned back, with a loud voice glorifying God. The

whole event may not have occupied many minutes, and Jesus with his

followers may still have stood on the same spot whence He bade the ten

lepers go show themselves to the priests. He may have followed them

with his eyes, as, but a few steps on their road of faith, health

overtook them, and the grateful Samaritan, with voice of loud

thanksgiving, hastened back to his Healer. No longer now did he remain

afar off, but in humblest reverence fell on his face at the Feet of

Him to Whom he gave thanks. This Samaritan[4889]4889 had received more

than new bodily life and health: he had found spiritual life and

healing.

But why did the nine Jews not return? Assuredly, they must have had

some faith when first seeking help from Christ, and still more when

setting out for the priests before they had experienced the healing.

But perhaps, regarding it from our own standpoint, we may overestimate

the faith of these men. Bearing in mind the views of the Jews at the

time, and what constant succession of miraculous cures - without a

single failure - had been witnessed these years, it cannot seem

strange that lepers should apply to Jesus. Not yet perhaps did it, in

the circumstances, involve very much greater faith to go to the

priests at His bidding - implying, of course, that they were or would

be healed. But it was far different to turn back and to fall down at

His feet in lowly worship and thanksgiving. That made a man a

disciple.

Many questions here suggest themselves: Did these nine Jews separate

from the one Samaritan when they felt healed, common misfortune having

made them companions and brethren, while the bond was snapped so soon

as they felt themselves free of their common sorrow? The History of

the Church and of individual Christians furnishes, alas! not a few

analogous instances. Or did these nine Jews, in their legalism and

obedience to the letter, go on to the priests, forgetful that, in

obeying the letter, they violated the spirit of Christ's command? Of

this also there are, alas! only too many parallel cases which will

occur to the mind. Or was it Jewish pride, which felt it had a right

to the blessings, and attributed them, not to the mercy of Christ, but

to God; or, rather, to their own relation as Israel to God? Or, what

seems to us the most probable, was it simply Jewish ingratitude and

neglect of the blessed opportunity now within their reach - a state of

mind too characteristic of those who know not 'the time of their

visitation' - and which led up to the neglect, rejection, and final

loss of the Christ? Certain it is, that the Lord emphasised the

terrible contrast in this between the children of the household and

'this stranger.'[4890]4890 And here another important lesson is

implied in regard to the miraculous in the Gospels. The history shows

how little spiritual value or efficacy they attach to miracles, and

how essentially different in this respect their tendency is from all

legendary stories. The lesson conveyed in this case is, that we may

expect, and even experience, miracles, without any real faith in the

Christ; with belief, indeed, in His Power, but without surrender to

His Rule. According to the Gospels, a man might either seek benefit

from Christ, or else receive Christ through such benefit. In the one

case, the benefit sought was the object, in the other, the means; in

the one, it was the goal, in the other, the road to it; in the one, it

gave healing, in the other, brought salvation; in the one, it

ultimately led away from, in the other, it led to Christ and to

discipleship. And so Christ now spake it to this Samaritan: 'Arise, go

thy way; thy faith has made thee whole.' But to all time there are

here to the Church lessons of most important distinction.

2. The Discourse concerning the Coming of the Kingdom, which is

reported by St. Luke immediately after the healing of the ten

lepers,[4891]4891 will be more conveniently considered in connection

with the fuller statement of the same truths at the close of our

Lord's Ministry.[4892]4892 It was probably delivered a day or so after

the healing of the lepers, and marks a farther stage in the Peræan

journey towards Jerusalem. For, here we meet once more the Pharisees

as questioners.[4893]4893 This circumstance, as will presently appear,

is of great importance, as carrying us back to the last mention of an

interpellation by the Pharisees.[4894]4894

3. This brings us to what we regard as, in point of time, the next

Discourse of Christ on this journey, recorded both by St. Matthew,

and, in briefer form, by St. Mark.[4895]4895 These Evangelist place it

immediately after their notice of the commencement of this

journey.[4896]4896 For reasons previously indicated, St. Luke inserts

the healing of the lepers and the prophetic Discourse, while the other

two Evangelists omit them. On the other hand, St. Luke omits the

Discourse here reported by St. Matthew and St. Mark, because, as we

can readily see, its subject-matter would, from the standpoint of his

Gospel, not appear of such supreme importance as to demand insertion

in a narrative of selected events.

The subject-matter of that Discourse is, in answer to Pharisaic

'tempting,' and exposition of Christ's teaching in regard to the

Jewish law and practice of divorce. The introduction of this subject

in the narratives of St. Matthew and St. Mark seems, to say the least,

abrupt. But the difficulty is entirely removed, or, rather, changed

into undesigned evidence, when we fit it into the general history.

Christ had advanced farther on His journey, and now once more

encountered the hostile Pharisees. It will be remembered that He had

met them before in the same part of the country,[4897]4897 [4898]4898

and answered their taunts and objections, among other things, by

charging them with breaking in spirit that Law of which they professed

to be the exponents and representatives. And this He had proved by

reference to their views and teaching on the subject of

divorce.[4899]4899 This seems to have rankled in their minds. Probably

they also imagined, it would be easy to show on this point a marked

difference between the teaching of Jesus and that of Moses and the

Rabbis, and to enlist popular feeling against Him. Accordingly, when

these Pharisees again encountered Jesus, now on his journey to Judæa,

they resumed the subject precisely where it had been broken off when

they had last met Him, only now with the object of 'tempting Him.'

Perhaps it may also have been in the hope that, by getting Christ to

commit Himself against divorce in Peræa - the territory of Herod -

they might enlist against Him, as formerly against the Baptist, the

implacable hatred of Herodias.[4900]4900

But their main object evidently was to involve Christ in controversy

with some of the Rabbinic Schools. This appears from the form in which

they put the question, whether it was lawful to put away a wife 'for

every cause?'[4901]4901 St. Mark, who gives only a very condensed

account, omits this clause; but in Jewish circles the whole

controversy between different teachers turned upon this point. All

held that divorce was lawful, the only question being as to its

grounds. We will not here enter on the unsavoury question of 'Divorce'

among the Jews,[4902]4902 to which the Talmud devotes a special

tractate.[4903]4903 There can, however, be no question that the

practice was discouraged by many of the better Rabbis, alike in

word[4904]4904 and by their example;[4905]4905 nor yet, that the

Jewish Law took the most watchful care of the interests of the woman.

In fact, if any doubt were raised as to the legal validity of the

letter of divorce, the Law always pronounced against the divorce. At

the same time, in popular practice, divorce must have been very

frequent; while the principles underlying Jewish legislation on the

subject are most objectionable.[4906]4906 These were in turn due to a

comparatively lower estimate of woman, and to an unspiritual view of

the marriage-relation. Christianity has first raised woman to her

proper position, not by giving her a new one, but by restoring and

fully developing that assigned to her in the Old Testament. Similarly,

as regards marriage, the New Testament - which would have us to be, in

one sense, 'eunuchs for the Kingdom of God,' has also fully restored

and finally developed what the Old Testament had already implied. And

this is part of the lesson taught in this Discourse, both to the

Pharisees and to the disciples.

To begin with, divorce (in the legal sense) was regarded as a

privilege accorded only to Israel, not to the Gentiles.[4907]4907

[4908]4908 On the question: what constituted lawful grounds of

divorce, the Schools were divided. Taking their departure from the

sole ground of divorce mentioned in Deut. xxiv. 1: 'a matter of shame

[literally, nakedness],' the School of Shammai applied the expression

only to moral transgressions,[4909]4909 and, indeed, exclusively to

unchastity.[4910]4910 It was declared that, if a woman were as

mischievous as the wife of Ahab, or [according to tradition] as the

wife of Korah, it were well that her husband should not divorce her,

except it be on the ground of adultery.[4911]4911 At the same time

this must not be regarded as a fixed legal principle, but rather as an

opinion and good counsel for conduct. The very passages, from which

the above quotations are made, also afford only too painful evidence

of the laxity of views and practices current. And the Jewish Law

unquestionably allowed divorce on almost any grounds; the difference

being, not as to what was lawful, but on what grounds a man should set

the Law in motion, and make use of the absolute liberty which it

accorded him. Hence, it is a serious mistake on the part of

Commentators to set the teaching of Christ on this subject by the side

of that of Shammai.

But the School of Hillel proceeded on different principles. It took

the words, 'matter of shame' in the widest possible sense, and

declared it sufficient ground for divorce if a woman had spoiled her

husband's dinner.[4912]4912 [4913]4913 Rabbi Akiba thought, that the

words,[4914]4914 'if she find no favour in his eyes,' implied that it

was sufficient if a man had found another woman more attractive than

his wife. All agreed that moral blame made divorce a duty,[4915]4915

and that in such cases a woman should not be taken back.[4916]4916

According to the Mishnah,[4917]4917 if they transgressed against the

Law of Moses or of Israel. The former is explained as implying a

breach of the laws of tithing, of setting apart the first of the

dough, and of purification. The latter is explained as referring to

such offences as that of going in public with uncovered head, of

spinning in the public streets, or entering into talk with men, to

which others add, that of brawling, or of disrespectfullyspeaking of

her husband's parents in his presence. A troublesome,[4918]4918 or

quarrelsome wife might certainly be sent away;[4919]4919 and ill

repute, or childlessness (during ten years) were also regarded as

valid grounds of divorce.[4920]4920

Incomparably as these principles differ from the teaching of Christ,

it must again be repeated, that no real comparison is possible between

Christ and even the strictest of the Rabbis, since none of them

actually prohibited divorce, except in case of adultery, nor yet laid

down those high eternal principles which Jesus enunciated. But we can

understand how, from the Jewish point of view, 'tempting Him,' they

would put the question, whether it was lawful to divorce a wife 'for

every cause.'[4921]4921 Avoiding their cavils, the Lord appealed

straight to the highest authority - God's institution of marriage. He,

Who at the beginning[4922]4922 [from the first, originally,

{hebrew}][4923]4923 had made them male and female, had in the

marriage-relation 'joined them together,' to the breaking of every

other, even the nearest, relationship, to be 'one flesh' - that is, to

a union which was unity. Such was the fact of God's ordering. It

followed, that they were one - and what God had willed to be one, man

might not put asunder. Then followed the natural Rabbinic objection,

why, in such case, Moses had commanded a bill of divorcement. Our Lord

replied by pointing out that Moses had not commanded divorce, only

tolerated it on account of their hardness of heart, and in such case

commanded to give a bill of divorce for the protection of the wife.

And this argument would appeal the more forcibly to them, that the

Rabbis themselves taught that a somewhat similar concession had been

made[4924]4924 by Moses in regard to female captives of war, as the

Talmud has it, 'on account of the evil impulse.'[4925]4925 But such a

separation,our Lord continued, had not been provided for in the

original institution, which was a union to unity. Only one thing could

put an end to that unity - its absolute breach. Hence, to divorce

one's wife (or husband) while this unity lasted, and to marry another,

was adultery, because, as the divorce was null before God, the

original marriage still subsisted - and, in that case, the Rabbinic

Law would also have forbidden it. The next part of the Lord's

inference, that 'whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit

adultery,' is more difficult of interpretation. Generally, it is

understood as implying that a woman divorced for adultery might not be

married. But it has been argued,[4926]4926 that, as the literal

rendering is, 'whoso marrieth her when put away,' it applies to the

woman whose divorce had just before been prohibited, and not, as is

sometimes thought, to 'a woman divorced [under any circumstances].' Be

this as it may, the Jewish Law, which regarded marriage with a woman

divorced under any circumstances as unadvisable,[4927]4927 absolutely

forbade that of the adulterer with the adulteress.[4928]4928

Whatever, therefore, may be pleaded, on account of 'the hardness of

heart' in modern society, in favour of the lawfulness of relaxing

Christ's law of divorce, which confines dissolution of marriage to the

one ground (of adultery), because then the unity of God's making has

been broken by sin - such a retrocession was at least not in the mind

of Christ, nor can it be considered lawful, either by the Church or

for individual disciples. But, that the Pharisees had rightly judged,

when 'tempting Him,' what the popular feeling on the subject would be,

appears even from what 'His disciples' [not necessarily the Apostles]

afterwards said to Him. They waited to express their dissent till they

were alone with Him 'in the house,'[4929]4929 and then urged that, if

it were as Christ had taught, it would be better not to marry at all.

To which the Lord replied,[4930]4930 that 'this saying' of the

disciples,[4931]4931 'it is not good to marry,' could not be received

by all men, but only by those to whom it was 'given.' For, there were

three cases in which abstinence from marriage might lawfully be

contemplated. In two of these it was, of course, natural; and, where

it was not so, a man might, 'for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake' - that

is, in the service of God and of Christ - have all his thoughts,

feelings, and impulses so engaged that others were no longer existent.

For, we must here beware of a twofold misunderstanding. It is not bare

abstinence from marriage, together, perhaps, with what the German

Reformers called immunda continentia (unchaste continency), which is

here commended, but such inward preoccupation with the Kingdom of God

as would remove all other thoughts and desires.[4932]4932 It is this

which requires to be 'given' of God; and which 'he that is able to

receive it' - who has the moral capacity for it - is called upon to

receive. Again, it must not be imagined that this involves any command

of celibacy: it only speaks of such who in the active service of the

Kingdom feel, that their every thought is so engrossed in the work,

that wishes and impulses to marriage are no longer existent in

them.[4933]4933 [4934]4934

4. The next incident is recorded by the three Evangelists.[4935]4935

It probably occurred in the same house where the disciples had

questioned Christ about His teaching on the Divinely sacred

relationship of marriage. And the account of His blessing of 'infants'

and 'little children' most aptly follows on the former teaching. It is

a scene of unspeakable sweetness and tenderness, where all is in

character - alas! even the conduct of the 'disciples' as we remember

their late inability to sympathise with the teaching of the Master.

And it is all so utterly unlike what Jewish legend would have invented

for its Messiah. We can understand how, when One Who so spake and

wrought, rested in the house, Jewish mothers should have brought their

'little children,' and some their 'infants,' to Him, that He might

'touch,' 'put His Hands on them, and pray.' What power and holiness

must these mothers have believed to be in His touch and prayer; what

life to be in, and to come from Him; and what gentleness and

tenderness must His have been, when they dared so to bring these

little ones! For, how utterly contrary it was to all Jewish notions,

and how incompatible with the supposed dignity of a Rabbi, appears

from the rebuke of the disciples. It was an occasion and an act when,

as the fuller and more pictorial account of St. Mark inform us, Jesus

'was much displeased' - the only time this strong word is used of our

Lord[4936]4936 - and said unto them: 'Suffer the little children to

come to Me,[4937]4937 hinder them not, for of such is the Kingdom of

God.' Then He gently reminded His own disciples of their grave error,

by repeating what they had apparently forgotten,[4938]4938 that, in

order to enter the Kingdom of God, it must be received as by a little

child - that here there could be no question of intellectual

qualification, nor of distinction due to a great Rabbi, but only of

humility, receptiveness, meekness, and a simple application to, and

trust in, the Christ. And so He folded these little ones in His Arms,

put His Hands upon them, and blessed them,[4939]4939 and thus for ever

consecrated that child-life, which a parent's love and faith brought

to Him; blessed it also by the laying-on of His Hands - as it were,

'ordained it,' as we fully believe to all time, 'strength because of

His enemies.'

CHAPTER XXIII.

THE LAST INCIDENTS IN PERÆA - THE YOUNG RULER WHO WENT AWAY

SORROWFUL - TO

LEAVE ALL FOR CHRIST - PROPHECY OF HIS PASSION - THE REQUEST OF

SALOME, AND

OF JAMES AND JOHN.

(St. Matt. xix. 16-22; St. Mark x. 17-22; St. Luke xviii. 18-23; St.

Matt. xix. 23-30; St. Mark x. 23-31; St. Luke xviii. 24-30; St. Matt.

xx. 17-19; St. Mark x. 32-34: St. Luke xviii. 31-34; St. Matt. xx.

20-28; St. Mark x. 35-45.)

As we near the goal, the wondrous story seems to grow in tenderness

and pathos. It is as if all the loving condescension of the Master

were to be crowded into these days; all the pressing need also, and

the human weaknesses of His disciples. And with equal compassion does

He look upon the difficulties of them who truly seek to come to Him,

and on those which, springing from without, or even from self and sin,

beset them who have already come. Let us try reverently to follow His

steps, and learn of His words.

As 'He was going forth into the way'[4940]4940 - we owe this trait, as

one and another in the same narrative, to St. Mark - probably at early

morn, as He left the house where He had for ever folded into His Arms

and blessed the children brought to Him by believing parents - His

progress was arrested. It was 'a young man,' 'a ruler,'[4941]4941

probably of the local Synagogue,[4942]4942 who came with all haste,

'running,' and with lowliest gesture [kneeling],[4943]4943 to ask what

to him, nay to us all, is the most important question. Remembering

that, while we owe to St. Mark the most graphic touches,[4944]4944 St.

Matthew most fully reports the words that had been spoken, we might

feel inclined to adopt that reading of them in St. Matthew[4945]4945

which is not only most strongly supported, but at first sight seems to

remove some of the difficulties of exposition. This reading would omit

in the address of the young ruler the word 'good' before 'Master, what

good thing shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?' and would make

Christ's reply read: 'Why askest thou Me concerning the good [that

which is good]? One there is Who is good.' This would meet not only

the objection, that in no recorded instance was a Jewish Rabbi

addressed as 'Good Master,' but the obvious difficulties connected

with the answer of Christ, according to the common reading: 'Why

callest thou Me good? none is good, save only One: God.' But on the

other side it must be urged, that the undoubted reading of the

question and answer in St. Mark's and St. Luke's Gospels agrees with

that of our Authorised Version, and hence that any difficulty of

exposition would not be removed, only shifted, while the reply of

Christ tallies far better with the words 'Good Master,' the

strangeness of such an address from Jewish lips giving only the more

reason for taking it up in the reply: 'Why callest thou Me good? none

is good save only One: God.' Lastly, the designation of God as the

only One 'good' agrees with one of the titles given Him in Jewish

writings: 'The Good One of the world' ({hebrew}).[4946]4946 [4947]4947

The actual question of the young Ruler is one which repeatedly occurs

in Jewish writings, as put to a Rabbi by his disciples. Amidst the

different answers given, we scarcely wonder that they also pointed to

observance of the Law. And the saying of Christ seems the more adapted

to the young Ruler when we recall this sentence from the Talmud:

'There is nothing else that is good but the Law.'[4948]4948 But here

again the similarity is only of form, not of substance. For, it will

be noticed, that, in the more full account by St. Matthew, Christ

leads the young Ruler upwards through the table of the prohibitions of

deeds to the first positive command of deed, and then, by a rapid

transition, to the substitution for the tenth commandment in its

negative form of this wider positive and all-embracing

command:[4949]4949 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' Any

Jewish 'Ruler,' but especially one so earnest, would have at once

answered a challenge on the first four commandments by 'Yes' - and

that not self-righteously, but sincerely, though of course in

ignorance of their real depth. And this was not the time for

lengthened discussion and instruction; only for rapid awakening, to

lead up, if possible, from earnestness and a heart-drawing towards the

master to real discipleship. Best here to start from what was admitted

as binding - the ten commandments - and to lead from that in them

which was least likely to be broken, step by step, upwards to that

which was most likely to awaken consciousness of sin.

And the young Ruler did not, as that other Pharisee, reply by trying

to raise a Rabbinic disputation over the 'Who is neighbour to

me?'[4950]4950 but in the sincerity of an honest heart answered that

he had kept - that is, so far as he knew them - 'all these things from

his youth.'[4951]4951 On this St. Matthew puts into his mouth the

question - 'What lack I yet?' Even if, like the other two Evangelists,

he had not reported it, we would have supplied this from what follows.

There is something intensely earnest, genuine, generous, even

enthusiastic, in the higher cravings of the soul in youth, when that

youth has not been poisoned by the breath of the world, or stricken

with the rottenness of vice. The soul longs for the true, the higher,

the better, and, even if strength fails of attainment, we still watch

with keen sympathy the form of the climber upwards. Much more must all

this have been the case with a Jewish youth, especially in those days;

one, besides, like this young Ruler, in whose case affluence of

circumstances not only allowed free play, but tended to draw out and

to give full scope to the finer feelings, and where wealth was joined

with religiousness and the service of a Synagogue. There was not in

him that pride of riches, nor the self-sufficiency which they so often

engender; nor the pride of conscious moral purity and aim after

righteousness before God and man; nor yet the pride of the Pharisee or

of the Synagogue-Ruler. What he had seen and heard of the Christ had

quickened to greatest intensity all in him that longed after God and

heaven, and had brought him in this supreme moral earnestness, lowly,

reverently, to the Feet of Him in Whom, as he felt, all perfectness

was, and from Whom all perfectness came. He had not been first drawn

to Christ, and thence to the pure, as were the publicans and sinners;

but, like so many - even as Peter, when in that hour of soul-agony he

said: 'To whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life,' - he

had been drawn to the pure and the higher, and therefore to Christ. To

some the way to Christ is up the Mount of Transfiguration, among the

shining Beings of another world; to some it is across dark Kedron,

down the deep Garden of Gethsemane with its agonies. What matters it,

if it equally lead to Him, and equally bring the sense of need and

experience of pardon to the seeker after the better, and the sense of

need and experience of holiness to the seeker after pardon?

And Jesus saw it all: down, through that intense upward look; inwards,

through that question, 'What lack I yet?' far deeper down than that

young man had ever seen into his own heart - even into depths of

weakness and need which he had never sounded, and which must be

filled, if he would enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus saw what he

lacked; and what He saw, He showed him. For, 'looking at him' in his

sincerity and earnestness, 'He loved him' - as He loves those that are

His Own. One thing was needful for this young man: that he should not

only become His disciple, but that, in so doing, he should 'come and

follow' Christ. We can all perceive how, for one like this young man,

such absolute and entire coming and following Christ was needful. And

again, to do this, it was in the then circumstances both of this young

man and of Christ necessary, that he should go and part with all that

he had. And what was an outward, was also, as we perceive it, an

inward necessity; and so, as ever, Providence and Grace would work

together. For, indeed, to many of us some outward step is often not

merely the means of but absolutely needful for, spiritual decision. To

some it is the first open profession of Christ; to others, the first

act of self-denial, or the first distinct 'No'-saying; to some, it may

be, it is the first prayer, or else the first act of

self-consecration. Yet it seems, as if it needed not only the word of

God but a stroke of some Moses'-rod to make the water gush forth from

the rock. And thus would this young Ruler have been 'perfect;' and

what he had given to the poor have become, not through merit nor by

way of reward, but really 'treasure in heaven.'[4952]4952

What he lacked - was earth's poverty and heaven's riches; a heart

fully set on following Christ: and this could only come to him through

willing surrender of all. And so this was to him alike the means, the

test, and the need. To him it was this; to us it may be something

quite other. Yet each of us has a lack - something quite deep down in

our hearts, which we may never yet have known, and which we must know

and give up, if we would follow Christ. And without forsaking, there

can be no following. This is the law of the Kingdom - and it is such,

because we are sinners, because sin is not only the loss of the good,

but the possession of something else in its place.

There is something deeply pathetic in the mode in which St. Mark

describes it: 'he was sad' - the word painting a dark gloom that

overshadowed the face of the young man.[4953]4953 Did he then not lack

it, this one thing? We need scarcely here recall the almost

extravagant language in which Rabbinism describes the miseries of

poverty;[4954]4954 we can understand his feelings without that. Such a

possibility had never entered his mind: the thought of it was terribly

startling. That he must come and follow Christ, then and there, and in

order to do so, sell all that he had and give it away among the poor,

and be poor himself, a beggar, that he might have treasure in heaven;

and that this should come to him as the one thing needful from that

Master in Whom he believed, from Whose lips he would learn the one

thing needful, and who but a little before had been to him the All in

All! It was a terrible surprise, a sentence of death to his life, and

of life to his death. And that it should come from His lips, at Whose

Feet he had run to kneel, and Who held for him the keys of eternal

life! Rabbinism had never asked this; if it demanded almsgiving, it

was in odious boastfulness;[4955]4955 while it was declared even

unlawful to give away all one's possessions[4956]4956 - at most, only

a fifth of them might be dedicated.[4957]4957

And so, with clouded face he gazed down into what he lacked - within;

but also gazed up in Christ on what he needed. And, although we hear

no more of him, who that day went back to his rich home very poor,

because 'very sorrowful,' we cannot but believe that he, whom Jesus

loved, yet found in the poverty of earth the treasure of heaven.

Nor was this all. The deep pity of Christ for him, who had gone that

day, speaks also in his warning to his disciples.[4958]4958 But surely

those are not only riches in the literal sense which make it so

difficult for a man to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven[4959]4959 - so

difficult, as to amount almost to that impossibility which was

expressed in the common Jewish proverb, that a man did not even in his

dreams see an elephant pass through the eye of a needle.[4960]4960 But

when in their perplexity the disciples put to each other the saddened

question: Who then can be saved? He pointed them onward, then upward,

as well as inward, teaching them that, what was impossible of

achievement by man in his own strength, God would work by His Almighty

Grace.

It almost jars on our ears, and prepares us for still stranger and

sadder to come, when Peter, perhaps as spokesman of the rest, seems to

remind the Lord that they had forsaken all to follow Him. St. Matthew

records also the special question which Simon added to it: 'What shall

we have therefore?' and hence his Gospel alone makes mention of the

Lord's reply, in so far as it applied only to the Apostles. For, that

reply really bore on two points: on the reward which all who left

everything to follow Christ would obtain;[4961]4961 and on the special

acknowledgment awaiting the Apostles of Christ.[4962]4962 In regard to

the former we mark, that it is twofold. They who had forsaken all 'for

His sake'[4963]4963 'and the Gospel's,'[4964]4964 'for the Kingdom of

God's sake' - and these three expressions explain and supplement each

other - would receive 'in this time' 'manifold more' of new, and

better, and closer relationships of a spiritual kind for those which

they had surrendered, although, as St. Mark significantly adds, to

prevent all possible mistakes, 'with persecutions.' But by the side of

this stands out unclouded and bright the promise for 'the world to

come' of 'everlasting life.' As regarded the Apostles personally, some

mystery lies on the special promise to them.[4965]4965 We could quite

understand, that the distinction of rule to be bestowed on them might

have been worded in language taken from the expectations of the time,

in order to make the promise intelligible to them. But, unfortunately,

we have no explanatory information to offer. The Rabbis, indeed, speak

of a renovation or regeneration of the world ({hebrew}) which was to

take place after the 7,000 or else 5,000 years of the Messianic

reign.[4966]4966 Such a renewal of all things is not only foretold by

the prophets,[4967]4967 and dwelt upon in later Jewish

writings,[4968]4968 but frequently referred to in Rabbinic

literature.[4969]4969 [4970]4970 But as regards the special rule or

'judgment' of the Apostles, or ambassadors of the Messiah, we have

not, and, of course, cannot expect any parallel in Jewish writings.

That the promise of such rule and judgment to the Apostles is not

peculiar to what is called the Judaic Gospel of St. Matthew, appears

from its renewal at a later period, as recorded by St. Luke.[4971]4971

Lastly, that it is in accordance with Old Testament promise, will be

seen by a reference to Dan. vii. 9, 10, 14, 27; and there are few

references in the New Testament to the blessed consummation of all

things in which such renewal of the world,[4972]4972 and even the rule

and judgment of the representatives of the Church,[4973]4973 are not

referred to.

However mysterious, therefore, in their details, these things seem

clear, and may without undue curiosity or presumption be regarded as

the teaching of our Lord: the renewal of earth; the share in His rule

and judgment which He will in the future give to His saints; the

special distinction which He will bestow on His Apostles,

corresponding to the special gifts, privileges, and rule with which He

had endowed them on earth, and to their nearness to, and their work

and sacrifices for Him; and, lastly, we may add, the preservation of

Israel as a distinct, probably tribal, nation.[4974]4974 As for the

rest, as so much else, it is 'behind the veil,' and, even as we see

it, better for the Church that the veil has not been further lifted.

The reference to the blessed future with its rewards was followed by a

Parable, recorded, as, with one exception, all of that series, only by

St. Matthew. It will best be considered in connection with the last

series of Christ's Parables.[4975]4975 But it was accompanied by what,

in the circumstances, was also a most needful warning.[4976]4976

Thoughts of the future Messianic reign, its glory, and their own part

in it might have so engrossed the minds of the disciples as to make

them forgetful of the terrible present, immediately before them. In

such case they might not only have lapsed into that most fatal Jewish

error of a Messiah-King, Who was not Saviour, the Crown without the

Cross, but have even suffered shipwreck of their faith, when the storm

broke on the Day of His Condemnation and Crucifixion. If ever, it was

most needful in that hour of elation to remind and forewarn them of

what was to be expected in the immediate future. How truly such

preparation was required by the disciples, appears from the narrative

itself.

There was something sadly mysterious in the words with which Christ

had closed His Parable, that the last should be first and the first

last[4977]4977 [4978]4978 - and it had carried dark misgivings to

those who heard it. And now it seemed all so strange! Yet the

disciples could not have indulged in illusions. His own sayings on at

least two previous occasions,[4979]4979 however ill or partially

understood, must have led them to expect at any rate grievous

opposition and tribulations in Jerusalem, and their endeavour to deter

Christ from going to Bethany to raise Lazarus proves, that they were

well aware of the danger which threatened the Master in

Judæa.[4980]4980 Yet not only 'was He now going up[4981]4981 to

Jerusalem,' but there was that in His bearing which was quite unusual.

As St. Mark writes, He was going 'before them' - we infer, apart and

alone, as One, busy with thoughts all engrossing, Who is setting

Himself to do His great work, and goes to meet it. 'And going before

them was Jesus; and they were amazed [utterly bewildered, viz. the

Apostles]; and those who were following, were afraid.'[4982]4982 It

was then that Jesus took the Apostles apart, and in language more

precise than ever before, told them how all things that were 'written

by the prophets shall be accomplished on the Son of Man'[4983]4983 -

not merely, that all that had been written concerning the Son of Man

should be accomplished, but a far deeper truth, all-comprehensive as

regards the Old Testament: that all its true prophecy ran up into the

sufferings of the Christ. As the three Evangelists report it, the Lord

gave them full details of His Betrayal, Crucifixion, and Resurrection.

And yet we may, without irreverence, doubt whether on that occasion He

had really entered into all those particulars. In such case it would

seem difficult to explain how, as St. Luke reports, 'they understood

none of these things, and the saying was hid from them, neither knew

they the things which were spoken;' and again, how afterwards the

actual events and the Resurrection could have taken them so by

surprise. Rather do we think, that the Evangelists report what Jesus

had said in the light of after-events. He did tell them of His

Betrayal by the leaders of Israel, and that into the hands of the

Gentiles; of His Death and Resurrection on the third day - yet in

language which they could, and actually did, misunderstand at the

time, but which, when viewed in the light of what really happened, was

perceived by them to have been actual prediction of those terrible

days in Jerusalem and of the Resurrection-morning. At the time they

may have thought that it pointed only to His rejection by Jews and

Gentiles, to Sufferings and Death - and then to a Resurrection, either

of His Mission or to such a reappearance of the Messiah, after His

temporary disappearance, as Judaism expected.

But all this time, and with increasing fierceness, were terrible

thoughts contending in the breast of Judas; and beneath the tramp of

that fight was there only a thin covering of earth, to hide and keep

from bursting forth the hellish fire of the master-passion within.

One other incident, more strange and sad than any that had preceded,

and the Peræan stay is for ever ended. It almost seems, as if the

fierce blast of temptation, the very breath of the destroyer, were

already sweeping over the little flock, as if the twilight of the

night of betrayal and desertion were already falling around. And now

it has fallen on the two chosen disciples, James and John - 'the sons

of thunder,' and one of them, 'the beloved disciple!' Peter, the third

in that band most closely bound to Christ, had already had his fierce

temptation,[4984]4984 and would have it more fiercely - to the

uprooting of life, if the Great High-Priest had not specially

interceded for him. And, as regards these two sons of Zebedee and of

Salome,[4985]4985 we know what temptation had already beset them, how

John had forbidden one to cast out devils, because he followed not

with them,[4986]4986 and how both he and his brother, James, would

have called down fire from heaven to consume the Samaritans who would

not receive Christ.[4987]4987 It was essentially the same spirit that

now prompted the request which their mother Salome

preferred,[4988]4988 not only with their full concurrence, but, as we

are expressly told,[4989]4989 with their active participation. There

is the same faith in the Christ, the same allegiance to Him, but also

the same unhallowed earnestness, the same misunderstanding - and, let

us add, the same latent self-exaltation, as in the two former

instances, in the present request that, as the most honoured of His

guests, and also as the nearest to Him, they might have their places

at His Right Hand and at His Left in His Kingdom.[4990]4990 Terribly

incongruous as is any appearance of self-seeking at that moment and

with that prospect before them, we cannot but feel that there is also

an intenseness of faith and absoluteness of love almost sublime, when

the mother steps forth from among those who follow Christ to His

Suffering and Death, to proffer such a request with her sons, and for

them.

And so the Saviour seems to have viewed it. With unspeakable patience

and tenderness, He, Whose Soul is filled with the terrible contest

before Him, bears with the weakness and selfishness which could

cherish such thoughts and ambitions even at such a time. To correct

them, He points to that near prospect, when the Highest is to be made

low. 'Ye know not what ye ask!' The King is to be King through

suffering - are they aware of the road which leads to that goal? Those

nearest to the King of sorrows must reach the place nearest to Him by

the same road as He. Are they prepared for it; prepared to drink that

cup of soul-agony, which the Father will hand to Him - to submit to,

to descend into that baptism of consecration, when the floods will

sweep over Him?[4991]4991 In their ignorance, and listening only to

the promptings of their hearts, they imagine that they are. Nay, in

some measure it would be so; yet, finally to correct their mistake: to

sit at His Right and at His Left Hand, these were not marks of mere

favour for Him to bestow - in His own words: it 'is not Mine to give

except to them for whom it is prepared of My Father.'

But as for the other ten, when they heard of it, it was only the

pre-eminence which, in their view, James and John had sought, which

stood out before them, to their envy, jealousy, and

indignation.[4992]4992 And so, in that tremendously solemn hour would

the fierce fire of controversy have broken out among them, who should

have been most closely united; would jealousy and ambition have filled

those who should have been most humble, and fierce passions, born of

self, the world and Satan, have distracted them, whom the thought of

the great love and the great sacrifice should have filled. It was the

rising of that storm on the sea, the noise and tossing of those angry

billows, which He hushed into silence when He spoke to them of the

grand contrast between the princes of the Gentiles as they 'lord it

over them,' or the 'great among them' as they 'domineer'[4993]4993

over men, and their own aims - how, whosoever would be great among

them, must seek his greatness in service - not greatness through

service, but the greatness of service; and, whosever would be chief or

rather 'first' among them, let it be in service. And had it not been

thus, was it not, would it not be so in the Son of Man - and must it

not therefore be so in them who would be nearest to Him, even His

Apostles and disciples? The Son of Man - let them look back, let them

look forward - He came not to be ministered unto, but to minister. And

then, breaking through the reserve that had held Him, and revealing to

them the inmost thoughts which had occupied Him when He had been alone

and apart, going before them on the way, He spoke for the first time

fully what was the deepest meaning of His Life, Mission, and Death:

'to give His Life a ransom for many'[4994]4994 [4995]4995 - to pay

with His Life-Blood the price of their redemption, to lay down His

Life for them: in their room and stead, and for their salvation.

These words must have sunk deep into the heart of one at least in that

company.[4996]4996 A few days later, and the beloved disciple tells us

of this Ministry of His Love at the Last Supper,[4997]4997 and ever

afterwards, in his writings or in his life, does he seem to bear them

about with him, and to re-echo them. Ever since also have they

remained the foundation-truth, on which the Church has been built: the

subject of her preaching, and the object of her experience.[4998]4998

CHAPTER XXIV.

IN JERICHO AND AT BETHANY - JERICHO - A GUEST WITH ZACCHÆUS - THE

HEALING OF

BLIND BARTIMÆUS - THE PLOT AT JERUSALEM - AT BETHANY, AND IN THE

HOUSE OF

SIMON THE LEPER

(St. Luke xix. 1-10; St. Matt. xx. 29-34; St. Mark x. 46-52; St. Luke

xviii. 35-43; St. John xi. 55-xii. 1; St. Matt. xxvi. 6-13; St. Mark

xiv. 3-9; St. John xii. 2-11.)

ONCE more, and now for the last time, were the fords of Jordan passed,

and Christ was on the soil of Judæa proper. Behind Him were Peræa and

Galilee; behind Him the Ministry of the Gospel by Word and Deed;

before Him the final Act of His Life, towards which all had

consciously tended. Rejected as the Messiah of His people, not only in

His Person but as regarded the Kingdom of God, which, in fulfilment of

prophecy and of the merciful Counsel of God, He had come to establish,

He was of set purpose going up to Jerusalem, there to accomplish His

Decease, 'to give His Life a Ransom for many.' And He was coming, not,

as at the Feast of Tabernacles, privately, but openly, at the head of

His Apostles, and followed by many disciples - a festive band going up

to the Paschal Feast, of which Himself was to be 'the Lamb' of

sacrifice.

The first station reached was Jericho, the 'City of Palms,' a distance

of only about six hours from Jerusalem. The ancient City occupied not

the site of the present wretched hamlet, but lay about half an hour to

the north-west of it, by the so-called Elisha-Spring. A second spring

rose an hour further to the north-north-west. The water of these

springs, distributed by aqueducts, gave, under a tropical sky,

unsurpassed fertility to the rich soil along the 'plain' of Jericho,

which is about twelve or fourteen miles wide. The Old Testament

history of the 'City of Palms' is sufficiently known. It was here also

that King Zedekiah had, on his flight, been seized by the

Chaldeans,[4999]4999 and thither a company of 345 men returned under

Zerubbabel.[5000]5000 In the war of liberation under the Maccabees the

Syrians had attempted to fortify Jericho.[5001]5001 These forts were

afterwards destroyed by Pompey in his campaign. Herod the Great had

first plundered, and then partially rebuilt, fortified, and adorned

Jericho. It was here that he died.[5002]5002 His son Archelaus also

built there a palace. At the time of which we write, it was, of

course, under Roman dominion. Long before, it had recovered its

ancient fame for fertility and its prosperity. Josephus describes it

as the richest part of the country, and calls it a little Paradise.

Antony had bestowed the revenues of its balsam-plantations as an

Imperial gift upon Cleopatra, who in turn sold them to Herod. Here

grew palm-trees of various kinds, sycamores, the

cypress-flower,[5003]5003 the myrobalsamum, which yielded precious

oil, but especially the balsam-plant. If to these advantages of

climate, soil, and productions we add, that it was, so to speak, the

key of Judæa towards the east, that it lay on the caravan-road from

Damascus and Arabia, that it was a great commercial and military

centre, and lastly, its nearness to Jerusalem, to which it formed the

last 'station' on the road of the festive pilgrims from Galilee and

Peræa - it will not be difficult to understand either its importance

or its prosperity.

We can picture to ourselves the scene, as our Lord on that afternoon

in early spring beheld it. There it was, indeed, already summer, for,

as Josephus tells us,[5004]5004 even in winter the inhabitants could

only bear the lightest clothing of linen. We are approaching it from

the Jordan. It is protected by walls, flanked by four forts. These

walls, the theatre, and the amphitheatre, have been built by Herod;

the new palace and its splendid gardens are the work of Archelaus. All

around wave groves of feathery palms, rising in stately beauty;

stretch gardens of roses, and especially sweet-scented

balsam-plantations, the largest behind the royal gardens, of which the

perfume is carried by the wind almost out to sea, and which may have

given to the city its name (Jericho, 'the perfumed'). It is the Eden

of Palestine, the very fairyland of the old world. And how strangely

is this gem set! Deep down in that hollowed valley, through which

tortuous Jordan winds, to lose his waters in the slimy mass of the Sea

of Judgment. The river and the Dead Sea are nearly equidistant from

the town, about six miles. Far across the river rise the mountains of

Moab, on which lies the purple and violet colouring. Towards Jerusalem

and northwards stretch those bare limestone hills, the hiding-place of

robbers along the desolate road towards the City. There, and in the

neighbouring wilderness of Judæa, are also the lonely dwellings of

anchorites, while over all this strangely varied scene has been flung

the many-coloured mantle of a perpetual summer. And in the streets of

Jericho a motley throng meets: pilgrims from Galilee and Peræa,

priests who have a 'station' here, traders from all lands, who have

come to purchase or to sell, or are on the great caravan-road from

Arabia and Damascus - robbers and anchorites, wild fanatics, soldiers,

courtiers, and busy publicans - for Jericho was the central station

for the collection of tax and custom, both on native produce and on

that brought from across Jordan. And yet it was a place for dreaming

also, under that glorious summer-sky, in those scented groves - when

these many figures from far-off lands and that crowd of priests,

numbering, according to tradition, half those in Jerusalem,[5005]5005

seemed fleeting as in a vision, and (as Jewish legend had it) the

sound of Temple-music came from Moriah, borne in faint echoes on the

breeze, like the distant sound of many waters.[5006]5006

It was through Jericho that Jesus, 'having entered,' was

passing.[5007]5007 [5008]5008 Tidings of the approach of the festive

band, consisting of His disciples and Apostles, and headed by the

Master Himself, must have preceded Him, these six miles from the fords

of Jordan. His Name, His Works, His Teaching - perhaps Himself, must

have been known to the people of Jericho, just as they must have been

aware of the feelings of the leaders of the people, perhaps of the

approaching great contest between them and the Prophet of Nazareth.

Was He a good man; had He wrought those great miracles in the power of

God or by Satanic influence - was He the Messiah or the Antichrist;

would He bring salvation to the world, or entail ruin on His own

nation? Conquer or be destroyed? Was it only one more in the long list

of delusions and illusions, or was the long-promised morning of

heaven's own day at last to break? Close by was Bethany, whence

tidings had come; most incredible yet unquestioned and unquestionable,

of the raising of Lazarus, so well known to all in that neighbourhood.

And yet the Sanhedrin - it was well known - had resolved on His death!

At any rate there was no concealment about Him; and here, in face of

all, and accompanied by His followers - humble and unlettered, it must

be admitted, but thoroughly convinced of His superhuman claims, and

deeply attached - Jesus was going up to Jerusalem to meet His enemies!

It was the custom, when a festive band passed through a place, that

the inhabitants gathered in the streets to bid their brethren welcome.

And on that afternoon, surely, scarce any one in Jericho but would go

forth to see this pilgrim-band. Men - curious, angry, half-convinced;

women, holding up their babes, it may be for a passing blessing, or

pushing forward their children that in after years they might say they

had seen the Prophet of Nazareth; traders, soldiers, a solid wall of

onlookers before their gardens was this 'crowd' along the road by

which Jesus 'was to pass.' Would He only pass through the place, or be

the guest of some of the leading priests in Jericho; would He teach,

or work any miracle, or silently go on His way to Bethany? Only one in

all that crowd seemed unwelcome; alone, and out of place. It was the

'chief of the Publicans' - the head of the tax and customs department.

As his name shows, he was a Jew; but yet that very name Zacchæus,

'Zakkai,' 'the just,' or 'pure,' sounded like mockery. We know in what

repute Publicans were held, and what opportunities of wrong-doing and

oppression they possessed. And from his after-confession it is only

too evident, that Zacchæus had to the full used them for evil. And he

had got that for which he had given up alike his nation and his soul:

'he was rich.' If, as Christ had taught, it was harder for any rich

man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than for a camel to pass through

the eye of a needle, what of him who had gotten his riches by such

means?

And yet Zacchæus was in the crowd that had come to see Jesus. What had

brought him? Certainly, not curiosity only. Was it the long working of

conscience; or a dim, scarcely self-avowed hope of something better;

or had he heard Him before; or of Him, that He was so unlike those

harsh leaders and teachers of Israel, who refused all hope on earth

and in heaven to such as him, that Jesus received - nay, called to Him

the publicans and sinners? Or was it only the nameless, deep,

irresistible inward drawing of the Holy Ghost, which may perhaps have

brought us, as it has brought many, we know not why or how, to the

place and hour of eternal decision for God, and of infinite grace to

our souls? Certain it is, that, as so often in such circumstances,

Zacchæus encountered only hindrances which seemed to render his

purpose almost impossible. The narrative is singularly detailed and

pictorial. Zacchæus, trying to push his way through 'the press,' and

repulsed; Zacchæus, 'little of stature,' and unable to look over the

shoulders of others: it reads almost like a symbolical story of one

who is seeking 'to see Jesus,' but cannot push his way because of the

crowd - whether of the self-righteous, or of his own conscious sins,

that seem to stand between him and the Saviour, and which will not

make room for him, while he is unable to look over them because he is,

so to speak, 'little of stature.'

Needless questions have been asked as to the import of Zacchæus' wish

'to see who Jesus was.' It is just this vagueness of desire, which

Zacchæus himself does not understand, which is characteristic. And,

since he cannot otherwise succeed, he climbs up one of those

wide-spreading sycamores in a garden, perhaps close to his own house,

along the only road by which Jesus can pass - 'to see Him.' Now the

band is approaching, through that double living wall: first, the

Saviour, viewing that crowd, with, ah! how different thoughts from

theirs - surrounded by His Apostles, the face of each expressive of

such feelings as were uppermost; conspicuous among them, he who

'carried the bag,' with furtive, uncertain, wild glance here and

there, as one who seeks to gather himself up to a terrible deed.

Behind them are the disciples, men and women, who are going up with

Him to the Feast. Of all persons in that crowd the least noted, the

most hindered in coming - and yet the one most concerned, was the

Chief Publican. It is always so - it is ever the order of the Gospel,

that the last shall be first. Yet never more self-unconscious was

Zacchæus than at the moment when Jesus was entering that garden-road,

and passing under the overhanging branches of that sycamore, the crowd

closing up behind, and following as He went along. Only one thought -

without ulterior conscious object, temporal or spiritual - filled his

whole being. The present absolutely held him - when those wondrous

Eyes, out of which heaven itself seemed to look upon earth, were

upturned, and that Face of infinite grace, never to be forgotten,

beamed upon him the welcome of recognition, and He uttered the

self-spoken invitation in which the invited was the real Inviter, the

guest the true Host. Did Jesus know Zacchæus before - or was it only

all open to His Divine gaze as 'He looked up and saw him?' This latter

seems, indeed, indicated by the 'must' of His abiding in the house of

Zacchæus - as if His Father had so appointed it, and Jesus come for

that very purpose. And herein, also, seems this story spiritually

symbolical.

As bidden by Christ, Zacchæus 'made haste and came down.' Under the

gracious influence of the Holy Ghost he 'received Him rejoicing.'

Nothing was as yet clear to him, and yet all was joyous within his

soul. In that dim twilight of the new day, and at this new creation,

the Angels sang and the Sons of God shouted together, and all was

melody and harmony in his heart. But a few steps farther, and they

were at the house of the Chief Publican. Strange hostelry this for the

Lord; yet not stranger in that Life of absolute contrasts than that

first hostelry, the same, even as regards its designation in the

Gospel,[5009]5009 as when the manager had been His cradle; not so

strange, as at the Sabbath-feast of the Pharisee Rulers of the

Synagogue. But now the murmur of disappointment and anger ran through

the accompanying crowd - which perhaps had not before heard what had

passed between Jesus and the Publican, certainly, had not understood,

or else not believed its import - because He was gone to be guest with

a man that was a sinner. Oh, terribly fatal misunderstanding of all

that was characteristic of the Mission of the Christ! oh, terribly

fatal blindness and jealousy! But it was this sudden shock of

opposition which awoke Zacchæus to full consciousness. The hands so

rudely and profanely thrust forward only served to rend the veil. It

often needs some such sudden shock of opposition, some sudden sharp

contest, to waken the new convert to full consciousness, to bring

before him, in clear outline, alike the past and the present. In that

moment Zacchæus saw it all: what his past had been, what his present

was, what his future must be. Standing forth, not so much before the

crowd as before the Lord, and not ashamed, nay, scarcely conscious of

the confession it implied - so much is the sorrow of the past in true

repentance swallowed up by the joy of the present - Zacchæus vowed

fourfold restoration, as by a thief,[5010]5010 of what had become his

through false accusation,[5011]5011 as well as the half of all his

goods to the poor. And so the whole current of his life had been

turned, in those few moments, through his joyous reception of Christ,

the Saviour of sinners; and Zacchæus the public robber, the rich Chief

of the Publicans, had become an almsgiver.

It was then, when it had been all done in silence, as mostly all God's

great works, that Jesus spake it to him, for his endless comfort, and

in the hearing of all, for their and our teaching: 'This day became -

arose - there salvation to this house,' 'forasmuch as,' truly and

spiritually, 'this one also is a son of Abraham.' And, as regards this

man, and all men, so long as time endureth: 'For the Son of Man came

to seek and to save that which was lost.'

The Evangelistic record passes with significant silence over that

night in the house of Zacchæus. It forms not part of the public

history of the Kingdom of God, but of that joy with which a stranger

intermeddleth not. It was in the morning, when the journey in company

with His disciples was resumed, that the next public incident occurred

in the healing of the blind by the wayside.[5012]5012 The small

divergences in the narratives of the three Evangelists are well known.

It may have been that, as St. Matthew relates, there were two blind

men sitting by the wayside, and that St. Luke and St. Mark mention

only one - the latter by name as 'Bar Timæus' - because he was the

spokesman. But, in regard to the other divergence, trifling as it is,

that St. Luke places the incident at the arrival, the other two

Evangelists at the departure of Jesus from Jericho, it is better to

admit our inability to conciliate these differing notes of time, than

to make clumsy attempts at harmonising them. We can readily believe

that there may have been circumstances unknown to us, which might show

these statements to be not really diverging. And, if it were

otherwise, it would in no way affect the narrative itself. Historical

information could only have been derived from local sources; and we

have already seen reason to infer that St. Luke had gathered his from

personal inquiry on the spot. And it may have been, either that the

time was not noted, or wrongly noted, or that this miracle, as the

only one in Jericho, may have been reported to him before mention was

made of the reception by Christ of Zacchæus. In any case, it shows the

independence of the account of St. Luke from that of the other two

Evangelists.

Little need be said of the incident itself: it is so like the other

Deeds of His Life. So to speak - it was left in Jericho as the

practical commentary, and the seal on what Christ had said and done

the previous evening in regard to Zacchæus. Once more the crowd was

following Jesus, as in the morning He resumed the journey with His

disciples. And, there by the wayside, begging, sat the blind men -

there, where Jesus was passing. As they heard the tramp of many feet

and the sound of many voices, they learned that Jesus of Nazareth was

passing by. It is all deeply touching, and deeply symbolical. But what

must their faith have been, when there, in Jericho, they not only

owned Him as the true Messiah, but cried - in the deep significance of

that special mode of address, as coming from Jewish lips:[5013]5013

'Jesus, Thou Son of David, have mercy on me!' It was quite in

accordance with what one might almost have expected - certainly with

the temper of Jericho, as we learned it on the previous evening, when

'many,' the 'multitude,' 'they which went before,' would have bidden

that cry for help be silent as an unwarrantable intrusion and

interruption, if not a needless and meaningless application. But only

all the louder and more earnest rose the cry, as the blind felt that

they might for ever be robbed of the opportunity that was slipping

past. And He, Who listens to every cry of distress, heard this. He

stood still, and commanded the blind to be called. Then it was that

the sympathy of sudden hope seized the 'multitude' the wonder about to

be wrought fell, so to speak, in its heavenly influences upon them, as

they comforted the blind in the agony of rising despair with the

words, 'He calleth thee.'[5014]5014 As so often, we are indebted to

St. Mark for the vivid sketch of what passed. We can almost see

Bartimæus as, on receiving Christ's summons, he casts aside his upper

garment and hastily comes. That question: what he would that Jesus

should do unto him, must have been meant for those around more than

for the blind. The cry to the son of David had been only for mercy. It

might have been for alms - though, as the address, so the gift

bestowed in answer, would be right royal - 'after the order of David.'

But our general cry for mercy must ever become detailed when we come

into the Presence of the Christ. And the faith of the blind rose to

the full height of the Divine possibilities opened before them. Their

inward eyes had received capacity for The Light, before that of earth

lit up their long darkness. In the language of St. Matthew, 'Jesus had

compassion on them and touched their eyes.' This is one aspect of it.

The other is that given by St. Mark and St. Luke, in recording the

words with which He accompanied the healing: 'Thy faith has saved

thee.'[5015]5015

And these two results came of it: 'all the people, when they saw it

gave praise unto God;' and, as for Bartimæus, though Jesus had bidden

him 'go thy way,' yet, 'immediately he received his sight,' he

'followed Jesus in the way,' glorifying God.[5016]5016 And this is

Divine disobedience, or rather the obedience of the spirit as against

the observance of the letter.[5017]5017

The arrival of the Paschal band from Galilee and Peræa was not in

advance of many others. In truth, most pilgrims from a distance would

probably come to the Holy City some days before the Feast, for the

sake of purification in the Temple, since those who for any reason

needed such - and there would be few families that did not require it

- generally deferred it till the festive season brought them to

Jerusalem. We owe this notice, and that which follows, to St.

John,[5018]5018 and in this again recognise the Jewish writer of the

Fourth Gospel. It was only natural that these pilgrims should have

sought for Jesus, and, when they did not find Him, discuss among

themselves the probability of His coming to the Feast. His absence

would, after the work which He had done these three years, the claim

which He made, and the defiant denial of it by the priesthood and the

Sanhedrin, have been regarded as a virtual surrender to the enemy.

There was a time when He need not have appeared at the Feast - when,

as we see it, it was better He should not come. But that time was

past. The chief priests and the Pharisees also knew it, and they 'had

given commandment that, if any one knew where He was, he would show

it, that they might take Him.' It would be better to ascertain where

He lodged, and to seize Him before He appeared in public, in the

Temple.

But it was not as they had imagined. Without concealment Christ came

to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom He had raised from the dead. He

came there six days before the Passover - and yet His coming was such

that they could not 'take Him.'[5019]5019 They might as well take Him

in the Temple; nay, more easily. For, the moment His stay in Bethany

became known, 'much people[5020]5020 of the Jews' came out, not only

for His sake, but to see that Lazarus whom He had raised from the

dead. And, of those who so came, many went away believing. And how,

indeed, could it be otherwise? Thus one of their plans was frustrated,

and the evil seemed only to grow worse. The Sanhedrin could perhaps

not be moved to such flagrant outrage of all Jewish Law, but 'the

chief priests,' who had no such scruples, consulted how they might put

Lazarus also to death.[5021]5021

Yet, not until His hour had come could man do aught against Christ or

His disciples. And, in contrast to such scheming, haste and search, we

mark the majestic calm and quiet of Him Who knew what was before Him.

Jesus had arrived at Bethany six days before the Passover - that is,

on a Friday.[5022]5022 The day after was the Sabbath, and 'they made

Him a supper.'[5023]5023 It was the special festive meal of the

Sabbath. The words of St. John seem to indicate that the meal was a

public one, as if the people of Bethany had combined to do Him this

honour, and so share the privilege of attending the feast. In point of

fact, we know from St. Matthew and St. Mark that it took place 'in the

house of Simon the Leper' - not, of course, an actual leper - but one

who had been such. Perhaps his guestchamber was the largest in

Bethany; perhaps the house was nearest to the Synagogue; or there may

have been other reasons for it, unknown to us - least likely is the

suggestion that Simon was the husband of Martha,[5024]5024 or else her

father.[5025]5025 But all is in character. Among the guests is

Lazarus: and, prominent in service, Martha; and Mary (the unnamed

woman of the other two Gospels, which do not mention that household by

name), is also true to her character.[5026]5026 She had 'an

alabaster'[5027]5027 of 'spikenard genuine,' which was very precious.

It held 'a litra' ({hebrew} or {hebrew}) which was a 'Roman pound,'

and its value could not have been less than nearly 9l. Remembering the

price of Nard,[5028]5028 as given by Pliny,[5029]5029 and that the

Syrian was only next in value to the Indian, which Pliny regarded as

the best[5030]5030 ointment of 'genuine'[5031]5031 Nard -

unadulterated and unmixed with any other balsam[5032]5032 (as the less

expensive kinds were), such a price (300 dinars = nearly 9l.) would be

by no means excessive; indeed, much lower than at Rome. But, viewed in

another light, the sum spent was very large, remembering that 200

dinars (about 6l.) nearly sufficed to provide bread for 5,000 men with

their families, and that the ordinary wages of a labourer amounted to

only one dinar a day.

We can here offer only conjectures, But it is, at least, not

unreasonable to suppose - remembering the fondness of Jewish women for

such perfumes[5033]5033 - that Mary may have had that 'alabaster' of

very costly ointment from olden days, before she had learned to serve

Christ. Then, when she came to know Him, and must have learned how

constantly that Decease, of which He ever spoke, was before His Mind,

she may have put it aside, 'kept it,' 'against the day of His

burying.' And now the decisive hour had come. Jesus may have told her,

as He had told the disciples, what was before Him in Jerusalem at the

Feast, and she would be far more quick to understand, even as she must

have known far better than they, how great was the danger from the

Sanhedrin. And it is this believing apprehension of the mystery of His

Death on her part, and this preparation of deepest love for it - this

mixture of sorrow, faith, and devotion - which made her deed so

precious, that, wherever in the future the Gospel would be preached,

this also that she had done would be recorded for a memorial of

her.[5034]5034 And the more we think of it, the better can we

understand, how at that last feast of fellowship, when all the other

guests realised not - no, not even His disciples - how near the end

was, she would 'come aforehand to anoint His Body for the

burying.'[5035]5035 [5036]5036 Her faith made it a twofold anointing:

that of the best Guest at the last feast, and that of preparation for

that Burial which, of all others, she apprehended as so terribly near.

And deepest humility now offered, what most earnest love had provided,

and intense faith, in view of what was coming, applied. And so she

poured the precious ointment over His Head, over His Feet[5037]5037 -

then, stooping over them, wiped them with her hair, as if, not only in

evidence of service and love, but in fellowship of His

Death.[5038]5038 'And the house was filled'- and to all time His

House, the Church, is filled - 'with the odour of the ointment.'

It is ever the light which throws the shadows of objects - and this

deed of faith and love now cast the features of Judas in gigantic dark

outlines against the scene. He knew the nearness of Christ's Betrayal,

and hated the more; she knew of the nearness of His precious Death,

and loved the more. It was not that he cared for the poor, when,

taking the mask of charity, he simulated anger that such costly

ointment had not been sold, and the price given to the poor. For he

was essentially dishonest, 'a thief,' and covetousness was the

underlying master-passion of his soul. The money, claimed for the

poor, would only have been used by himself. Yet such was his pretence

of righteousness, such his influence as 'a man of prudence' among the

disciples, and such their sad weakness, that they, or at least

'some,'[5039]5039 expressed indignation among themselves and against

her who had done the deed of love, which, when viewed in the

sublimeness of a faith, that accepted and prepared for the death of a

Saviour Whom she so loved, and to Whom this last, the best service she

could, was to be devoted, would for ever cause her to be though of as

an example of loving. There is something inexpressibly sad, yet so

patient, gentle, and tender in Christ's 'Let her alone.' Surely, never

could there be waste in ministry of love to Him! Nay, there is

unspeakable pathos in what He says of His near Burying, as if He would

still their souls in view of it. That He, Who was ever of the poor and

with them, Who for our sakes became poor, that through His poverty we

might be made rich, should have to plead for a last service of love to

Himself, and for Mary, and as against a Judas, seems indeed, the depth

of self-abasement. Yet, even so, has this falsely-spoken plea for the

poor become a real plea, since He has left us this, as it were, as His

last charge, and that by His own Death, that we have the poor always

with us. And so do even the words of covetous dishonesty become, when

passing across Him, transformed into the command of charity, and the

breath of hell is changed into the summer-warmth of the Church's

constant service to Christ in the ministry to His poor.

Book V.

THE CROSS AND THE CROWN.

'Ave, Scala peccatorum,

Qua ascendit rex coelorum,

Ut ad choros Angelorum

Homo sic ascenderet;

In te vitam reparavit

Auctor vitæ, proles David,

Et sic se humiliavit.

Ut mundum redimeret.

Ap. Daniel, Thes. Hymnol. vol. v. p. 183.

'The blessing from the cloud that showers,

In wondrous twofold birth

Of heaven is and earth -

He is both yours, ye hosts, and ours:

Hosannah, David's Son,

For victory is won!

He left us with a blessing here,

And took it to the sky;

The blessing from on high

Bespeaks to us His Presence near:

Hosannah, David's Son,

For victory is won!'

(From an Ascension Hymn). - A. E.

CHAPTER I.

THE FIRST DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - PALM-SUNDAY - THE ROYAL ENTRY INTO

JERUSALEM

(St. Matt. xxi. 1-11; St. Mark xi. 1-11; St. Luke xix. 29-44; St. John

xii. 12-19.)

At length the time of the end had come. Jesus was about to make Entry

into Jerusalem as King: King of the Jews, as Heir of David's royal

line, with all of symbolic, typic, and prophetic import attaching to

it. Yet not as Israel after the flesh expected its Messiah was the Son

of David to make triumphal entrance, but as deeply and significantly

expressive of His Mission and Work, and as of old the rapt seer had

beheld afar off the outlined picture of the Messiah-King: not in the

proud triumph of war-conquests, but in the 'meek' rule of peace.

It is surely one of the strangest mistakes of modern criticism to

regard this Entry of Christ into Jerusalem as implying that, fired by

enthusiasm, He had for the moment expected that the people would

receive Him as the Messiah.[5040]5040 And it seems little, if at all

better, when this Entry is described as 'an apparent concession to the

fevered expectations of His disciples and the multitude . . . the

grave, sad accommodation to thoughts other than His own to which the

Teacher of new truths must often have recourse when He finds Himself

misinterpreted by those who stand together on a lower

level.'[5041]5041 'Apologies' are the weakness of 'Apologetics' - and

any 'accommodation' theory can have no place in the history of the

Christ. On the contrary, we regard His Royal Entry into the Jerusalem

of Prophecy and of the Crucifixion as an integral part of the history

of Christ, which would not be complete, nor thoroughly consistent,

without it. It behoved Him so to enter Jerusalem, because He was a

King; and as King to enter it in such manner, because He was such a

King - and both the one and the other were in accordance with the

prophecy of old.

It was a bright day in early spring of the year 29, when the festive

procession set out from the home at Bethany. There can be no

reasonable doubt as to the locality of that hamlet (the modern

El-'Azariye, 'of Lazarus'), perched on a broken rocky plateau on the

other side of Olivet. More difficulty attaches to the identification

of Bethphage, which is associated with it, the place not being

mentioned in the Old Testament, though repeatedly in Jewish writings.

But, even so, there is a curious contradiction, since Bethphage is

sometimes spoken of as distinct from Jerusalem,[5042]5042 while at

others it is described as, for ecclesiastical purposes, part of the

City itself.[5043]5043 Perhaps the name Bethphage - 'house of figs' -

was given alike to that district generally, and to a little village

close to Jerusalem where the district began.[5044]5044 And this may

explain the peculiar reference, in the Synoptic Gospels, to Bethphage

(St. Matthew), and again to 'Bethphage and Bethany.'[5045]5045 For,

St. Matthew and St. Mark relate Christ's brief stay at Bethany and His

anointing by Mary not in chronological order,[5046]5046 but introduce

it at a later period, as it were, in contrast to the betrayal of

Judas.[5047]5047 Accordingly, they pass from the Miracles at Jericho

immediately to the Royal Entry into Jerusalem - from Jericho to

'Bethphage,' or, more exactly, to 'Bethphage and Bethany,' leaving for

the present unnoticed what had occurred in the latter hamlet.

Although all the four Evangelists relate Christ's Entry into

Jerusalem, they seem to do so from different standpoints. The

Synoptists accompany Him from Bethany, while St. John, in accordance

with the general scheme of his narrative, seems to follow from

Jerusalem that multitude which, on tidings of His approach, hastened

to meet Him. Even this circumstance, as also the paucity of events

recorded on that day, proves that it could not have been at early

morning that Jesus left Bethany. Remembering, that it was the last

morning of rest before the great contest, we may reverently think of

much that may have passed in the Soul of Jesus and in the home of

Bethany. And now He has left that peaceful resting-place. It was

probably soon after His outset, that He sent the 'two disciples' -

possibly Peter and John[5048]5048 - into 'the village over against'

them - presumably Bethphage. There they would find by the side of the

road an ass's colt tied, whereon never man had sat. We mark the

significant symbolism of the latter, in connection with the general

conditions of consecration to Jehovah[5049]5049 - and note in it, as

also in the Mission of the Apostles, that this was intended by Christ

to be His Royal and Messianic Entry. This colt they were to loose and

to bring to Him.

The disciples found all as He had said. When they reached Bethphage,

they saw, by a doorway where two roads met, the colt tied by its

mother. As they loosed it, 'the owners' and 'certain of them that

stood by'[5050]5050 asked their purpose, to which, as directed by the

Master, they answered: 'The Lord [the Master, Christ] hath need of

him,' when, as predicted, no further hindrance was offered. In

explanation of this we need not resort to the theory of a miraculous

influence, nor even suppose that the owners of the colt were

themselves 'disciples.' Their challenge to 'the two,' and the little

more than permission which they gave, seem to forbid this idea. Nor is

such explanation requisite. From the pilgrim-band which had

accompanied Jesus from Galilee and Peræa, and preceded Him to

Jerusalem, from the guests at the Sabbath-feast in Bethany, and from

the people who had gone out to see both Jesus and Lazarus, the tidings

of the proximity of Jesus and of His approaching arrival must have

spread in the City. Perhaps that very morning some had come from

Bethany, and told it in the Temple, among the festive bands -

specially among his own Galileans, and generally in Jerusalem, that on

that very day - in a few hours - Jesus might be expected to enter the

City. Such, indeed, must have been the case, since, from St. John's

account, 'a great multitude' 'went forth to meet Him.' The latter, we

can have little doubt, must have mostly consisted, not of citizens of

Jerusalem, whose enmity to Christ was settled, but of those 'that had

come to the Feast.'[5051]5051 With these went also a number of

'Pharisees,' their hearts filled with bitterest thoughts of jealousy

and hatred.[5052]5052 And, as we shall presently see, it is of great

importance to keep in mind this composition of 'the multitude.'

If such were the circumstances, all is natural. We can understand, how

eager questioners would gather about the owners of the colt (St.

Mark), there at the cross-roads at Bethphage, just outside Jerusalem;

and how, so soon as from the bearing and the peculiar words of the

disciples they understood their purpose, the owners of the ass and

colt would grant its use for the solemn Entry into the City of the

'Teacher of Nazareth,'[5053]5053 Whom the multitude was so eagerly

expecting; and, lastly, how, as from the gates of Jerusalem tidings

spread of what had passed in Bethphage, the multitude would stream

forth to meet Jesus.

Meantime Christ and those who followed Him from Bethany had slowly

entered on[5054]5054 the well-known caravan-road from Jericho to

Jerusalem. It is the most southern of three, which converge close to

the City, perhaps at the very place where the colt had stood tied.

'The road soon loses sight of Bethany. It is now a rough, but still

broad and well-defined mountain-track, winding over rock and loose

stones; a steep declivity on the left; the sloping shoulder of Olivet

above on the right; fig-trees below and above, here and there growing

out of the rocky soil.'[5055]5055 Somewhere here the disciples who

brought 'the colt' must have met Him. They were accompanied by many,

and immediately followed by more. For, as already stated, Bethphage -

we presume the village - formed almost part of Jerusalem, and during

Easter-week must have been crowded by pilgrims, who could not find

accommodation within the City walls. And the announcement, that

disciples of Jesus had just fetched the beast of burden on which Jesus

was about to enter Jerusalem, must have quickly spread among the

crowds which thronged the Temple and the City.

As the two disciples, accompanied, or immediately followed by the

multitude, brought 'the colt' to Christ, 'two streams of people met' -

the one coming from the City, the other from Bethany. The impression

left on our minds is, that what followed was unexpected by those who

accompanied Christ, that it took them by surprise. The disciples, who

understood not,[5056]5056 till the light of the Resurrection-glory had

been poured on their minds, the significance of 'these things,' even

after they had occurred, seem not even to have guessed, that it was of

set purpose Jesus was about to make His Royal Entry into Jerusalem.

Their enthusiasm seems only to have been kindled when they saw the

procession from the town come to meet Jesus with palm-branches, cut

down by the way, and greeting Him with Hosanna-shouts of welcome. Then

they spread their garments on the colt, and set Jesus thereon -

'unwrapped their loose cloaks from their shoulders and stretched them

along the rough path, to form a momentary carpet as He approached.'

Then also in their turn they cut down branches from the trees and

gardens through which they passed, or plaited and twisted

palm-branches, and strewed them as a rude matting in His way, while

they joined in, and soon raised to a much higher pitch[5057]5057 the

Hosanna of welcoming praise. Nor need we wonder at their ignorance at

first of the meaning of that, in which themselves were chief actors.

We are too apt to judge them from our standpoint, eighteen centuries

later, and after full apprehension of the significance of the event.

These men walked in the procession almost as in a dream, or as dazzled

by a brilliant light all around - as if impelled by a necessity, and

carried from event to event, which came upon them in a succession of

but partially understood surprises.

They had now ranged themselves: the multitude which had come from the

City preceding, that which had come with Him from Bethany following

the triumphant progress of Israel's King, 'meek, and sitting upon an

ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.' 'Gradually the long procession

swept up and over the ridge where first begins "the descent of the

Mount of Olives" towards Jerusalem. At this point the first view is

caught of the south-eastern corner of the City. The Temple and the

more northern portions are hid by the slope of Olivet on the right;

what is seen is only Mount Zion, now for the most part a rough field.'

But at that time it rose, terrace upon terrace, from the Palace of the

Maccabees and that of the High-Priest, a very city of palaces, till

the eye rested in the summit on that castle, city, and palace, with

its frowning towers and magnificent gardens, the royal abode of Herod,

supposed to occupy the very site of the Palace of David. They had been

greeting Him with Hosannas! But enthusiasm, especially in such a

cause, is infectious. They were mostly stranger-pilgrims that had come

from the City, chiefly because they had heard of the raising of

Lazarus.[5058]5058 And now they must have questioned them which came

from Bethany, who in turn related that of which themselves had been

eyewitnesses.[5059]5059 We can imagine it all - how the fire would

leap from heart to heart. So He was the promised Son of David - and

the Kingdom was at hand! It may have been just as the precise point of

the road was reached, where 'the City of David' first suddenly emerges

into view, 'at the descent of the Mount of Olives,' 'that the whole

multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud

voice for all the mighty works that they had seen.'[5060]5060 As the

burning words of joy and praise, the record of what they had seen,

passed from mouth to mouth, and they caught their first sight of 'the

City of David,' adorned as a bride to welcome her King, Davidic praise

to David's Greater Son wakened the echoes of old Davidic Psalms in the

morning-light of their fulfilment. 'Hosanna to the Son of David!

Blessed be He that cometh in the Name of the Lord. . . . Blessed the

Kingdom that cometh, the Kingdom of our father David. . . . Blessed be

He that cometh in the Name of the Lord. . . . Hosanna . . . Hosanna in

the highest . . .Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.'

They were but broken utterances, partly based upon Ps. cvxiii., partly

taken from it - the 'Hosanna,'[5061]5061 or 'Save now,' and the

'Blessed be He that cometh in the Name of the Lord,'[5062]5062 forming

part of the responses by the people with which this Psalm was chanted

on certain of the most solemn festivals.[5063]5063 Most truly did they

thus interpret and apply the Psalm, old and new Davidic praise

mingling in their acclamations. At the same time it must be remembered

that, according to Jewish tradition, Ps. cxviii. vv. 25-28, was also

chanted antiphonally by the people of Jerusalem, as they went to

welcome the festive pilgrims on their arrival, the latter always

responding in the second clause of each verse, till the last verse of

the Psalm[5064]5064 was reached, which was sung by both parties in

unison, Psalm ciii. 17 being added by way of conclusion.[5065]5065 But

as 'the shout rang through the long defile,' carrying evidence far and

wide, that, so far from condemning and forsaking, more than the

ordinary pilgrim-welcome had been given to Jesus - the Pharisees, who

had mingled with the crowd, turned to one another with angry frowns:

'Behold [see intently], how ye prevail nothing! See - the

world[5066]5066 is gone after Him!' It is always so, that, in the

disappointment of malice, men turn in impotent rage against each other

with taunts and reproaches. Then, psychologically true in this also,

they made a desperate appeal to the Master Himself, Whom they so

bitterly hated, to check and rebuke the honest zeal of His disciples.

He had been silent hitherto - alone unmoved, or only deeply moved

inwardly - amidst this enthusiastic crowd. He could be silent no

longer - but, with a touch of quick and righteous indignation, pointed

to the rocks and stones, telling those leaders of Israel, that, if the

people held their peace, the very stones would cry out.[5067]5067

[5068]5068 It would have been so in that day of Christ's Entry into

Jerusalem. And it has been so ever since. Silence has fallen these

many centuries upon Israel; but the very stones of Jerusalem's ruin

and desolateness have cried out that He, Whom in their silence they

rejected, has come as King in the Name of the Lord.

'Again the procession advanced. The road descends a slight declivity,

and the glimpse of the City is again withdrawn behind the intervening

ridge of Olivet. A few moments and the path mounts again, it climbs a

rugged ascent, it reaches a ledge of smooth rock, and in an instance

the whole City bursts into view. As now the dome of the Mosque El-Aksa

rises like a Ghost from the earth before the traveller stands on the

ledge, so then must have risen the Temple-tower; as now the vast

enclosure of the Mussulman sanctuary, so then must have spread the

Temple courts; as now the grey town on its broken hills, so then the

magnificent City, with its background - long since vanished away - of

gardens and suburbs on the western plateau behind. Immediately before

was the Valley of the Kedron, here seen in its greatest depth as it

joins the Valley of Hinnom, and thus giving full effect to the great

peculiarity of Jerusalem, seen only on its eastern side - its

situation as of a City rising out of a deep abyss. It is hardly

possible to doubt that this rise and turn of the road - this rocky

ledge - was the exact point where the multitude paused again, and "He,

when He beheld the City, wept over it."' Not with still weeping

(_d_krusen), as at the grave of Lazarus, but with loud and deep

lamentation (_klausen). The contrast was, indeed, terrible between the

Jerusalem that rose before Him in all its beauty, glory, and security,

and the Jerusalem which He saw in vision dimly rising on the sky, with

the camp of the enemy around about it on every side, hugging it closer

and closer in deadly embrace, and the very 'stockade' which the Roman

Legions raised around it;[5069]5069 then, another scene in the

shifting panorama, and the city laid with the ground, and the gory

bodies of her children among her ruins; and yet another scene: the

silence and desolateness of death by the Hand of God - not one stone

left upon another! We know only too well how literally this vision has

become reality; and yet, though uttered as prophecy by Christ, and its

reason so clearly stated, Israel to this day knows not the things

which belong unto its peace, and the upturned scattered stones of its

dispersion are crying out in testimony against it. But to this day,

also do the tears of Christ plead with the Church on Israel's behalf,

and His words bear within them precious seed of promise.

We turn once more to the scene just described. For, it was no common

pageantry; and Christ's public Entry into Jerusalem seems so

altogether different from - we had almost said, inconsistent with -

His previous mode of appearance. Evidently, the time for the silence

so long enjoined had passed, and that for public declaration had come.

And such, indeed, this Entry was. From the moment of His sending forth

the two disciples to His acceptance of the homage of the multitude,

and His rebuke of the Pharisee's attempt to arrest it, all must be

regarded as designed or approved by Him: not only a public assertion

of His Messiahship, but a claim to its national acknowledgment. And

yet, even so, it was not to be the Messiah of Israel's conception, but

He of prophetic picture: 'just and having salvation; lowly, and riding

upon an ass.'[5070]5070 It is foreign to our present purpose to

discuss any general questions about this prophecy, or even to

vindicate its application to the Messiah. But, when we brush aside all

the trafficking and bargaining over words, that constitutes so much of

modern criticism, which in its care over the lesson so often loses the

spirit, there can, at least, be no question that this prophecy was

intended to introduce, in contrast to earthly warfare and kingly

triumph, another Kingdom, of which the just King would be the Prince

of Peace, Who was meek and lowly in His Advent, Who would speak peace

to the heathen, and Whose sway would yet extend to earth's utmost

bounds. Thus much may be said, that if there ever was true picture of

the Messiah-King and His Kingdom, it is this, and that, if ever Israel

was to have a Messiah or the world a Saviour, He must be such as

described in this Prophecy - not merely in the letter, but in the

spirit of it. And as so often indicated, it was not the letter but the

spirit of prophecy - and of all prophecy - which the ancient

Synagogue, and that rightly, saw fulfilled in the Messiah and His

Kingdom. Accordingly, with singular unanimity the Talmud and the

ancient Rabbinic authorities have applied this prophecy to the

Christ.[5071]5071 Nor was it quoted by St. Matthew and St. John in the

stiffness and deadness of the letter. On the contrary (as so often in

Jewish writings, two prophets - Isa. lxii. 11, and Zech. ix. 9 - are

made to shed their blended light upon this Entry of Christ, as

exhibiting the reality, of which the prophetic vision had been the

reflex. Nor yet are the words of the Prophets given literally - as

modern criticism would have them weighed out in the critical balances

- either from the Hebrew text, or form the LXX. rendering; but their

real meaning is given, and they are 'Targumed' by the sacred writers.

according to their wont. Yet who that sets the prophetic picture by

the side of the reality - the description by the side of Christ's

Entry into Jerusalem - can fail to recognise in the one the real

fulfilment of the other?

Another point seems to require comment. We have seen reasons to regard

the bearing of the disciples as one of surprise, and that, all through

these last scenes, they seem to have been hurried from event to event.

But the enthusiasm of the people - their royal welcome of Christ - how

is it to be explained, and how reconciled with the speedy and terrible

reaction of His Betrayal and Crucifixion? Yet it is not so difficult

to understand it; and, if we only keep clear of unconscious

exaggeration, we shall gain in truth and reasonableness what we lose

in dramatic effect. It has already been suggested, that the multitude

which went to meet Jesus must have consisted chiefly of

pilgrim-strangers. The overwhelming majority of the citizens of

Jerusalem were bitterly and determinately hostile to Christ. But we

know that, even so, the Pharisees dreaded to take the final steps

against Christ during the presence of these pilgrims at the Feast,

apprehending a movement in His favour.[5072]5072 It proved, indeed,

otherwise; for these country-people were but ill-informed; they dared

not resist the combined authority of their own Sanhedrin and of the

Romans. Besides, the prejudices of the populace, and especially of an

Eastern populace, are easily raised, and they readily sway from one

extreme to the opposite. Lastly, the very suddenness and completeness

of the blow, which the Jewish authorities delivered, would have

stunned even those who had deeper knowledge, more cohesion, and

greater independence than most of them who, on that Palm-Sunday, had

gone forth from the City.

Again, as regards their welcome of Christ, deeply significant as it

was, we must not attach to it deeper meaning than it possessed. Modern

writers have mostly seen in it the demonstrations of the Feast of

Tabernacles,[5073]5073 as if the homage of its services had been

offered to Christ. It would, indeed, have been symbolic of much about

Israel if they had thus confounded the Second with the First Advent of

Christ, the Sacrifice of the Passover with the joy of the Feast of

Ingathering. But, in reality, their conduct bears not that

interpretation. It is true that these responses from Ps. cxviii.,

which formed part of what was known as the (Egyptian)

Hallel,[5074]5074 were chanted by the people on the Feast of

Tabernacles also, but the Hallel was equally sung with responses

during the offering of the Passover, at the Paschal Supper, and on the

Feasts of Pentecost and of the Dedication of the Temple. The waving of

the palm-branches was the welcome of visitors or kings,[5075]5075 and

not distinctive of the Feast of Tabernacles. At the latter, the

worshippers carried, not simple palm-branches, but the Lulabh, which

consisted of palm, myrtle, and willow branches interwinted. Lastly,

the words of welcome from Ps. cxviii. were (as already stated) those

with which on solemn occasions the people also greeted the arrival of

festive pilgrims,[5076]5076 although, as being offered to Christ

alone, and as accompanied by such demonstrations, they may have

implied that they hailed Him as the promised King, and have converted

His Entry into a triumph in which the people did homage. And, if proof

were required of the more sober, and, may we not add, rational view

here advocated, it would be found in this, that not till after His

Resurrection did even His own disciples understand the significance of

the whole scene which they had witnessed, and in which they had borne

such a part.

The anger and jealousy of the Pharisees understood it better, and

watched for the opportunity of revenge. But, for the present, on that

bright spring-day, the weak, excitable, fickle populace streamed

before Him through the City-gates, through the narrow streets, up the

Temple-mount. Everywhere the tramp of their feet, and the shout of

their acclamations brought men, women, and children into the streets

and on the housetops. The City was moved, and from mouth to mouth the

question passed among the eager crowd of curious onlookers: 'Who is

He?' And the multitude answered - not, this is Israel's Messiah-King,

but: 'This is Jesus the Prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.' And so up

into the Temple!

He alone was silent and sad among this excited multitude, the marks of

the tears He had wept over Jerusalem still on His cheek. It is not so,

that an earthly King enters His City in triumph; not so, that the

Messiah of Israel's expectation would have gone into His Temple. He

spake not, but only looked round about upon all things, as if to view

the field on which He was to suffer and die. And now the shadows of

evening were creeping up; and, weary and sad, He once more returned

with the twelve disciples to the shelter and rest of Bethany.

CHAPTER II.

THE SECOND DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - THE BARREN FIG-TREE - THE CLEANSING

OF THE

TEMPLE - THE HOSANNA OF THE CHILDREN

(St. Matt. xxi. 12-22; St. Mark xi. 15-26; St. Luke xix. 45-48.)

How the King of Israel spent the night after the triumphal Entry into

His City and Temple, we may venture reverently to infer. His royal

banquet would be fellowship with the disciples. We know how often His

nights had been spent in lonely prayer,[5077]5077 and surely it is not

too bold to associate such thoughts with the first night in Passion

week. Thus, also, we can most readily account for that exhaustion and

faintness of hunger, which next morning made Him seek fruit on the

fig-tree on His way to the City.

It was very early[5078]5078 on the morning of the second day in

Passion-week (Monday), when Jesus, with his disciples, left Bethany.

In the fresh, crisp, spring air, after the exhaustion of that night,

'He hungered.' By the roadside, as so often in the East, a solitary

tree[5079]5079 grew in the rocky soil. It must have stood on an

eminence, where it caught the sunshine and warmth, for He saw it 'afar

off,'[5080]5080 and though spring had but lately wooed nature into

life, it stood out, with its wide-spreading mantle of green, against

the sky. 'It was not the season of figs,' but the tree, covered with

leaves, attacted His attention. It might have been, that they hid some

of the fruit which hung through the winter, or else the springing

fruits of the new crop. For it is a well-known fact, that in Palestine

'the fruit appears before the leaves,'[5081]5081 and that this

fig-tree, whether from its exposure or soil, was precocious, is

evident from the fact that it was in leaf, which is quite unusual at

that season on the Mount of Olives,[5082]5082 The old fruit would, of

course, have been edible, and in regard to the unripe fruit we have

the distinct evidence of the Mishnah,[5083]5083 confirmed by the

Talmud,[5084]5084 that the unripe fruit was eaten, so soon as it began

to assume a red colour - as it is expressed, 'in the field, with

bread,' or, as we understand it, by those whom hunger overtook in the

fields, whether working or travelling. But in the present case there

was neither old nor new fruit, 'but leaves only.' It was evidently a

barren fig-tree, cumbering the ground, and to be hewn down. Our mind

almost instinctively reverts to the Parable of the Barren Fig-tree,

which He had so lately spoken.[5085]5085 To Him, Who but yesterday had

wept over the Jerusalem that knew not the day of its visitation, and

over which the sharp axe of judgment was already lifted, this

fig-tree, with its luxuriant mantle of leaves, must have recalled,

with pictorial vividness, the scene of the previous day. Israel was

that barren fig-tree; and the leaves only covered their nakedness, as

erst they had that of our first parents after their Fall. And the

judgment, symbolically spoken in the Parable, must be symbolically

executed in this leafy fig-tree, barren when searched for fruit by the

Master. It seems almost an inward necessity, not only symbolically but

really also, that Christ's Word should have laid it low. We cannot

conceive that any other should have eaten of it after the hungering

Christ had in vain sought fruit thereon. We cannot conceive that

anything should resist Christ, and not be swept away. We cannot

conceive, that the reality of what He had taught should not, when

occasion came, be visibly placed before the eyes of the disciples.

Lastly, we seem to feel (with Bengel) that, as always, the

manifestation of His true Humanity, in hunger, should be accompanied

by that of His Divinity, in the power of His Word of

judgment.[5086]5086

With St. Matthew, who, for the sake of continuity, relates this

incident after the events of that day (the Monday) and immediately

before those of the next,[5087]5087 we anticipate what was only

witnessed on the morrow.[5088]5088 As St. Matthew has it: on Christ's

Word the fig-tree immediately withered away. But according to the more

detailed account of St. Mark, it was only next morning, when they

again passed by, that they noticed the fig-tree had withered from its

very roots. The spectacle attracted their attention, and vividly

recalled the Words of Christ, to which, on the previous day, they had,

perhaps, scarcely attached sufficient importance. And it was the

suddenness and completeness of the judgment that had been denounced,

which now struck Peter, rather than its symbolic meaning. It was

rather the Miracle than its moral and spiritual import - the storm and

earthquake rather than the still small Voice - which impressed the

disciples. Besides, the words of Peter are at least capable of this

interpretation, that the fig-tree had withered in consequence of,

rather than by the Word of Christ. But He ever leads His own from mere

wonderment at the Miraculous up to that which is higher.[5089]5089 His

answer now combined all that they needed to learn. It pointed to the

typical lesson of what had taken place: the need of realising, simple

faith, the absence of which was the cause of Israel's leafy

barrenness, and which, if present and active, could accomplish all,

however impossible it might seem by outward means.[5090]5090 And yet

it was only to 'have faith in God;' such faith as becomes those who

know God; a faith in God, which seeks not and has not its foundation

in anything outward, but rests on Him alone. To one who 'shall not

doubt in his heart, but shall believe that what he saith cometh to

pass, it shall be to him.'[5091]5091 And this general principle of the

Kingdom, which to the devout and reverent believer needs neither

explanation nor limitation, received its further application,

specially to the Apostles in their coming need: 'Therefore I say unto

you, whatsoever things, praying, ye ask for, believe that ye have

received them [not, in the counsel of God,[5092]5092 but actually, in

answer to the prayer of faith], and it shall be to you.'

These two things follow: faith gives absolute power in prayer, but it

is also its moral condition. None other than this is faith; and none

other than faith - absolute, simple, trustful - gives glory to God, or

has the promise. This is, so to speak, the New Testament application

of the first Table of the Law, summed up in the 'Thou shalt love the

Lord thy God.' But there is yet another moral condition of prayer

closely connected with the first - a New Testament application of the

second Table of the Law, summed up in the 'Thou shalt love thy

neighbour as thyself.' If the first moral condition was God-ward, the

second is man-ward; if the first bound us to faith, the second binds

us to charity, while hope, the expectancy of answered prayer, is the

link connecting the two. Prayer, unlimited in its possibilities,

stands midway between heaven and earth; with one hand it reaches up to

heaven, with the other down to earth; in it, faith prepares to

receive, what charity is ready to dispense. He who so prays believes

in God and loves man; such prayer is not selfish, self-seeking,

self-conscious; least of all, is it compatible with mindfulness of

wrongs, or an unforgiving spirit. This, then, is the second condition

of prayer, and not only of such all-prevailing prayer, but even of

personal acceptance in prayer. We can, therefore, have no doubt that

St. Mark correctly reports in this connection this as the condition

which the Lord attaches to acceptance, that we previously put away all

uncharitableness.[5093]5093 [5094]5094 We remember, that the promise

had a special application to the Apostles and early disciples; we also

remember, how difficult to them was the thought of full forgiveness of

offenders and persecutors;[5095]5095 and again, how great the

temptation to avenge wrongs and to wield miraculous power in the

vindication of their authority.[5096]5096 In these circumstances Peter

and his fellow-disciples, when assured of the unlimited power of the

prayer of faith, required all the more to be both reminded and warned

of this as its second moral condition: the need of hearty forgiveness,

if they had aught against any.

From this digression we return to the events of that second day in

Passion-week (the Monday), which began with the symbolic judgment on

the leafy, barren fig-tree. The same symbolism of judgment was to be

immediately set forth still more clearly, and that in the Temple

itself. On the previous afternoon, when Christ had come to it, the

services were probably over, and the Sanctuary comparatively empty of

worshippers and of those who there carried on their traffic. When

treating of the first cleansing of the Temple, at the beginning of

Christ's Ministry, sufficient has been said to explain the character

and mode of that nefarious traffic, the profits of which went to the

leaders of the priesthood, as also how popular indignation was roused

alike against this trade and the traders. We need not here recall the

words of Christ; Jewish authorities sufficiently describe, in even

stronger terms, this transformation of 'the House of Prayer' into 'a

den of robbers.'[5097]5097 If, when beginning to do the 'business' of

His Father, and for the first time publicly presenting Himself with

Messianic claim, it was fitting He should take such authority, and

first 'cleanse the Temple' of the nefarious intruders who, under the

guise of being God's chief priests, made His House one of traffic,

much more was this appropriate now, at the close of His Work, when, as

King, He had entered His City, and publicly claimed authority. At the

first it had been for teaching and warning, now it was in symbolic

judgment; what and as He then began, that and so He now finished.

Accordingly, as we compare the words, and even some of the acts, of

the first 'cleansing' with those accompanying and explaining the

second, we find the latter, we shall not say, much more severe, but

bearing a different character - that of final judicial

sentence.[5098]5098

Nor did the Temple-authorities now, as on the former occasion, seek to

raise the populace against Him, or challenge His authority by

demanding the warrant of 'a sign.' The contest had reached quite

another stage. They heard what He said in their condemnation, and with

bitter hatred in their hearts sought for some means to destroy Him.

But fear of the people restrained their violence. For, marvellous

indeed was the power which He wielded. With rapt attention the people

hung entranced on his lips,[5099]5099 'astonished' at those new and

blessed truths which dropped from them. All was so other than it had

been! By His authority the Temple was cleansed of the unholy, thievish

traffic which a corrupt priesthood carried on, and so, for the time,

restored to the solemn Service of God; and that purified House now

became the scene of Christ's teaching, when He spake those words of

blessed truth and of comfort concerning the Father - thus truly

realising the prophetic promise of 'a House of Prayer for all the

nations.'[5100]5100 And as those traffickers were driven from the

Temple, and He spake, there flocked in from porches and Temple-Mount

the poor sufferers - the blind and the lame - to get healing to body

and soul. It was truly spring-time in that Temple, and the boys that

gathered about their fathers and looked in turn from their faces of

rapt wonderment and enthusiasm to the Godlike Face of the Christ, and

then on those healed sufferers, took up the echoes of the welcome at

His entrance into Jerusalem - in their simplicity understanding and

applying them better - as they burst into 'Hosanna to the Son of

David.'

It rang through the courts and porches of the Temple, this Children's

Hosanna. They heard it, whom the wonders He had spoken and done, so

far from leading to repentance and faith, had only filled with

indignation. Once more in their impotent anger they sought, as the

Pharisees had done on the day of His Entry, by a hypocritical appeal

to His reverence for God, not only to mislead, and so to use His very

love of the truth against the truth, but to betray Him into silencing

those Children's Voices. But the undimmed mirror of His soul only

reflected the light.[5101]5101 These Children's Voices were Angels'

Echoes, echoes of the far-off praises of heaven, which children's

souls had caught and children's lips welled forth. Not from the great,

the wise, nor the learned, but 'out of the mouth of babes and

sucklings' has He 'perfected praise.'[5102]5102 And this, also, is the

Music of the Gospel.

CHAPTER III.

THE THIRD DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - THE EVENTS OF THAT DAY - THE QUESTION

CHRIST'S AUTHORITY - THE QUESTION OF TRIBUTE TO CÆSAR - THE WIDOW'S

FARTHING

- THE GREEKS WHO SOUGHT TO SEE JESUS - SUMMARY AND RETROSPECT OF

THE PUBLIC

MINISTRY OF CHRIST

(St. Matthew xxi. 23-27; St. Mark xi. 27-33; St. Luke xx. 1-8; St.

Matt. xxii. 15-22; St. Mark xii. 13-17; St. Luke xx. 20-26; St. Matt.

xxii. 41-46; St. Luke xxi. 1-4; St. John xii. 20-50.)

THE record of this third day is so crowded, the actors introduced on

the scene are so many, the occurrences so varied, and the transitions

so rapid, that it is even more than usually difficult to arrange all

in chronological order. Nor need we wonder at this, when we remember

that this was, so to speak, Christ's last working-day - the last, of

His public Mission to Israel, so far as its active part was concerned;

the last day in the Temple; the last, of teaching and warning to

Pharisees and Sadducees; the last, of his call to national repentance.

That what follows must be included in one day, appears from the

circumstance that its beginning is expressly mentioned by St.

Mark[5103]5103 in connection with the notice of the withering of the

fig-tree, while its close is not only indicated in the last words of

Christ's Discourses, as reported by the Synoptists,[5104]5104 but the

beginning of another day is afterwards equally clearly

marked.[5105]5105

Considering the multiplicity of occurrences, it will be better to

group them together, rather than follow the exact order of their

succession. Accordingly, this chapter will be devoted to the events of

the third day in Passion Week.

1. As usually, the day commenced[5106]5106 with teaching in the

Temple.[5107]5107 We gather this from the expression: 'as He was

walking,'[5108]5108 viz., in one of the Porches, where, as we know

considerable freedom of meeting, conversing, or even teaching, was

allowed. It will be remembered, that on the previous day the

authorities had been afraid to interfere with Him. In silence they had

witnessed, with impotent rage, the expulsion of their traffic-mongers;

in silence they had listened to His teaching, and seen His miracles.

Not till the Hosanna of the little boys - perhaps those children of

the Levites who acted as choristers in the Temple[5109]5109 - wakened

them from the stupor of their fears, had they ventured on a feeble

remonstrance, in the forlorn hope that He might be induced to

conciliate them. But with the night and morning other counsels had

come. Besides, the circumstances were somewhat different. It was early

morning, the hearers were new, and the wondrous influence of His Words

had not yet bent them to His Will. From the formal manner in which the

chief priests, the scribes, and the elders are introduced,[5110]5110

and from the circumstance that they so met Christ immediately on His

entry into the Temple, we can scarcely doubt that a meeting, although

informal,[5111]5111 of the authorities had been held to concert

measures against the growing danger. Yet, even so, cowardice as well

as cunning marked their procedure. They dared not directly oppose Him,

but endeavoured, by attacking Him on the one point where he seemed to

lay Himself open to it, to arrogate to themselves the appearance of

strict legality, and so to turn popular feeling against Him.

For, there was no principle more firmly established by universal

consent than that authoritative teaching[5112]5112 required previous

authorisation. Indeed, this logically followed from the principle of

Rabbinism. All teaching must be authoritative, since it was

traditional - approved by authority, and handed down from teacher to

disciple. The highest honour of a scholar was, that he was like a

well-plastered cistern, from which not a drop had leaked of what had

been poured into it. The ultimate appeal in cases of discussion was

always to some great authority, whether an individual Teacher or a

Decree by the Sanhedrin. In this manner had the great Hillel first

vindicated his claim to be the Teacher of his time and to decide the

disputes then pending. And, to decide differently from authority, was

either the mark of ignorant assumption or the outcome of daring

rebellion, in either case to be visited with 'the ban.' And this was

at least one aspect of the controversy as between the chief

authorities and Jesus. No one would have thought of interfering with a

mere Haggadist - a popular expositor, preacher, or teller of legends.

But authoritatively to teach, required other warrant. In fact there

was regular ordination (Semikhah) to the office of Rabbi, Elder, and

Judge, for the three functions were combined in one. According to the

Mishnah, the 'disciples' sat before the Sanhedrin in three rows, the

members of the Sanhedrin being recruited successively from the

front-rank of the Scholars.[5113]5113 At first the practice is said to

have been for every Rabbi to accredit his own disciples. But

afterwards this right was transferred to the Sanhedrin, with the

proviso that this body might not ordain without the consent of its

Chief, though the latter might do so without consent of the

Sanhedrin.[5114]5114 But this privilege was afterwards withdrawn on

account of abuses. Although we have not any description of the

earliest mode of ordination, the very name - Semikhah - implies the

imposition of hands. Again, in the oldest record, reaching up, no

doubt, to the time of Christ, the presence of at least three ordained

persons was required for ordination.[5115]5115 At a later period, the

presence of an ordained Rabbi, with the assessorship of two others,

even if unordained, was deemed sufficient.[5116]5116 In the course of

time certain formalities were added. The person to be ordained had to

deliver a Discourse; hymns and poems were recited; the title 'Rabbi'

was formally bestowed on the candidate, and authority given him to

teach and to act as Judge [to bind and loose, to declare guilty or

free]. Nay, there seem to have been even different orders, according

to the authority bestowed on the person ordained. The formula in

bestowing full orders was: 'Let him teach; let him teach; let him

judge; let him decide on questions of first-born;[5117]5117 let him

decide; let him judge!' At one time it was held that ordination could

only take place in the Holy Land. Those who went abroad took with them

their 'letters of orders.'[5118]5118

At whatever periods some of these practices may have been introduced,

it is at least certain that, at the time of our Lord, no one would

have ventured authoritatively to teach without proper Rabbinic

authorisation. The question, therefore, with which the Jewish

authorities met Christ, while teaching, was one which had a very real

meaning, and appealed to the habits and feelings of the people who

listened to Jesus. Otherwise, also, it was cunningly framed. For, it

did not merely challenge Him for teaching, but also asked for His

authority in what He did, referring not only to His Work generally,

but, perhaps, especially to what had happened on the previous day.

They were not there to oppose Him; but, when a man did as He had done

in the Temple, it was their duty to verify his credentials. Finally,

the alternative question reported by St. Mark: 'or' - if Thou hast not

proper Rabbinic commission - 'who gave Thee this authority to do these

things?' seems clearly to point to their contention, that the power

which Jesus wielded was delegated to Him by none other than Beelzebul.

The point in our Lord's reply seems to have been strangely overlooked

by commentators.[5119]5119 As His words are generally understood, they

would have amounted only to silencing His questioners - and that, in a

manner which would, under ordinary circumstances, be scarcely regarded

as either fair or ingenuous. It would have been simply to turn the

question against themselves, and so in turn to raise popular

prejudice. But the Lord's words meant quite other. He did answer their

question, though He also exposed the cunning and cowardice which

prompted it. To the challenge for His authority, and the dark hint

about Satanic agency, He replied by an appeal to the Baptist. He had

borne full witness to the Mission of Christ from the Father, and 'all

men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed.' Were they satisfied?

What was their view of the Baptism in preparation for the Coming of

Christ? No? They would not, or could not answer! If they said the

Baptist was a prophet, this implied not only the authorisation of the

Mission of Jesus, but the call to believe on Him. On the other hand,

they were afraid publicly to disown John! And so their cunning and

cowardice stood out self-condemned, when they pleaded ignorance - a

plea so grossly and manifestly dishonest, that Christ, having given

what all must have felt to be a complete answer, could refuse further

discussion with them on this point.

2. Foiled in their endeavor to involve Him with the ecclesiastical,

they next attempted the much more dangerous device of bringing Him

into collision with the civil authorities. Remembering the ever

watchful jealousy of Rome, the reckless tyranny of Pilate, and the low

artifices of Herod, who was at that time in Jerusalem,[5120]5120 we

instinctively feel, how even the slightest compromise on the part of

Jesus in regard to the authority of Cæsar would have been absolutely

fatal. If it could have been proved, on undeniable testimony, that

Jesus had declared Himself on the side of, or even encouraged, the

so-called 'Nationalist' party, He would quickly perished, like Judas

of Galilee.[5121]5121 The Jewish leaders would thus have readily

accomplished their object, and its unpopularity have recoiled only on

the hated Roman power. How great the danger was which threatened

Jesus, may be gathered from this, that, despite His clear answer, the

charge that He prevented the nation, forbidding to give tribute to

Cæsar, was actually among those brought against Him before

Pilate.[5122]5122

The plot, for such it was,[5123]5123 was most cunningly concocted. The

object was to 'spy' out His inmost thoughts,[5124]5124 and, if

possible, 'entangle' Him in His talk.[5125]5125 For this purpose it

was not the old Pharisees, whom He knew and would have distrusted, who

came, but some of their disciples - apparently fresh, earnest,

zealous, conscientious men. With them had combined certain of 'the

Herodians' - of course, not a sect nor religious school, but a

political party at the time. We know comparatively little of the

deeper political movements in Judæa, only so much as it has suited

Josephus to record. But we cannot be greatly mistaken in regarding the

Herodians as a party which honestly accepted the House of Herod as

occupants of the Jewish throne. Differing from the extreme section of

the Pharisees, who hated Herod, and from the 'Nationalists,' it might

have been a middle or moderate Jewish party - semi-Roman and

semi-Nationalist. We know that it was the ambition of Herod Antipas

again to unite under his sway of the whole of Palestine; but we know

not what intrigues may have been carried on for that purpose, alike

with the Pharisees and the Romans. Nor is it the first time in this

history, that we find the Pharisees and the Herodians

combined.[5126]5126 Herod may, indeed, have been unwilling to incur

the unpopularity of personally proceeding against the Great Prophet of

Nazareth, expecially as he must have had so keen a remembrance of what

the murder of John had cost him. Perhaps he would fain, if he could,

have made use of Him, and played Him off as the popular Messiah

against the popular leaders. But, as matters had gone, he must have

been anxious to rid himself of what might be a formidable rival,

while, at the same time, his party would be glad to join with the

Pharisees in what would secure their gratitude and allegiance. Such,

or similar, may have been the motives which brought about this strange

alliance of Pharisees and Herodians.

Feigning themselves just men, they now came to Jesus with honeyed

words, intended to disarm His suspicions, but, by an appeal to His

fearlessness and singleness of moral purpose, to induce Him to commit

Himself without reserve. Was it lawful for them to give tribute unto

Cæsar, or not? were they to pay the capitation-tax[5127]5127 of one

drachm, or to refuse it? We know how later Judaism would have answered

such a question. It lays down the principle, that the right of coinage

implies the authority of levying taxes, and indeed constitutes such

evidence of de facto government as to make it duty absolutely to

submit to it.[5128]5128 So much was this felt, that the Maccabees,

and, in the last Jewish war, Bar Kokhabh, the false Messiah, issued a

coinage dating from the liberation of Jerusalem. We cannot therefore

doubt, that this principle about coinage, taxation, and government was

generally accepted in Judæa. On the other hand, there was a strong

party in the land; with which, not only politically but religiously,

many of the noblest spirits would sympathise, which maintained, that

to pay the tribute-money to Cæsar was virtually to own his royal

authority, and so to disown that of Jehovah, Who alone was Israel's

King. They would argue, that all the miseries of the land and people

were due to this national unfaithfulness. Indeed, this was the

fundamental principle of the Nationalist movement. History has

recorded many similar movements, in which strong political feelings

have been strangely blended with religious fanaticism, and which have

numbered in their ranks, together with unscrupulous partisans, not a

few who were sincere patriots or earnest religionists. It has been

suggested in a former part of this book, that the Nationalist movement

may have had an important preparatory bearing on some of the earlier

followers of Jesus, perhaps at the beginning of their inquiries, just

as, in the West, Alexandrian philosophy moved to many a preparation

for Christianity.[5129]5129 At any rate, the scruple expressed by

these men would, if genuine, have called forth sympathy.[5130]5130 But

what was the alternative here presented to Christ? To have said No,

would have been to command rebellion; to have said simply Yes, would

have been to give a painful shock to keep feeling, and, in a sense, in

the eyes of the people, the lie to His own claim of being Israel's

Messiah-King!

But the Lord escaped from this 'temptation' - because, being true, it

was no real temptation to Him.[5131]5131 Their knavery and hypocrisy

He immediately perceived and exposed, in this also responding to their

appeal of being 'true.' Once more and emphatically must we disclaim

the idea that Christ's was rather an evasion of the question than a

reply. It was a very real rather, when pointing to the image and

inscription on the coin,[5132]5132 for which He had called, He said,

'What is Cæsar's render to Cæsar, and what is God's to God.'[5133]5133

It did far more than rebuke their hypocrisy and presumption; it

answered not only that question of theirs to all earnest men of that

time, as it would present itself to their minds, but it settles to all

time and for all circumstances the principle underlying it. Christ's

Kingdom is not of this world; a true Theocracy is not inconsistent

with submission to the secular power in things that are really its

own; politics and religion neither include, nor yet exclude, each

other; they are, side by side, in different domains. The State is

Divinely sanctioned, and religion is Divinely sanctioned - and both

are equally the ordinance of God. On this principle did Apostolic

authority regulate the relations between Church and State, even when

the latter was heathen. The question about the limits of either

province has been hotly discussed by sectarians on either side, who

have claimed the saying of Christ in support of one or the opposite

extreme which they have advocated. And yet, to the simple searcher

after duty, it seems not so difficult to see the distinction, if only

we succeed in purging ourselves of logical refinements and strained

references.

It was an answer not only most truthful, but of marvellous beauty and

depth. It elevated the controversy into quite another sphere, where

there was no conflict between what was due to God and to man - indeed,

no conflict at all, but Divine harmony and peace. Nor did it speak

harshly of the Nationalist aspirations, nor yet plead the cause of

Rome. It said not whether the rule of Rome was right or should be

permanent - but only what all must have felt to be Divine. And so

they, who had come to 'entangle' Him, 'went away,' not convinced nor

converted, but marvelling exceedingly.[5134]5134

3. Passing for the present from the cavils of the Sadducees and the

gainslaying of the Scribes, we come unexpectedly on one of those sweet

pictures - a historical miniature, as it is presented to us - which

affords real relief to the eye amidst the glare all around.[5135]5135

From the bitter malice of His enemies and the predicted judgment upon

them, we turn to the silent worship of her who gave her all, and to

the words with which Jesus owned it, all unknown to her. It comes to

us the more welcome, that it exhibits in deed what Christ had said to

those hypocrites who had discussed it, whether the tribute given to

Cæsar was not robbing God of what was His. Truly here was one, who, in

the simplicity of her humble worship, gave to the Lord what was His!

Weary with the contention, the Master had left those to whom He had

spoken in the Porches, and, while the crowd wrangled about His Words

or His Person, had ascended the flight of steps which led from 'the

Terrace' into the Temple-building. From these steps - whether those

leading up to the 'Beautiful Gate,' or one of the side gates - He

could gain full view into 'The Court of the Women,' into which they

opened. On these steps, or within the gate (for in no other place was

it lawful), He sat Him down, watching the multitude. The time of

Sacrifice was past, and those who still lingered had remained for

private devotion, for private sacrifices, or to pay their vows and

offerings. Although the topography of the Temple, especially of this

part of it, is not without its difficulties, we know that under the

colonnades, which surrounded 'the Court of the Women,' but still left

in the middle room for more than 15,000 worshippers, provision was

made for receiving religious and charitable shaped boxes (Shopharoth);

somewhere here also we must locate two chambers:[5136]5136 that of

'the silent,' for gifts to be distributed in secret to the children of

the pious poor, and that where votive vessels were deposited. Perhaps

there was here also a special chamber for offerings.[5137]5137 These

'trumpets' bore each inscriptions, marking the objects of contribution

- whether to make up for past neglect, to pay for certain sacrifices,

to provide incense, wood, or for other gifts.

As they passed to this or that treasury-box, it must have been a study

of deep interest, especially on that day, to watch the givers. Some

might come with appearance of self-righteousness, some even with

ostentation, some as cheerfully performing a happy duty. 'Many that

were rich cast in much' - yes, very much, for such was the tendency

that (as already stated) a law had to be enacted, forbidding the gift

of the Temple of more than a certain proportion of one's possessions.

And the amount of such contributions may be inferred by recalling the

circumstances, that, at the time of Pompey and Crassus, the

Temple-Treasury, after having lavishly defrayed every possible

expenditure, contained in money nearly half a million, and precious

vessels to the value of nearly two millions sterling.[5138]5138

And as Jesus so sat on these steps, looking out on the ever-shifting

panorama, His gaze was riveted by a solitary figure. The simple words

of St. Mark sketch a story of singular pathos. 'It was one pauper

widow.' We can see her coming alone, as if ashamed to mingle with the

crowd of rich givers; ashamed to have her offering seen; ashamed,

perhaps, to bring it; a 'widow,' in the garb of a desolate mourner;

her condition, appearance, and bearing that of a 'pauper.' He observed

her closely and read her truly. She held in her hand only the smallest

coins, 'two Perutahs,' and it should be known that it was not lawful

to contribute a less amount.[5139]5139 Together these two Perutahs

made a guadrans, which was the ninety-sixth part of a denar, itself of

the value of about sevenpence. But it was 'all her living' (b_ov),

perhaps all that she had been able to save out of her scanty

housekeeping; more probably, all that she had to live upon for that

day and till she wrought for more. And of this she now made humble

offering unto God. He spake not to her words of encouragement, for she

walked by faith; He offered not promise of return, for her reward was

in heaven. She knew not that any had seen it - for the knowledge of

eyes turned on her, even His, would have flushed with shame the pure

cheek of her love; and any word, conscious notice, or promise would

have married and turned aside the rising incense of her

sacrifice.[5140]5140 But to all time has it remained in the Church,

like the perfume of Mary's alabaster that filled the house, this deed

of self-denying sacrifice. More, far more, than the great gifts of

their 'superfluity,' which the rich cast in, was, and is to all time,

the gift of absolute self-surrender and sacrifice, tremblingly offered

by the solitary mourner. And though He spake not to her, yet the

sunshine of his words must have fallen into the dark desolateness of

her heart; and, though perhaps she knew not why, it must have been a

happy day, a day of rich feast in the heart, that when she gave up

'her whole living' unto God. And so, perhaps, is every sacrifice for

God all the more blessed, when we know not of its blessedness.

Would that to all time its lesson had been cherished, not

theoretically, but practically, by the Church! How much richer would

have been her 'treasury:' twice blessed in gift and givers. But so is

not legend written. If it had been a story invented for a purpose or

adorned with the tinsel of embellishment, the Saviour and the widow

would not have so parted - to meet and to speak not on earth, but in

heaven. She would have worshipped, and He spoken or done some great

thing. Their silence was a tryst for heaven.

4. One other event of solemn joyous import remains to be recorded on

that day.[5141]5141 But so closely is it connected with what the Lord

afterwards spoke, that the two cannot be separated. It is narrated

only by St. John, who, as before explained,[5142]5142 tells it as one

of a series of progressive manifestations of the Christ: first in His

Entry into the City, and then in the Temple - successively, to the

Greeks, by the Voice from Heaven, and before the people.

Precious as each part and verse here is, when taken by itself, there

is some difficulty in combining them , and in showing their

connection, and its meaning. But here we ought not to forget, that we

have, in the Gospel-narrative, only the briefest account - as it were,

headings, summaries, outlines, rather than a report. Nor do we know

the surrounding circumstances. The words which Christ spoke after the

request of the Greeks to be admitted to His Presence may bear some

special reference also to the state of the disciples, and their

unreadiness to enter into and share His predicted sufferings. And this

may again be connected with Christ's prediction and Discourse about

'the last things.'[5143]5143 For the position of the narrative in St.

John's Gospel seems to imply that it was the last event of the day -

nay, the conclusion of Christ's public Ministry. If this be so, words

and admonitions, otherwise somewhat mysterious in their connection,

would acquire a new meaning.

It was then, as we suppose, the evening of a long weary day of

teaching. As the sun had been hastening towards its setting in red, He

had spoken of that other sun-setting, with the sky all aglow in

judgement, and of the darkness that was to follow - but also of the

better Light would arise in it. And in those Temple-porches they had

been hearing Him - seeing Him in His wonder-working yesterday, hearing

Him in His wonder-speaking that day - those 'men of other tongues.'

They were 'Proselytes,' Greeks by birth, who had groped their way to

the proch of Judaism, just as the first streaks of light were falling

within upon his altar. They must have been stirred in their inmost

being; felt, that it was just for such as they, and to them that He

spoke; that this was what in the Old Testament they had guessed,

anticipated, dimly hoped for, if they had not seen it - its grand

faith, its grander hope, its grandest reality. Not one by one, and

almost by stealth, were they thenceforth to come to the gate; but the

portals were to be flung wide open, and as the golden light streamed

out upon the way, He stood there, that bright Divine Personality, Who

was not only the Son of David, but the Son of Man, to bid them the

Father's welcome of good pleasure to the Kingdom.

And so, as the lengthening shadows gathered around the Temple-court

and porches, they would fain have 'seen' Him, not afar off, but near:

spoken to Him. They had became 'Proselytes of Righteousness;' they

would become disciples of 'the Lord our Righteousness;' as Proselytes

they had come to Jerusalem 'to worship,' and they would learn to

praise. Yet, in the simple self-unconscious modesty of their religious

childhood, they dared not go to Jesus directly, but came with their

request to Philip of Bethsaida.[5144]5144 We know not why to him:

whether from family connections, or that his education, or previous

circumstances, connected Philip with these 'Greeks,' or whether

anything in his position in the Apostolic circle, or something that

had just occurred, influenced their choice. And he also - such was the

ignorance of the Apostles of the inmost meaning of their Master -

dared not go directly to Jesus, but went ot his own townsman, who had

been his early friend and fellow-disciple, and now stood so close to

the Person of the Master - Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter.

Together the two came to Jesus, Andrew apparently foremost. The answer

of Jesus implies what, at any rate, we would have expected, that the

request of these Gentile converts was granted, though this is not

expressly stated, and it is extremely difficult to determine whether,

and what portion of what He spake was addressed to the Greeks, and

what to the disciples. Perhaps we should regard the opening words as

bearing reference to the request of the Greeks, and hence as primarily

addressed to the disciples,[5145]5145 but also as serving as

introduction of the words that follow, which were spoken primarily the

Greeks,[5146]5146 but secondarily also to the disciples, and which

bear on that terrible, very near, mystery of His Death, and their

Baptism into it.

As we see these 'Greeks' approaching, the beginning of Christ's

History seems re-enacted at its close. Not now in the stable of

Bethlehem, but in the Temple, are 'the wise men,' the representatives

of the Gentile world, offering their homage to the Messiah. But the

life which had then begun was now all behind Him - and yet, in a

sense, before Him. The hour of decision was about to strike. Not

merely as the Messiah of Israel, but in His world-wide bearing as 'the

Son of Man,' was He about to be glorified by receiving the homage of

the Gentile world, of which the symbol and the firstfruits were now

before Him. But only in one way could He thus be glorified: by dying

for the salvation ot the world, and so opening the Kingdom of Heaven

to all believers. On a thousand hills was the glorious harvest to

tremble in the golden sunlight; but the corn of wheat falling into the

ground, must, as it falls, die, burst its envelope, and so spring into

a very manifoldedness of life. Otherwise would it have remained alone.

This is the great paradox of the Kingdom of God - a paradox which has

its symbol and analogon in nature, and which has also almost become

the law of progress in history: that life which has not sprung of

death abideth alone, and is really death, and that death is life. A

paradox this, which has its ultimate reason in this, that sin has

entered into the world.

And as to the Master, the Prince of Life, so to the disciples, as

bearing forth the life. If, in this world of sin, He must fall as the

seed-corn into the ground and die, that many may spring of Him, so

must they also hate their life, that they may keep it unto life

eternal. Thus serving, they must follow Him, that where He is they may

also be, for the Father will honour them that honour the Son.

It is now sufficiently clear to us, that our Lord spake primarily to

these Greeks, and secondarily to His disciples, of the meaning of His

impending Death, of the necessity of faithfulness to Him in it, and of

the blessing attaching thereto. Yet was not unconscious of the awful

realities which this involved.[5147]5147 He was true, Man, and His

Human Soul was troubled in view of it:[5148]5148 True Man, therefore

He felt it; True Man, therefore He spake it, and so also sympathised

with them in their coming struggle. Truly Man, but also truly more

than Man - and hence both the expressed desire, and at the same tine

the victory over that desire: 'What shall I say?[5149]5149 "Father,

save Me from this hour?[5150]5150 But for this cause came I unto this

hour!"' And the seeming discord is resolved, as both the Human and the

Divine in the Son - faith and sight - join in glorious accord;

'Father, glorify Thy Name!'

Such appeal and prayer, made in such circumstances, could not have

remained unacknowledged, if He was the Messiah, Son of God. As at His

Baptism, so at this Baptism of self-humiliation and absolute

submission to suffering, came the Voice from Heaven, audible to all,

but its words intelligible only to Him: 'I both glorified it, and will

again glorify it!'[5151]5151 Words these, which carried the Divine

seal of confirmation to all Christ's past work, and assured it for

that which was to come. The words of confirmation could only be for

Himself; 'the Voice' was for all. What mattered it, that some spoke of

it as thunder on a spring-evening, while others, with more reason,

thought of Angel-Voices? To him it bore the assurance, which had all

along been the ground of His claims, as it was the comfort in His

Sufferings, that, as God had in the past glorified Himself in the Son,

so would it be in the future in the perfecting of the work given Him

to do. And this He now spake, as, looking on those Greeks as the

emblem and firstfruits of the work finished in His Passion, He saw of

the travail of His Soul, and was satisfied. Of both He spake in the

prophetic present. To His view judgement had already come to this

world, as it lay in the power of the Evil One, since the Prince of it

was cast out from his present rule. And, in place of it, the Crucified

Christ, 'lifted up out of the earth' - in the twofold sense - was, as

the result of His Work, drawing, with sovereign, conquering power,

'all' unto Him, and up with Him.

The Jews who heard it, so far understood Him, that His words referred

to His removal from earth, or His Death, since this was a common

Jewish mode of expression ({hebrew}).[5152]5152 [5153]5153 But they

failed to understand His special reference to the manner of it. And

yet, in view of the peculiarly shameful death to the cross, it was

most important that He should ever point to it also. But, even in what

they understood, they had a difficulty. They understood Him to imply

that He would be taken from earth; and yet they had always been taught

from the Scriptures[5154]5154 that the Messiah was, when fully

manifested, to abide for ever, or, as the Rabbis put it, that His

Reign was to be followed by the Resurrection. Or did He refer to any

other One by the expression, 'Son of Man?' Into the controversial

part of the question the Lord did not enter; nor would it have been

fitting to have so in that 'hour.' But to their inquiry He fully

replied, and that with such earnest, loving admonition as became His

last address in the Temple. Yes; it was so! But a little while would

the Light be among them.[5155]5155 Let them hasten to avail themselves

of it,[5156]5156 lest darkness overtake them - and he that walked in

darkness knew not wither he went. Oh, that His love could have

arrested them! While they still had 'the Light,' would that they might

learn to believe in the Light, that so they might become the children

of Light!

They were His last words of appeal to them, ere He withdrew to spend

His Sabbath of soul before the Great Contest.[5157]5157 And the writer

of the Fourth Gospel gathers up, by way of epilogue, the great

contrast between Israel and Christ.[5158]5158 Although He had shown so

many miracles, they believe not on Him - and this their wilful

unbelief was the fulfillment of Esaias' prophecy of old concerning the

Messiah.[5159]5159 On the other hand, their wilful unbelief was also

the judgement of God in accordiance with prophecy.[5160]5160 Those who

have followed the course of this history must have learned this above

all, that the rejection of Christ by the Jews was not an isolated act,

but the outcome and direct result of their whole previous religious

development. In face of the clearest evidence, they did not believe,

because they could not believe. The long course of their resistance to

the prophetic message, and their perversion of it, was itself a

hardening of their hearts, although at the same time a God-decreed

sentence on their resistance.[5161]5161 Because they would not believe

- through this their mental obscuration, which came upon them in

Divine judgement, although in the natural course of their self-chosen

religious development - therefore, despite all evidence, they did not

believe, when He came and did such miracles before them. And all this

in accordance with prophecy, when Isaiah saw in far-off vision the

bright glory[5162]5162 of Messiah, and spoke of Him. Thus far Israel

as a nation. And though, even among their 'chief rulers,' there were

many who believed on him, yet dared they not 'make confession,' from

fear that the Pharisees would put them out of the Synagogues, with all

the terrible consequences which this implied. For such surrender of

all were they not prepared, whose intellect might be convinced, but

whose heart was not converted - who 'loved the glory of men more than

the glory of God.'

Such was Israel. On the other hand, what was the summary of the

Christ's activity? His testimony now rose so loud, as to be within

hearing of all ('Jesus cried').[5163]5163 From first to last that

testimony had pointed from Himself up to the Father. Its substance was

the reality and the realisation of that which the Old Testimony had

pointed from Himself up to the Father. Its substance was the reality

and the realisation of that which the Old Testament had infolded and

gradually unfolded to Israel, and through Israel to the world: the

Fatherhood of God. To believe on him was really not faith in him, but

faith in him that sent Him. A step higher: To behold Christ was to

behold Him that had sent Him.[5164]5164 To combine these two: Christ

had come a light into the world, God had sent Him as as the Sun of

Righteousness, that by believing on him as the God-sent, men might

attain moral vision - no longer 'abide in darkness,' but in the bright

spiritual light that and risen. But as for the others, there were

those who heard and did not keep[5165]5165 His words; and, again, who

rejected, Him, and did not receive His words. Neither in one nor the

other case was the controversy as between His sayings and men. As

regarded the one class, He had come into the world with the Word of

salvation, not with the sword of judgement. As regarded His open

enemies, He left the issue till the evidence of His word should appear

in the terrible judgenment of the last Day.

Once more, and more empatic than ever, was the final appeal to His

Mission by the Father.[5166]5166 From first to last it had not been

His own work: what He should say, and what He should speak, the Father

'Himself' had given Him commandment. Nay, this commandment, and what

He spoke in it, was not mere teaching, nor Law: it was Life

everlasting. And so it is, and ever shall be, eternal thanks to the

love of Him Who sent, and the grace of Him Who came: that the things

which He spake, He spake as the Father said unto Him.

These two things, then, are the final summary by the Apostle of the

History of the Christ in His public activity. On the one hand, he

shows us how Israel, hardened in the self-chosen course of its

religious development, could not, and, despite the clearest evidence,

did not, believe. And, on the other hand, he sets before us the Christ

absolutely surrendering Himself to do the Will and Work of the Father;

witnessed by the Father; revealing the Father; coming as the Light of

the world to chase away its moral darkness; speaking to all men,

bringing to them salvation, not judgment, and leaving the vindication

of His Word to its manifestation in the Last Day; and finally, as the

Christ, Whose every message is commanded of God, and Whose every

commandment is life everlasting - and therefore and so speaking it, as

the Father said unto Him.

These two things: concerning the history of Israel and their necessary

unbelief, and concerning the Christ as God-sent, God-witnessed,

God-revealing, bringing light and life as the Father's gift and

command - the Christ as absolutely surrendering Himself to this

Mission and embodying it - are the sum of the Gospel-narratives. They

explain their meaning, and set forth their object and lessons.

CHAPTER IV.

THE THIRD DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - THE LAST CONTROVERSIES AND

DISCOURSES - THE

SADDUCEES AND THE RESURRECTION - THE SCRIBE AND THE GREAT

COMMANDMENT -

QUESTION TO THE PHARISEES ABOUT DAVID'S SON AND LORD - FINAL WARNING

TO THE

PEOPLE: THE EIGHT 'WOES' - FAREWELL.

(St. Matt. xxii. 23-33; St. Mark xii. 18-27; St. Luke xx. 27-39; St.

Matt. xxii. 34-40; St. Mark xii. 28-34; St. Matt. xxii. 41-46; St.

Mark xii. 35-40; St. Luke xx. 40-47; St. Matt. xxiii.)

THE last day in the Temple was not to pass without other 'temptations'

than that of the Priests when they questioned His authority, or of the

Pharisees when they cunningly sought to entangle Him in His speech.

Indeed, Christ had on this occasion taken a different position; He had

claimed supreme authority, and thus challenged the leaders of Israel.

For this reason, and because at the last we expect assaults from all

His enemies, we are prepared for the controversies of that day.

We remember that, during the whole previous history, Christ had only

on one occasion come into public conflict with the Sadducees, when,

characteristically, they had asked of Him 'a sign from

heaven.'[5167]5167 Their Rationalism would lead them to treat the

whole movement as beneath serious notice, the outcome of ignorant

fanaticism. Nevertheless, when Jesus assumed such a position in the

Temple, and was evidently to such extent swaying the people, it

behoved them, if only to guard their position, no longer to stand by.

Possibly, the discomfiture and powerlessness of the Pharisees may also

have had their influence. At any rate, the impression left is, that

those of them who now went to Christ were delegates, and that the

question which they put had been well planned.[5168]5168

Their object was certainly not serious argument, but to use the much

more dangerous weapon of ridicule. Persecution the populace might have

resented; for open opposition all would have been prepared; but to

come with icy politeness and philosophic calm, and by a well-turned

question to reduce the renowned Galilean Teacher to silence, and show

the absurdity of His teaching, would have been to inflict on His cause

the most damaging blow. To this day such appeals to rough and ready

common-sense are the main stock-in-trade of that coarse infidelity,

which, ignoring alike the demands of higher thinking and the facts of

history, appeals - so often, alas! effectually - to the untrained

intellect of the multitude, and - shall we not say it? - to the coarse

and lower in us all. Besides, had the Sadducees succeeded, they would

at the same time have gained a signal triumph for their tenets, and

defeated, together with the Galilean Teacher, their own Pharisaic

opponents. The subject of attack was to be the Resurrection[5169]5169

- the same which is still the favourite topic for the appeals of the

coarser forms of infidelity to 'the common sense' of the masses.

Making allowance for difference of circumstances, we might almost

imagine we were listening to one of our modern orators of materialism.

And in those days the defence of belief in the Resurrection laboured

under twofold difficulty. It was as yet a matter of hope, not of

faith: something to look forward to, not to look back upon. The

isolated events recorded in the Old Testament, and the miracles of

Christ - granting that they were admitted - were rather instances of

resuscitation than of Resurrection. The grand fact of history, than

which none is better attested - the Resurrection of Christ - had not

yet taken place, and was not even clearly in view of any one. Besides,

the utterances of the Old Testament on the subject of the 'hereafter'

were, as became alike that stage of revelation and the understanding

of those to whom it was addressed, far from clear. In the light of the

New Testament it stands out in the sharpest proportions, although as

an Alpine height afar off; but then that Light had not yet risen upon

it.

Besides, the Sadducees would allow no appeal to the highly poetic

language of the Prophets, to whom, at any rate, they attached less

authority, but demanded proof from that clear and precise letter of

the Law, every tittle and iota of which the Pharisees exploited for

their doctrinal inferences, and from which alone they derived them.

Here, also, it was the Nemesis of Pharisaism, that the postulates of

their system laid it open to attack. In vain would the Pharisees

appeal to Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, or the Psalms.[5170]5170 To such an

argument as from the words, 'this people will rise up,'[5171]5171 the

Sadducees would rightly reply, that the context forbade the

application to the Resurrection; to the quotation of Isaiah xxvi. 19,

they would answer that that promise must be understood spiritually,

like the vision of the dry bones in Ezekiel; while such a reference as

to this, 'causing the lips of those that are asleep to

speak,'[5172]5172 would scarcely require serious refutation.[5173]5173

Of similar character would be the argument from the use of a special

word, such as 'return' in Gen. iii. 19,[5174]5174 or that from the

twofold mention of the word 'cut off' in the original of Num. xv. 31,

as implying punishment in the present and in the future

dispensation.[5175]5175 Scarcely more convincing would be the appeal

to such passages as Deut. xxxii. 39: 'I kill and make

alive,'[5176]5176 or the statement that, whenever a promise occurs in

the form which in Hebrew represents the future tense,[5177]5177 it

indicates a reference to the Resurrection. Perhaps more satisfactory,

although not convincing to a Sadducee, whose special contention it was

to insist on proof from the Law,[5178]5178 might be an appeal to such

passages as Dan. xii. 2, 13,[5179]5179 or to the restoration of life

by certain of the prophets, with the superadded canon, that God had in

part prefiguratively wrought by His prophets whatever He would fully

restore in the future.

If Pharisaic argumentation had failed to convince the Sadducees on

Biblical grounds, it would be difficult to imagine that, even in the

then state of scientific knowledge, any enquiring person could have

really believed that there was a small bone in the spine which was

indestructible, and from which the new man would spring;[5180]5180 or

that there existed even now a species of mice, or else of snails,

which gradually and visibly developed out of the earth.[5181]5181 Many

clever sayings of the Pharisees are, indeed, here recorded in their

controversies, as on most subjects, and by which a Jewish opponent

might have been silenced. But here, especially, must it have been felt

that a reply was not always an answer, and that the silencing of an

opponent was not identical with proof of one's own assertion. And the

additions with which the Pharisees had encumbered the doctrine of the

Resurrection would not only surround it with fresh difficulties, but

deprive the simple fact of its grand majesty. Thus, it was a point in

discussion, whether a person would rise in his clothes, which one

Rabbi tried to establish by a reference to the grain of wheat, which

was buried 'naked,' but rose clothed.[5182]5182 Indeed, some Rabbis

held, that a man would rise in exactly the same clothes in which he

had been buried, while others denied this.[5183]5183 On the other

hand, it was beautifully argued that body and soul must be finally

judged together, so that, in their contention to which of them the

sins of man had been due, justice might be meted out to each - or

rather to the two in their combination, as in their combination they

had sinned.[5184]5184 Again, it was inferred from the apparition of

Samuel[5185]5185 that the risen would look exactly as in life - have

even the same bodily defects, such as lameness, blindness, or

deafness. It is argued, that they were only afterwards to be healed,

lest enemies might say that God had not healed them when they were

alive, but that He did so when they were dead, and that they were

perhaps not the same persons.[5186]5186 In some respects even more

strange was the contention that, in order to secure that all the pious

of Israel should rise on the sacred soil of Palestine,[5187]5187 there

were cavities underground in which the body would roll till it reached

the Holy Land, there to rise to newness of life.[5188]5188

But all the more, that it was so keenly controverted by heathens,

Sadducees, and heretics, as appears from many reports in the Talmud,

and that it was so encumbered with realistic legends, should we admire

the tenacity with which the Pharisees clung to this doctrine. The hope

of the Resurrection-world appears in almost every religious utterance

of Israel. It is the spring-bud on the tree, stript by the long winter

of disappointment and persecution. This hope pours its morning carol

into the prayer which every Jew is bound to say on

awakening;[5189]5189 it sheds its warm breath over the oldest of the

daily prayers which date from before the time of our Lord;[5190]5190

in the formula 'from age to age,' 'world without end,' it forms, so to

speak, the rearguard to every prayer, defending it from Sadducean

assault;[5191]5191 it is one of the few dogmas denial of which

involves, according to the Mishnah, the loss of eternal life, the

Talmud explaining, almost in the words of Christ - that in the

retribution of God this is only 'measure according to

measure;'[5192]5192 nay, it is venerable even in its exaggeration,

that only our ignorance fails to perceive it in every section of the

Bible, and to hear it in every commandment of the Law.

But in the view of Christ the Resurrection would necessarily occupy a

place different from all this. It was the innermost shrine in the

Sanctuary of His Mission, towards which He steadily tended; it was

also, at the same time, the living corner-stone of that Church which

he had builded, and its spire, which, as with uplifted finger, ever

pointed all men heavenwards. But of such thoughts connected with His

Resurrection Jesus could not have spoken to the Sadducees; they would

have been unintelligible at that time even to His own disciples. He

met the cavil of the Sadducees majestically, seriously, and solemnly,

with words most lofty and spiritual, yet such as they could

understand, and which, if they had received them, would have led them

onwards and upwards far beyond the standpoint of the Pharisees. A

lesson this to us in our controversies.

The story under which the Sadducees conveyed their sneer was also

intended covertly to strike at their Pharisaic opponents. The ancient

ordinance of marrying a brother's childless widow[5193]5193 [5194]5194

had more and more fallen into discredit, as its original motive ceased

to have influence. A large array of limitations narrowed the number of

those on whom this obligation now devolved. Then the Mishnah laid it

down that, in ancient times, when the ordinance of such marriage was

obeyed in the spirit of the Law, its obligation took precedence of the

permission of dispensation, but that afterwards this relationship

became reversed.[5195]5195 Later authorities went further. Some

declared every such union, if for beauty, wealth, or any other than

religious motives, as incestuous,[5196]5196 while one Rabbi absolutely

prohibited it, although opinions continued divided on the subject. But

what here most interests us is, that what are called in the Talmud the

'Samaritans,' but, as we judge, the Sadducees, held the opinion that

the command to marry a brother's widow only applied to a betrothed

wife, not to one that had actually been wedded.[5197]5197 This gives

point to the controversial question, as addressed to Jesus.

A case such as they told, of a woman who had successively been married

to seven brothers, might, according to Jewish Law, have really

happened.[5198]5198 Their sneering question now was, whose wife she

was to be in the Resurrection. This, of course, on the assumption of

the grossly materialistic views of the Pharisees. In this the

Sadducean cavil was, in a sense, anticipating certain objections of

modern materialism. It proceeded on the assumption that the relations

of time would apply to eternity, and the conditions of the things seen

hold true in regard to those that are unseen. But perchance it is

otherwise; and the future may reveal what in the present we do not

see. The reasoning as such may be faultless; but, perchance, something

in the future may have to be inserted in the major or the minor, which

will make the conclusion quite other! All such cavils we would meet

with the twofold appeal of Christ to the Word[5199]5199 and to the

Power of God - how God has manifested, and how He will manifest

Himself - the one flowing from the other.

In His argument against the Sadducees Christ first appealed to the

power of God.[5200]5200 What God would work was quite other than they

imagined: not a mere re-awakening, but a transformation. The world to

come was not to be a reproduction of that which had passed away - else

why should it have passed away - but a regeneration and renovation;

and the body with which we were to be clothed would be like that which

Angels bear. What, therefore, in our present relations is of the

earth, and of our present body of sin and corruption, will cease; what

is eternal in them will continue. But the power of God will transform

all - the present terrestrial into the future heavenly, the body of

humiliation into one of exaltation. This will be the perfecting of all

things by that Almighty Power by which He shall subdue all things to

Himself in the Day of His Power, when death shall be swallowed up in

victory. And herein also consists the dignity of man, in virtue of the

Redemption introduced, and, so to speak, begun at his Fall, that man

is capable of such renovation and perfection - and herein, also, is

'the power of God,' that He hath quickened us together with Christ, so

that here already the Church receives in Baptism into Christ the germ

of the Resurrection, which is afterwards to be nourished and fed by

faith, through the believer's participation in the Sacrament of

fellowship with His body and Blood.[5201]5201 Nor ought questions here

to rise, like dark clouds, such as of the perpetuity of those

relations which on earth are not only so precious to us, but so holy.

Assuredly, they will endure, as all that is of God and good; only what

in them is earthly will cease, or rather be transformed with the body.

Nay, and we shall also recognise each other, not only by the

fellowship of the soul; but as, even now, the mind impresses its stamp

on the features, so then, when all shall be quite true, shall the

soul, so to speak, body itself forth, fully impress itself on the

outward appearance, and for the first time shall we then fully

recognise those whom we shall now fully know - with all of earth that

was in them left behind, and all of God and good fully developed and

ripened into perfectness of beauty.

But it was not enough to brush aside the flimsy cavil, which had only

meaning on the supposition of grossly materialistic views of the

Resurrection. Our Lord would not merely reply, He would answer the

Sadducees; and more grand or noble evidence of the Resurrection has

never been offered than that which He gave. Of course as speaking to

the Sadducees, He remained on the ground of the Pentateuch; and yet it

was not only to the Law but to the whole Bible that He appealed, nay,

to that which underlay Revelation itself: the relation between God and

man. Not this nor that isolated passage only proved the Resurrection:

He Who, not only historically but in the fullest sense, calls Himself

the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, cannot leave them dead.

Revelation implies, not merely a fact of the past - as is the notion

which traditionalism attaches to it - a dead letter; it means a living

relationship. 'He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for

all live unto Him.'

The Sadducees were silenced, the multitude was astonished, and even

from some of the Scribes the admission was involuntarily wrung:

'Teacher, Thou hast beautifully said.' One point, however, still

claims our attention. It is curious that, as regards both these

arguments of Christ, Rabbinism offers statements closely similar.

Thus, it is recorded as one of the frequent sayings of a later Rabbi,

that in the world to come there would be neither eating nor drinking,

fruitfulness nor increase, business nor envy, hatred nor strife, but

that the just would sit with crowns on their heads, and feast on the

splendor of the Shekhinah.[5202]5202 This reads like a Rabbinic

adaptation of the saying of Christ. As regards the other point, the

Talmud reports a discussion on the Resurrection between 'Sadducees,'

or perhaps Jewish heretics (Jewish-Christian heretics), in which Rabbi

Gamaliel II. at last silences his opponents by an appeal to the

promise[5203]5203 'that ye may prolong your days in the land which the

Lord sware unto your father to give unto them' - 'unto them,'

emphasises the Rabbi, not 'unto you.'[5204]5204 Although this almost

entirely misses the spiritual meaning conveyed in the reasoning of

Christ, it is impossible to mistake its Christian origin. Gamaliel II.

lived after Christ, but at a period when there was lively intercourse

between Jews and Jewish Christians; while, lastly, we have abundant

evidence that the Rabbi was acquainted with the sayings of Christ, and

took part in the controversy with the Church.[5205]5205 On the other

hand, Christians in his day - unless heretical sects - neither denied

that Resurrection, nor would they have so argued with the Jewish

Patriarch; while the Sadducees no longer existed as a party engaging

in active controversy. But we can easily perceive, that intercourse

would be more likely between Jews and such heretical Jewish Christians

as might maintain that the Resurrection was past, and only spiritual.

The point is deeply interesting. It opens such further questions as

these: In the constant intercourse between Jewish Christians and Jews,

what did the latter learn? and may there not be much in the Talmud

which is only an appropriation and adaptation of what had been derived

from the New Testament?

2. The answer of our Lord was not without its further results. As we

conceive it, among those who listened to the brief but decisive

passage between Jesus and the Sadducees were some 'Scribes' -

Sopherim, or, as they are also designated, 'lawyers,' 'teachers of the

Law,' experts, expounders, practitioners of the Jewish Law. One of

them, perhaps he who exclaimed: Beautifully said, Teacher! hastened to

the knot of Pharisees, whom it requires no stretch of the imagination

to picture gathered in the Temple on that day, and watching, with

restless, ever foiled malice, the Saviour's every movement. As 'the

Scribe' came up to them, he would relate how Jesus had literally

'gagged' and 'muzzled'[5206]5206 the Sadducees - just as, according to

the will of God, we are 'by well-doing to gag the want or knowledge of

senseless men.' There can be little doubt that the report would give

rise to mingled feelings, in which that prevailing would be, that,

although Jesus might thus have discomfited the Sadducees, He would be

unable to cope with other questions, if only properly propounded by

Pharisaic learning. And so we can understand how one of the number,

perhaps the same Scribe, would volunteer to undertake the

office;[5207]5207 and how his question was, as St. Matthew reports, in

a sense really intended to 'tempt' Jesus.

We dismiss here the well-known Rabbinic distinctions of 'heavy' and

'light' commandments, because Rabbinism declared the 'light' to be as

binding as 'the heavy,'[5208]5208 those of the Scribes more 'heavy'

(or binding) than those of Scripture,[5209]5209 and that one

commandment was not to be considered to carry greater reward, and to

be therefore more carefully observed, than another.[5210]5210 That

such thoughts were not in the mind of the questioner, but rather the

grand general problem - however himself might have answered it -

appears even from the form of his inquiry: 'Which [qualis] is the

great - 'the first'[5211]5211 - commandment in the Law?' So

challenged, the Lord could have no hesitation in replying. Not to

silence him, but to speak the absolute truth, He quoted the

well-remembered words which every Jew was bound to repeat in his

devotions, and which were ever to be on his lips, living or dying, as

the inmost expression of his faith: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God

is one Lord.' And then continuing, He repeated the command concerning

love to God which is the outcome of that profession. But to have

stopped here would have been to propound a theoretic abstraction

without concrete reality, a mere Pharisaic worship of the letter. As

God is love - His Nature so manifesting itself - so is love to God

also love[5212]5212 to man. And so this second is 'like' 'the first

and great commandment.' It was a full answer to the Scribe when He

said: 'There is none other commandment greater than these.'

But it was more than an answer, even deepest teaching, when, as St.

Matthew reports, He added: 'on these two commandments hang all the law

and the prophets.'[5213]5213 It little matters for our present purpose

how the Jews at the time understood and interpreted these two

commandments.[5214]5214 They would know what it meant that the Law and

the Prophets 'hung' on them, for it was a Jewish expression

({hebrew}). He taught them, not that any one commandment was greater

or smaller, heavier or lighter, than another - might be set aside or

neglected, but that all sprang from these two as their root and

principle, and stood in living connection with them. It was teaching

similar to that concerning the Resurrection; that, as concerning the

promises, so concering the commandments, all Revelation was one

connected whole; not disjointed ordinances of which the letter was to

be weighed, but a life springing from love to God and love to man. So

noble was the answer, that for the moment the generous enthusiasm of

the Scribe, who had previously been favorably impressed by Christ's

answer to the Sadducees, was kindled. For the moment, at least,

traditionalism lost its sway; and, as Christ pointed to it, he saw the

exceeding moral beauty of the Law. He was not far from the Kingdom of

God.[5215]5215 Whether or not he ever actually entered it, is written

on the yet unread page of its history.

3. The Scribe had originally come to put his question with mixed

motives, partially inclined towards Him from His answer to the

Sadducees, and yet intending to subject Him to the Rabbinic test. The

effect now wrought in him, and the silence which from that moment fell

on all His would-be questioners, induced Christ to follow up the

impression that had been made. Without addressing any one in

particular, He set before them all, what perhaps was the most familiar

subject in their theology, that of the descent of Messiah. Whose Son

was He? And when they replied: 'The Son of David,'[5216]5216 He

referred them to the opening words of Psalm cx., in which David called

the Messiah 'Lord.' The argument proceeded, of course, on the two-fold

supposition that the Psalm was Davidic and that it was Messianic.

Neither of these statements would have been questioned by the ancient

Synagogue. But we could not rest satisfied with the explanation that

this sufficed for the purpose of Christ's argument, if the foundation

on which it rested could be seriously called in question. Such,

however, is not the case. To apply Psalm cx., verse by verse and

consistently, to any one of the Maccabees, were to undertake a

critical task which only a series of unnatural explanations of the

language could render possible. Strange, also, that such an

interpretation of what at the time of Christ would have been a

comparatively young composition, should have been wholly unknown alike

to Sadducee and Pharisee. For our own part, we are content to rest the

Messianic interpretation on the obvious and natural meaning of the

words taken in connection with the general teaching of the Old

Testament about the Messiah, on the undoubted interpretation of the

ancient Jewish Synagogue,[5217]5217 on the authority of Christ, and on

the testimony of History.

Compared with this, the other question as to the authorship of the

Psalm is of secondary importance. The character of infinite, nay,

Divine, superiority to any earthly Ruler, and of course to David,

which the Psalm sets forth in regard to the Messiah, would

sufficiently support the argument of Christ. But, besides, what does

it matter, whether the Psalm was composed by David, or only put into

the mouth of David (David's or Davidic), which, on the supposition of

Messianic application, is the only rational alternative?

But we should greatly err if we thought that, in calling the attention

of His hearers to this apparent contradiction about the Christ, the

Lord only intended to show the utter incompetence of the Pharisees to

teach the higher truths of the Old Testament. Such, indeed, was the

case - and they felt it in His Presence.[5218]5218 But far beyond

this, as in the proof which He gave for the Ressurection, and in the

view which He presented of the great commandment, the Lord would point

to the grand harmonious unity of Revelation. Viewed separately, the

two statements, that Messiah was David's Son, and that David owned Him

Lord, would seem incompatible. But in their combination in the Person

of the Christ, how harmonious and how full of teaching - to Israel of

old, and to all men - concerning the nature of Christ's Kingdom and of

His Work!

It was but one step from this demonstration of the incompetence of

Israel's teachers for the position they claimed to a solemn warning on

this subject. And this appropriately constitutes Christ's Farewell to

the Temple, to its authorieites, and to Israel. As might have been

expected, we have the report of it in St. Matthew's Gospel.[5219]5219

Much of this had been said before, but in quite other connection, and

therefore with different application. We notice this, when comparing

this Discourse with the Sermon on the Mount, and, still more, with

what Christ had said when at the meal in the house of the Pharisee in

Peræa.[5220]5220 But here St. Matthew presents a regular series of

charges against the representatives of Judaism, formulated in logical

manner, taking up successively one point after the other, and closing

with the expression of deepest compassion and longing for that

Jerusalem, whose children He would fain have gathered under His

sheltering wings from the storm of Divine judgment.

To begin with - Christ would have them understand, that, in warning

them of the incompetence of Israel's teachers for the position which

they occupied, He neither wished for Himself nor His disciples the

place of authority which they claimed, nor yet sought to incite the

people to reisitance thereto. On the contrary, so long as they held

the place of authority they were to be regarded - in the language of

the Mishnah[5221]5221 - as if instituted by Moses himself, as sitting

in Moses' seat, and were to be obeyed, so far as merely outward

observances were concerned. We regard this direction, not as of merely

temporary application, but as involving as important principle. But we

also recall that the ordinances to which Christ made reference were

those of the Jewish canon-law, and did not involve anything which

could really affect the conscience - except that of the ancient, or of

our modern Pharisees. But while they thus obeyed their outward

directions, they were equally to eschew the spirit which characterised

their observances.[5222]5222 In this respect of twofold charge is laid

against them: of want of spiritual earnestness and love,[5223]5223 and

of more externalism, vanity, and self-seeking.[5224]5224 And here

Christ interrupted His Discourse to warn His disciples against the

first beginnings of what had led to such fearful consequences, and to

point them to the better way.[5225]5225

This constitutes the first part of Christ's charge. Before proceeding

to those which follow, we may give a few illustrative explanations. Of

the opening accusation about the binding (truly in bondage: desme_w)

of heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and laying them on men's

shoulders, proof can scarcely be required. As frequently shown,

Rabbinism placed the ordinances of tradition above those of the

Law,[5226]5226 and this by a necessity of the system, since they were

professedly the authoritative exposition and the supplement of the

written Law.[5227]5227 And although it was a general rule, that no

ordinance should be enjoined heavier that the congregation could

bear,[5228]5228 yet (as previously stated) it was admitted, that

whereas the words of the Law contained what 'lightened' and what 'made

heavy,' the words of the Scribes contained only what 'made

heavy.'[5229]5229 Again, it was another principle, that were an

'aggravation' or increase of the burden had once been introduced, it

must continue to be observed.[5230]5230 Thus the burdens became

intolerable. And the blame rested equally on both the great Rabbinic

Schools. For, although lthe School of Hillel was supposed in general

to make the yoke lighter, and that of Shammai heavier, yet not only

did they agree on many points,[5231]5231 but the School of Hillel was

not unfrequently even more strict than that of his rival.[5232]5232 In

truth, their differences seem too often only prompted by a spirit of

opposition, so that the serious business of religion became in their

hands one of rival authority and mere wrangling.[5233]5233

It is not so easy to understand the second part of Christ's

accusation. There were, indeed, many hypocrites among them, who might,

in the language of the Talmud, alleviate for themselves and make heavy

for others.[5234]5234 Yet the charge of not moving them with the

finger could scarcely apply to the Pharisees as a party - not even in

this sense, that Rabbinic ingenuity mostly found some means of evading

what was unpleasant. But, as previously explained,[5235]5235 we would

understand the word rendered 'move' as meaning to 'set in motion,' or

'move away,' in the sense that they did not 'alleviate' where they

might have done so, or else with reference to their admitted

principle, that their ordinances always made heavier, never lighter -

always imposed grievous burdens, but never, not even with the finger,

moved them away.

With this charge of unreality and want of love, those of externalism,

vanity, and self-seeking are closely connected. Here we can only make

selection from the abundant evidence in our support of it. By a merely

external interpretation of Exod. xiii. 9, 16, and Deut. vi. 8; xi. 18,

practice of wearing Phylacteries or, as they were called, Tephillin,

'prayer-fillets,' was introduced.[5236]5236 These, as will be

remembered, were square capsules, covered with leather, containing on

small scrolls of parchment, these four sections of the law: Exod.

xiii. 1-10; 11-16: Deut. vi. 4-9; xi. 13-21. The Phylacteries were

fastened by long leather straps to the forehead, and round the left

arm, near the heart. Most superstitious reverence was attached to

them, and in later times they were even used as amulets. Nevertheless,

the Talmud itself gives confirmation that the practice of constantly

wearing phylacteries - or, it might be, making them broad, and

enlarging the borders of the garments, we intended 'for to be seen of

men.' Thus we are told of a certain man who had done so, in order to

cover his dishonest practices in appropriating what had been entrusted

to his keeping.[5237]5237 Nay, the Rabbis had in so many words to lay

it down as a principle, than the Phylacteries were not to be worn for

show.[5238]5238

Detailed proof is scarcely required of the charge of vanity and

self-seeking in claiming marked outward honours, such as the

upper-most places at feasts and in the Synagogue, respectful

salutations in the market, the ostentatious repetition of the title

'Rabbi,' or 'Abba,' 'Father,' or 'Master,'[5239]5239 [5240]5240 or the

distinction of being acknowledged as 'greatest.' The very earnestness

with which the Talmud sometimes warns against such motives for study

or for piety sufficiently establishes it. But, indeed, Rabbinic

writings lay down elaborate directions, what place is to be assigned

to the Rabbis, according to their rank, and to their

disciples,[5241]5241 and how in the College the most learned, but at

feast the most aged, among the Rabbis, are to occupy the 'upper

seats.'[5242]5242 So weighty was the duty of respectful salutation by

the title Rabbi, that to neglect it would involve the heaviest

punishment.[5243]5243 Two great Rabbis are described as literally

complaining, that they must have lost the very appearance of learning,

since in the market-place they only had been greeted with 'May your

peace be great,' without the addition 'My masters.'[5244]5244

A few further illustrations of the claims which Rabbinism preferred

may throw light on the words of Christ. It reads like a wretched

imitation from the New Testament, when the heathen Governor of Cæsarea

is represented as rising up before Rabbis because he beheld 'the faces

as it were of Angels;' or like an adaptation of the well-known story

about Constantine the Great when the Governor of Antioch is described

as vindicating a similar mark of respect to the Rabbis by this, that

he had seen their faces and by them conquered in battle.[5245]5245

From another Rabbi rays of light are said to have visibly

proceeded.[5246]5246 According to some, they were Epicuraeans, who had

no part in the world to come, who referred slightingly to 'these

Rabbis.'[5247]5247 To sypply a learned man with the means of gaining

money in trade, would procure a high place in heaven.[5248]5248 It was

said that, according to Prov. viii. 15, the sages were to be saluted

as kings;[5249]5249 nay, in some respects, they were higher - for, as

between a sage and a king, it would be duty to give the former

priority in redemption from captivity, since every Israelite was fit

to be a king, but the loss of a Rabbi could not easily be made

up.[5250]5250 But even this is not all. The curse of a Rabbi, even if

uncaused, would surely come to pass.[5251]5251 It would be too painful

to repeat some of the miracles pretended to have been done by them or

for them, occasionally in protection of a lie; or to record their

disputes which among them was 'greatest,' or how they established

their respective claims.[5252]5252 Nay, their self-assertion extended

beyond this life, and a Rabbi went so far as to order that he should

be buried in white garments, to show that he was worthy of appearing

before his Maker.[5253]5253 But perhaps the climax of blasphemous

self-assertion is reached in the story, that, in a discussion in

heaven between God and the heavenly Academy on a Halakhic question

about purity, a certain Rabbi - deemed that most learned on the

subject - was summoned to decide the point! As his soul passed from

the body he exclaimed: 'Pure, pure,' which the Voice from Heaven

applied to the state of the Rabbi's soul; and immediately afterwards a

letter had fallen from heaven to inform the sages of the purpose of

which the Rabbi had been summoned to the heavenly assembly, and

afterwards another enjoing a week's universal mourning for him on pain

of excommunication.[5254]5254

Such daring profanities must have crushed out all spiritual religion,

and reduced it to a mere intellectual display, in which the Rabbi was

always chief - here and hereafter. Repulsive as such legends are, they

will at least help us to understand what otherwise might seem harsh in

our Lord's denunciations of Rabbinism. In view of all this, we need

not discuss the Rabbinic warnings against pride and self-seeking when

connected with study, nor their admonitions to humility.[5255]5255

For, the question here is, what Rabbinism regarded as pride, and what

as humility, in its teachers? Nor is it maintained that all were

equally guilty in this matter; and what passed around may well have

led more earnest to energetic admonitions to humility and

unselfishness. but no ingenuity can explain away the facts as above

stated, and, when such views prevailed, it would have been almost

superhuman wholly to aviod what our Lord denounced as characteristic

of Pharisaism. And in this sense, not with Pharisaic painful

literalism, but as opposed to Rabbinic bearing, are we to understand

the Lord's warning ot His own not to claim among brethen to be

'Rabbi,' or 'Abba,' or 'guide.'[5256]5256 The Law of the Kindgom, as

repeatedly taught,[5257]5257 was the opposite. As regarede aims, they

were to seek the greatness of service; and as regarded that

acknowledgment which would come from God, it would be the exaltation

of humiliation.

It was not a break in the Discourse,[5258]5258 rather an

intensification of it, when Christ now turned to make final

denunication of Pharisaism in its sin and hypocrisy.[5259]5259

Corresponding to the eight Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount with

which His public Ministry began, He now closed it with eight

denunciations of woe.[5260]5260 These are the fourthpouring of His

holy wrath, the last and fullest testimony against those whose guilt

would involve Jerusalem in common sin and common judgement. Step by

step, with logical sequence and intensified pathos of energy, is each

charge advanced, and with it the Woe of Divine wrath announced.

The first Woe against Pharisaism was on their shutting the Kingdom of

God against men by their opposition to the Christ. All knew how

exclusive were their pretensions in confining piety to the possesion

of knowledge, and that they declared it impossible for an ignorant

person to be pious. Had they taught men the Scriptures, and shown them

the right way, they would have been true to their office; but woe to

them who, in their positions as leaders, had themselves stood back

with their backs to the door of the Kingdom, and prevented the

entrance of others.

The second Woe was on their covetousness and hypocrisy. They made long

prayers,[5261]5261 but how often did it only cover the vilest

selfishness, even to the 'devouring' of widow's houses. We can

scarcely expect the Talmud here to furnish us with illustrative

instances, and yet at least one such is recorded;[5262]5262 and we

recall how often broad phylacteries covered fraudulent minds.

The third Woe was on their proselytism, which issued only in making

their converts twofold more the children of hell than themselves.

Against this charge, rightly understood, Judaism has in vain sought to

defend itself. It is, indeed, true that, in its pride and

exclusiveness, Judaism seemed to denounce proselytism, laid down

strict rules to test the sincerity of converts, and spoke of them in

general contempt[5263]5263 as 'a plague of leprosy.'[5264]5264 Yet the

bitter complaint of classical writers,[5265]5265 [5266]5266 the

statements of Josephus,[5267]5267 the frequent allusions in the New

Testament and even the admissions of the Rabbis, prove their zeal for

making proselytes - which, indeed, but for its moral sequences, would

neither have deserted nor drawn down the denunciation of a 'woe.' Thus

the Midrash, commenting on the words:[5268]5268 'the souls that they

had gotten in Haran,' refers it to the converts which Abraham had

made, adding that every proselyte was to be regarded as if a soul had

been created.[5269]5269 [5270]5270 To this we may add the pride with

which Judaism looked back upon the 150,000 Gibeonite converts said to

have been made whem David avenged the sin of Saul;[5271]5271 the

satisfaction with which it looked forward to the times of Messiah as

those of spontaneous conversion to the Synagogue;[5272]5272 and not

the unfrequent instances in which a spirit favourableto proselytism is

exhibited in Jewish writings,[5273]5273 as, also, such a saying as

this, that when Israel is obedient to the will of God, He brings in as

converts to Judaism all the just of the nations, such as Jethro,

Rahab, Ruth, &c.[5274]5274 But after all, may the Lord not have

referred, not to conversion to Judaism in general, but to proselytism

to the sect of the Pharisees, which was undoubtedly sought to the

compassing of sea and land?

The fourth Woe is denounced on the moral blindness of these guides

rather than on their hypocrisy. From the nature of things it is not

easy to understand the precise allusion of Christ. It is true that the

Talmud makes the strangest distinction between an oath or adjuration,

such as 'by heaven' or 'by earth,' which is not supposed to be

binding; and that by any of the letters of which Divine Being, when

the oath is supposed to be binding.[5275]5275 But itseems more likely

that our Lord refers to oaths or adjurations in connection with vows,

where the casuistry was of the most complicated kind. In general, the

Lord here condemns the arbitrariness of all such Jewish distinctions,

which, by attaching excessive value to the letter of an oath or vow,

really tended to diminish its sanctity. All such distinctions argued

folly and more blindness.

The fifth Woe referred to one of the best-known and strangest Jewish

ordinances, which extended the mosaic law of tithing, in most

burdensome minuteness, even to the smallest products of the soil that

were esculent and could be preserved,[5276]5276 such as anise. Of

these, according to some, not only the seeds, but, in certain cases,

even the leaves and stalks, had to be tithed.[5277]5277 And this,

together with grievous omission of the weightier matters of the Law:

judgement, mercy, and faith. Truly, this was 'to strain out the gnat,

and swallow the camel!' We remember that this conscientiousness in

tithing constituted one of the characteristics of the Pharisees; but

we could scarcely be prepared for such an instance of it, as when the

Talmud gravely assures us that the ass of a certain Rabbi had been so

well trained as to refuse corn of which the tithes had not been

taken![5278]5278 And experience, not only in the past but in the

present, has only too plainly shown, that a religious zeal which

expends itself on trifles has not room nor strength left for the

weightier matters of the Law.

From tithing to purification the transition was natural.[5279]5279 It

constituted the second grand characteristic of Pharasaic piety. We

have seen with what punctiliousness questions of outward purity of

vessels were discussed. But woe to the hypocrisy which, caring for the

outside, heeded not whether that which filled the cup and platter had

been procured by extortion or was used for excess. And, alas for the

blindness which perceived not, that internal purity was the real

condition of that which was outward!

Woe similarly to another species of hypocrisy, of which, indeed, the

preceding were but the outcome: that of outward appearance of

righteousness, while heart and mind were full of iniquity - just as

those annually-whited sepulchres of theirs seemed so fair outwardly,

but within were full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. Woe,

lastly, to that hypocrisy which built and decorated sepulchres of

prophets and righteous men, and by so doing sought to shelter itself

from share in the guilt of those who had killed them. It was not

spiritual repentance, but national pride, which actuated them in this,

the same spirit of self-sufficiency, pride, and impenitence which had

led their fathers to commit the murders. And were they not about to

imbrue their hands in the blood of Him to Whom all the prophets had

pointed? Fast were they in the Divine judgement filling up the measure

of their fathers.

And thicker and heavier than ever before fell the hailstorm of His

denunciations, as He foretold the certain doom which awaited their

national impenitence.[5280]5280 Prophets, wise men, and scribes would

be sent them of Him; and only murder, sufferings, and persecutions

would await them - not reception of their message and warnings. And so

would they become heirs of all the blood of martyred saints, from that

of him whom Scripture records as the first one murdered, down to that

last martyr of Jewish unbelief of whom tradition spoke in such terms -

Zechariah,[5281]5281 stoned by the king's command in the Court of the

Temple,[5282]5282 whose blood, as legend had it, did not dry up those

two centuries and a half, but still bubbled on the pavement, when

Nebuzar-adan entered the Temple, and at last avenged it.[5283]5283

And yet it would not have been Jesus, if, while denouncing certain

judgement on them who, by continuance and completion of the crimes of

their fathers, through the same unbelief, had served themselves heirs

to all their guilt, He had not also added to it the passionate lament

of a love which, even when spurned, lingered with regretful longing

over the lost.[5284]5284 They all knew the common illustration of the

hen gathering her young brood for shelter,[5285]5285 and they knew

also what of Divine protection, blessing, and rest it implied, when

they spoke of being gathered under the wings of the Shekhinah. Fain

and often would Jesus have given to Israel, His people, that shelter,

rest, protection, and blessing - but they would not. Looking around on

those Temple-buildings - that House, it shall be left to them

desolate! And he quitted its courts with these words, that they of

Israel should not see Him again till, the night of their unbelief

past, they would welcome His return with a better Hosanna than that

which greeted His Royal Entry three days before. And this was the

'Farewell' and the parting of Israel's Messiah from Israel and its

temple. Yet a Farewell which promised a coming again; and a parting

which implied a welcome in the future from a believing people to a

gracious, pardoning King!

CHAPTER V.

THE THIRD DAY IN PASION-WEEK - THE LAST SERIES OF PARABLES: TO THE

PHARISEES

AND TO THE PEOPLE - ON THE WAY TO JERUSALEM: THE PARABLE OF THE

LABOURERS IN

THE VINEYARD - IN THE TEMPLE: THE PARABLE OF THE 'NO' AND 'YES' OF THE

TWO

SONS - THE PARABLE OF THE EVIL HUSBANDMEN EVILLY DESTROYED - THE

PARABLE OF

THE MARRIAGE OF THE KING'S SON AND OF THE WEDDING GARMENT

(ST. Matt. xix. 30, xx. 16; St. Matt. xxi. 28-32; St. Mark xii. 1-12;

St. Luke xx. 9-19; St. Matt. xxii. 1-14.)

ALTHOUGH it may not be possible to mark their exact succession, it

will be convenient here to group together the last series of Parables.

Most, if not all of them, were spoken on that third day in Passion

week: the first four to a more general audience; the last three (to be

treated in another chapter) to the disciples, when, on the evening of

that third day, on the Mount of Olives,[5286]5286 He told them of the

'Last Things.' They are the Parables of Judgment, and in one form or

another treat of 'the End.'

1. The Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard.[5287]5287 As treating

of 'the End,' this Parable evidently belongs to the last series,

although it may have been spoken previously to Passion-Week, perhaps

on that Mission-journey in Peræa, in connection with which it is

recorded by St. Matthew. At any rate, it stands in internal relation

with what passed on that occasion, and must therefore be studied with

reference to it.

We remember, that on the occasion of the rich young ruler's failure to

enter the Kingdom, to which he was so near, Christ had uttered an

earnest warning on the danger of 'riches.'[5288]5288 In the low

spiritual stage which the Apostles had as yet attained, it was,

perhaps only natural that Peter should, as spokesman of the rest,

have, in a kind of spiritual covetousness, clutched at the promised

reward, and that in a tone of self-righteousness he should have

reminded Christ of the yet part of what He, the Lord. had always to

bear, and bore so patiently and lovingly, from their ignorance and

failure to understand Him and His work. And this want of true

sympathy, this constant contending with the moral dulness even of

those nearest to Him, must have been part of His great humiliation and

sorrow, one element in the terrible solitariness of His Life, which

made Him feel that, in the truest sense, 'the Son of Man had not where

to lay His Head.' And yet we also mark the wondrous Divine generosity

which, even in moments of such sore disappointment, would not let Him

take for nought what should have been freely offered in the gladsome

service of grateful love. Only there was here deep danger to the

disciples: danger of lapsing into feelings kindred to those with which

the Pharisees viewed the pardoned Publicans, or th elder son in the

Parable his younger brother; danger of misunderstanding the right

relations, and with it the very character of the Kingdom, and of work

in and for it. It is to this that the Parable of the Labourers in the

Vineyard refers.

The principle which Christ lays down is, that, while nothing done for

Him shall lose its rewared, yet, from one reason or another, no

forecast can be made, no inferences of self-righteousness may be

drawn. It does not by any means follow, that most work done, at least,

to our seeing and judging, shall entail a greater reward. On the

contrary, 'many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be

first.' Not all, not yet always and necessarily, but 'many.' And in

such cases no wrong has been done; there exists no claim, even in view

of the promises of due acknowledgement of work. Spiritual pride and

self-assertion can only be the outcome either of misunderstanding

God's relation to us, or else of a wrong state of mind towards

others;[5289]5289 - that is, it betokens mental or moral unfitness.

Of this the Parable of the Labourers is an illustration. It teaches

nothing beyond this.[5290]5290 But, while illustrating how it may come

that some who were first are 'last,' and how utterly mistaken or wrong

is the thought that they must necessarily receive more than others,

who, seemingly, have done more - how, in short, work for Christ is not

a ponderable quantity, so much for so much, nor yet we the judges of

when and why a worker has come - it also conveys much that is new,

and, in many respects, most comforting.

We mark, first, the bearing of 'the householder, who went out

immediately, at earliest morn (_ma prw_), to hire labourers into his

vineyard.' That he did not send his steward, but went

himself,[5291]5291 and with the dawn of morning, shows both that there

was much work to do, and the householder's anxiety to have it done.

That householder is God, and the vineyard His Kingdom; the labourers,

whom with earliest morning He seeks in the market-place of busy life,

are His Servants. With these he agreed for a denarius a day, which was

the ordianry wages for a day's labour,[5292]5292 and so sent them into

the vineyard; in other words, He told them He would pay the reward

promised to labourers. So passed the early hours of the morning. About

the third hour (the Jewish working day being reckoned from sunrise to

sunset), that is, probably as it was drawing towards a close, he went

out again, and, as he saw 'others' standing idle in the market-place,

he said to them, 'Go ye also into the vineyard.' There was more than

enough to do in that vineyard; enough and more to employ them. And

when he came, they had stood in the marketplace ready and waiting to

go to work, yet 'idle' - unemployed as yet. It might not have been

precisely their blame that they had not gone before; they were

'others' than those in the market-place when the Master had first

come, and they had not been there at that time. Only as he now sent

them, he made no definite promise. They felt that in their special

circumstances they had no claim; he told them, that whatsoever was

right he would give them; and they implicitly trusted to his word, to

his justice and goodness. And so happened it yet again, both at the

sixth and at the ninth hour of the day. We repeat, that in none of

these instances was it the guilt of the labourers - in the sense of

being due to their unwillingness or refusal - that they had not before

gone into the vineyard. For some reason - perhaps by their fault,

perhaps not, they had not been earlier in the market-place. But as

soon as they were there and called, they went, although, of course,

the loss of time, however caused, implied loss of work. Neither did

the Master in any case make, nor they ask for, other promise than that

implied in his word and character.

These four things, then, stand out clearly in the Parable: the

abundance of work to be done in the vineyard; th anxiety of the

householder to secure all available labourers; the circumstance that,

not from unwillingness or refusal, but because they had not been there

and available, the labourers had come at later hours; and that, when

they had so come, they were ready to go into the vineyard without

promise of definite reward, simply trusting to the truth and goodness

of him whom they went to serve. We think here of those 'last,' the

Gentiles from the east, west, north, and south;[5293]5293 of the

converted publicans and sinners; of those, a great part of whose lives

has, alas! been spent somewhere else, and who have only come at a late

hour into the market-place; nay, of them also whose opportunities,

capacity, strength, or time have been very limited - and we thank God

for the teaching of this Parable. And if doubt should still exist, it

must be removed by the concluding sentences of this part of the

Parable, in which the householder is represented as going out at the

last hour, when, finding others standing[5294]5294 he asks them why

they stood there all the day idle, to which they reply, that no man

had hired them. These also are, in turn, sent into the vineyard,

though apparently without any expressed promise at all.[5295]5295 It

thus appears, that in proportion to the lateness of their work was the

felt absence of any claim on the part of the labourers, and their

simple reliance on their employer.

And now it is even. The time for working is past, and the Lord of the

vineyard bids His Steward [here the Christ] pay His labourers. But

here the first surprise awaits them. The order of payment is the

inverse of that of labour: 'beginning from the last unto the first.'

This is almost a necessary part of the Parable. For, if the first

labourers had been paid first, they would either have gone away

without knowing what was done to the last, or, if they had remained,

their objection could not have been urged, except on the ground of

manifest malevolence towards their neighbours. After having received

their wages, they could not have objected that they had not received

enough, but only that the others had received too much. But it was not

the scope of the Parable to charge with conscious malevolence those

who sought a higher reward or deemed themselves entitled to it. Again,

we notice, as indicating the disposition of the later labourers, that

those of the third hour did not murmur, because they had not got more

than they of the eleventh hour. This is in accordance with their not

having made any bargain at the first, but trusted entirely to the

householder. But they of the first hour had their cupidity excited.

Seeing what the others had received, they expected. to have more than

their due. When they like wise received every man a denarius, they

murmured, as if injustice had been done them. And, as mostly in like

circumstances, truth and fairness seemed on their side. For, selecting

the extreme case of the eleventh hour labourers, had not the

Householder made those who had wrought[5296]5296 only one hour equal

to them who had 'borne the burden of the day and the heat?' Yet,

however fair their reasoning might seem, they had no claim in truth or

equity, for had they not agreed for one denarius with him? And it had

not even been in the general terms of a day's wages, but they had made

the express bargain of one denarius. They had gone to work with a

stipulated sum as their hire distinctly in view. They now appealed to

justice; but from first to last they had had justice. This as regards

the 'so much for so much' principle of claim, law, work, and pay.

But there was yet another aspect than that of mere justice. Those

other labourers, who had felt that, owning to the lateness of their

appearance, they had no claim - and, alas! which of us must not feel

how late we have been in coming, and hence how little we can have

wrought - had made no bargain, but trusted to the Master. And as they

had believed, so was it unto them. Not because they made or had any

claim - 'I will, however, to give unto this last, even as unto thee' -

the word 'I will' (q_lw) being emphatically put first to mark 'the

good pleasure' of His grace as the ground of action. Such a Master

could not have given less to those who had come when called, trusting

to His goodness, and not in their deserts. The reward was now

reckoned, not of work nor of debt, but of grace.[5297]5297 In passing

we also mark, as against cavillers, the profound accord between what

negative critics would call the 'true Judaic Gospel' of St. Matthew,

and what constitutes the very essence of 'the anti-Judaic teaching' of

St. Paul - and we ask our opponents to reconcile on their theory what

can only be explained on the ground that St. Paul, like St. Matthew,

was the true disciple of the true Teacher, Jesus Christ.

But if all is to be placed on the new ground of grace, with which,

indeed, the whold bearing of the later labourers accords, then (as St.

Paul also shows) the laboureres who murmured were guilty either of

ignorance in failing to perceive the sovereignty of grace - that it is

within His power to do with His own as He willeth[5298]5298 - or else

of malevolence, when, instead of with grateful joy, they looked on

with an evil eye - and this in proportion as 'the Householder' was

good. But such a state of mind may be equally that of the

Jews,[5299]5299 and of the Gentiles.[5300]5300 And so, in this

illustrative case of the Parable, 'the first shall be last, and the

last first.'[5301]5301 And in other instances also, though not in all

- 'many shall be last that are first; and first that are

last.'[5302]5302 But He is the God, Sovereign in grace, in Whose

Vineyard there is work to do for all, however limited their time,

power, or opportunity; Whose laboureres we are, if His Children; Who,

in His desire for the work, and condescension and patience towards the

workers, goeth out into the market-place even to the eleventh hour,

and, with only gentlest rebuke for not having earlier come thither and

thus lost our day in idleness, still, even to the last, bids us come;

Who promises what is right, and gives far more than is due to them who

simply trust Him: the God not of the Jews nor of the Gentiles only,

but our Father; the God Who not only pays, but freely gives of His

own, and in Whose Wisdom and by Whose Grace it may be, that, even as

the first shall be last, so the last shall be first.

Another point still remains to be noticed. If anywhere, we expect in

these Parables, addressed to the people, forms of teaching and

speaking with which they were familiar - in other words, Jewish

parallels. But we equally expect that the teaching of Christ, while

conveyed under illustrations with which the Jews were familiar, would

be entirely different in spirit. And such we find it notably in the

present instances. To begin with, according to Jewish Law, if a man

engaged a labourer without any definite bargain, but on the statement

that he would be paid as one or another of the labourers in the place,

he was, according to some, only bound to pay the lowest wages in the

place; but, according to the majority, the average between the lowest

and the highest.[5303]5303 [5304]5304 Again, as regards the letter of

the Parable itself, we have a remarkable parallel in a funeral oration

on a Rabbi, who died at the early age of twenty-eight. The text chosen

was: 'The sleep of a labouring man is sweet,'[5305]5305 and this was

illustrated by a Parable of a king who had a vineyard, and engaged

many labourers to work in it. One of them was distinguished above the

rest by his ability. So the king took him by the hand, and walked up

and down with him. At even, when the labourers were paid, this one

received the same wages as the others, just as if he had wrought the

whole day. Upon this the others murmured, because he who had wrought

only two hours had received the same as they who had laboured the

whole day, when the king replied: 'Why murmur ye? This labourer has by

his skill wrought as much in two hours as you during the whole

day.'[5306]5306 This in reference to the great merits of the deceased

young Rabbi.

But it will be observed that, with all its similarity of form, the

moral of the Jewish Parable is in exactly the opposite direction from

the teaching of Christ. The same spirit of work and pay breathes in

another Parable, which is intended to illustrate the idea that God had

not revealed the reward attaching to each commandment, in order that

men might not neglect those which brought less return. A king - so the

Parable runs - had a garden, for which he hired labourers without

telling them what their wages would be. In the evening he called them,

and, having ascertained from each under what tree he had been working,

he paid them according to the value of the trees on which they had

been engaged. And when they said that he ought to have told them,

which trees would bring the labourers most pay, the king replied that

thereby a great part of his garden would have been neglected. So had

God in like manner only revealed the reward of the greatest of the

commandments, that to honour father and mother,[5307]5307 and that of

the least, about letting the mother-bird fly away[5308]5308 -

attaching to both precisely the same reward.[5309]5309

To these, if need were, might be added other illustrations of that

painful reckoning about work, or else sufferings, and reward, which

characterises Jewish theology, as it did those labourers in the

Parable.[5310]5310

2. The second Parable in this series - or perhaps rather illustration

- was spoken within the Temple. The Savior had been answering the

question of the Pharisees as to His authority by an appeal to the

testimony of the Baptist. This led Him to refer to the twofold

reception of that testimony - on the one hand, by the Publicans and

harlots, and, on the other, by the Pharisees.

The Parable,[5311]5311 which now follows, introduces a man who has two

sons. He goes to the first, and in language of affection (t_knon) bids

him go and work in his vineyard. The son curtly and rudely refuses;

but afterwards he changes his mind[5312]5312 and goes.[5313]5313

Meantime the father, when refused by the one, has gone to his other

son on the same errand. The contrast here is marked. The tone is most

polite, and the answer of the son contains not only a promise, be we

almost see him going: 'I, sir! - and he did not go.' The application

was easy. The first son represented the Publicans and harlots, whose

curt and rude refusal of the Father's call was implied in their life

of reckless sin. But afterwards they changed their mind - and went

into the Father's vineyard. The other Son, with his politeness of tone

and ready promise, but utter neglect of obligations undertaken,

represented the Pharisees with their hypocritical and empty

professions. And Christ obliged them to make application of the

Parable. When challenged by the Lord, which of the two had done the

will of his father, they could not avoid the answer. Then it was that,

in language equally stern and true. He pointed the moral. The Baptist

had come preaching righteousness, and, while the self-righteous

Pharisees had not believed him, those sinners had. And yet, even when

the Pharisees saw the effect on these former sinners, they changed not

their minds that they might believe. Therefore the Publicans and

harlots would and did go into the Kingdom before them.

3. Closely connected with the two preceding Parables, and, indeed,

with the whole tenor of Christ's sayings at that time, is that about

the Evil Husbandmen in the Vineyard.[5314]5314 As in the Parable about

the Labourers sought by the Householder at different times, the object

here is to set forth the patience and goodness of the owner, even

towards the evil. And as, in the Parable of the Two Sons, reference is

made to the practical rejection of the testimony of the Baptist by the

Jews, and their consequent self-exclusion from the Kingdom, so in this

there is allusion to John as greater than the prophets,[5315]5315 to

the exclusion of Israel as a people from their position in the

Kingdom,[5316]5316 and to their punishment as individuals.[5317]5317

Only we mark here a terrible progression. The neglect and non-belief

which had appeared in the former Parable have now ripened into

rebellion, deliberate, aggravated, and carried to its utmost

consequences in the murder of the King's only and loved Son.

Similarly, what formerly appeared as their loss, in that sinners went

into the Kingdom of God before them, is now presented alike as their

guilt and their judgment, both national and individual.

The Parable opens, like that in Is. v., with a description of the

complete arrangements made by the Owner of the Vineyard,[5318]5318 to

show how everything had been done to ensure a good yield of fruit, and

what right the Owner had to expect at least a share in it. In the

Parable, as in the prophecy, the Vineyard represents the Theocracy,

although in the Old Testament, necesaary, as identified with the

nation of Israel,[5319]5319 while in the Parable the two are

distinguished, and the nation is represented by the labourers to whom

the Vineyeard was 'let out.' Indeed, the whole structure of the

Parable shows, that the husbandmen are Israel as a nation, although

they are addressed and dealt with in the persons of their

representatives and leaders. And so it was spoken 'to the

people,'[5320]5320 and yet 'the chief priests and Pharisees' rightly

'perceived that He spake of them.'[5321]5321

This vineyard the owner had let out to husbandmen, while he himself

'travelled away' [abroad], as St. Luke adds, 'for a long time.' From

the language it is evident, that the husbandmen had the full

management of the vineyard. We remember, that there were three modes

of dealing with land. According to one of these (Arisuth), 'the

labourers' employed received a certaain portion of the fruits, say, a

third or fourth of the produce.[5322]5322 In such cases it seems, at

least sometimes, to have been the practice, besides giving them a

proportion of the produce, to provide also the seed (for a field) and

to pay wages to the labourers.[5323]5323 The other two modes of

letting land were, either that the tenant paid a money rent to the

proprietor,[5324]5324 or else that he agreed to give the owner a

definite amount of produce, whether the harvest had been good or

bad.[5325]5325 Such leases were given by the year or for life:

sometimes the lease was even hereditary, passing from father to

son.[5326]5326 There can scarcely be a doubt that it is the latter

kind of lease (Chakhranutha, from {hebrew}) which is referred to in

the Parable, the lessees being bound to give the owner a certain

amount of fruits in their season.

Accordingly, 'when the time of the fruits drew near, he sent his

servants to the husbandmen to receive his fruits' - the part of them

belonging to him, or, as St. Mark and St. Luke express it, 'of the

fruits of the vineyard.' We gather, that it was a succession of

servants, who received increasingly ill treatment from them evil

husbandmen. We might have expected that the owner would now have taken

severe measures; but instead of this he sent, in his patience and

goodness, 'other servants' - not 'more,'[5327]5327 which would

scarcely have any meaning, but 'greater than the first,' no doubt,

with the idea that their greater authority would command respect. And

when these also received the same treatment, we must regard it as

involving, not only additional, but increased guilt on the part of the

husbandmen. Once more, and with deepening force, does the question

arise, what measures the owner would now take. But once more we have

only a fresh and still greater display of his patience and

unwillingness to believe that these husbandmen were so evil. As St.

Mark pathetically put it, indicating not only the owner's goodness,

but the spirit of determined rebellion and the wickedness of the

husbandmen: 'He had yet one, a beloved son - he sent him last unto

them,' on the supposition that they would reverence him. The result

was different. The appearance of the legal heir made them apprehensive

of their tenure. Practically, the vineyard was already theirs; by

killing the heir, the only claimant to it would be put out of the way,

and so thevineyard become in every respect their own. For, the

husbandmen proceeded on the idea, that as the owner was 'abroad' 'for

a long time,' he would not personally interfere - an impression

strengthened by the circumstance that he had not avenged the former

ill-usage of his servants, but only sent others in the hope of

influencing them by gentleness. So the labourers. 'taking him [the

son], cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him' - the first

action indicating that by violence they thrust him out of his

possession, before they wickedly slew him.

The meaning of the Parable is sufficiently plain. The owner of the

vineyard, God, had let out His Vineyard - the Theocracy - to His

people of old. The covenant having been instituted, He withdrew, as it

were - the former direct communication between Him and Israel ceased.

Then in due season He sent 'His Servants,' the prophets, to gather His

fruits - they had had theirs in all the temporal and spiritual

advantages of the covenant. But, instead of returning the fruits meet

unto repentance, they only ill-treated His messengers, and that

increasingly, even unto death. In His longsuffering He next sent on

the same errand 'greater' than them - John the Baptist.[5328]5328 And

when he also received the same treatment, He sent last His own Son,

Jesus Christ. His appearance made them feel, that it was now a

decisive struggle for the Vineyard - and so, in order to gain its

possession for themselves, they cast the rightful heir out of His own

possession, and then killed Him!

And they must have understood the meaning of the Parable, who had

served themselves heirs to their fathers in the murder of all the

prophets.[5329]5329 who had just been convicted of the rejection of

the Baptist's message, and whose hearts were even then full of

murderous thoughts against the rightful Heir of the Vineyard. But,

even so, they must speak their own judgment. In answer to His

challenge, what in their view the owner of the vineyard would do to

these husbandmen, the chief priests and Pharisees could only reply:

'As evil men evilly will he destroy them. And the vineyard will He let

out to other husbandmen, which shall render Him the fruits in their

season.'[5330]5330

The application was obvious, and it was made by Christ, first, as

always, by a reference to the prophetic testimony, showing not only

the unity of all God's teaching, but also the continuity of the Israel

of the present with that of old in their resistance and rejection of

God's counsel and messengers. The quotation, than which none more

applicable could be imagined, was from Ps. cxviii. 22, 23, and is made

in the (Greek) Gospel of St. Matthew - not necessarily by Christ -

from the LXX. Version. The only, almost verbal, difference between it

and the original is, that, whereas in the latter the adoption of the

stone rejected by the builders as head of the corner ('this,' hoc,

{hebrew}) is ascribed to Jehovah, in the LXX. its original designation

(a_tj) as head of the corner (previous to the action of the builders),

is traced to the Lord. And then followed, in plain and unmistakable

language, the terrible prediction, first, nationally, that the Kingdom

of God would be taken from them, and 'given to a nation bringing forth

the fruits thereof;' and then individually, that whosoever stumbled at

that stone and fell over it, in personal offence or hostility, should

be broken in pieces,[5331]5331 but whosoever stood in the way of, or

resisted its progress, and on whom therefore it fell, it would

'scatter Him as dust.'

Once more was their wrath roused, but also their fears. They knew that

He spake of them, and would fain have laid hands on Him; but they

feared the people, who in those days regarded Him as a prophet. And so

for the present they left Him, and went their way.

4. If Rabbinic writings offer scarcely any parallel to the preceding

Parable, that of the Marriage-Feast of the King's Son and the Wedding

Garment[5332]5332 seems alsmost reproduced in Jewish tradition. In its

oldest form[5333]5333 it is ascribed to Jochanan ben Zakkai, who

flourished about the time of the composition of the Gospel of St.

Matthew. It appears with variety of, or with additional details in

Jewish commentaries.[5334]5334 But while the Parable of our Lord only

consists of two parts,[5335]5335 forming one whole and having one

lesson, the Talmud divides it into two separate Parables, of which the

one is intended to show the necessity of being prepared for the next

world - to stand in readiness for the King's feast;[5336]5336 while

the other[5337]5337 is meant to teach that we ought to be able to

present our soul to God at the last in the same state of purity in

which we had (according to Rabbinic notions) originally received

it.[5338]5338 Even this shows the infinite difference between the

Lord's and the Rabbinic use of the Parable.[5339]5339 In the Jewish

Parable a King is represented as inviting to a feast,[5340]5340

without, however, fixing the exact time for it. The wise adorn

themselves in time, and are seated at the door of the palace, so as to

be in readiness, since, as they argue, no elaborate preparation for a

feast can be needed in a palace; while the foolish go away to their

work, arguing there must be time enough, since there can be no feast

without preparation. (The Midrash has it, that, when inviting the

guests, the King had told them to wash, anoint, and array themselves

in their festive garments; and that the foolish, arguing that, from

the preparation of the food and the arranging of the seats, they would

learn when the feast was to begin, had gone, the mason to his cask of

lime, the potter to his clay, the smith to his furnace, the fuller to

his bleaching-ground.) But suddenly comes the King's summons to the

feast, when the wise appear festively adorned, and the King rejoices

over them, and they are made to sit down, eat and drink; while he is

wroth with the foolish, who appear squalid, and are ordered to stand

by and look on in anguish, hunger and thirst.

The other Jewish Parable[5341]5341 is of a king who committed to his

servants the royal robes. The wise among them carefully laid them by

while the foolish put them on when they did their work. After a time

the king asked back the robes, when the wise could restore them clean,

while the foolish had them soiled. Then the king rejoiced over the

wise, and, while the robes were laid up in the treasury, they were

bidden go home in peace. 'But to the foolish he commanded that the

robes should be handed over to the fuller, and that they themselves

should be cast into prison.' We readily see that the meaning of this

Parable was, that a man might preserve His soul perfectly pure, and so

enter into peace, while the careless, who had lost their orginal

purity (no original sin here), would, in the next world, by suffering,

both expiate their guilt and purify their souls.

When, from these Rabbinic preversions, we turn to the Parable of our

Lord, its meaning is not difficult to understand. The King made a

marriage[5342]5342 for his Son, when he sent his Servants to call them

that were bidden to the wedding. Evidently, as in the Jewish Parable,

and as before in that of the guests invited to the Great

Supper,[5343]5343 a preliminary general invitation had preceded the

announcement that all was ready. Indeed, in the Midrash on Lament. iv.

2,[5344]5344 it is expressly mentioned among other distinctions of the

inhabitants of Jerusalem, that none of them went to a feast till the

invitation had been given and repeated. But in the Parable those

invited would not come. It reminds us both of the Parable of the

labourers for the Vineyard, sought at different times, and of the

repeated sending of messengers to those Evil Husbandmen for the fruits

that were due, when we are next told that the king sent forth other

servants to tell them to come, for he had made ready his 'early meal'

(_riston, not 'dinner,' as in the Authorised and Revised Version), and

that, no doubt with a view to the later meal, the oxen and fatlings

were killed. These repeated endeavours to call, to admonish, and to

invite, form a characteristic feature of these Parables, showing that

it was one of the central objects ot our Lord's teaching to exhibit

the longsuffering and goodness of God. Instead of giving heed to these

repeated and pressing calls, in the words of the Parable: 'but they

(the one class) made light of it, and went away, the one to his own

land, the other unto his own merchandise.'

So the one class; the other made not light of it, but acted even worse

than the first. 'But the rest laid hands on his servants, entreated

them shamefully, and killed them.' By this we are to understand, that,

when the servants came with the second and more pressing message, the

one class showed their contempt for the king, the wedding of his son,

and the feast, and their preference for and preoccupation with their

own possessions or acquisitions - their property or their trading,

their enjoyments or their aims and desires. And, when these had gone,

and probably the servants still remanied to plead the message of their

Lord, the rest evil entreated, and then killed them - proceeding

beyond mere contempt, want of interest, and preoccupation with their

own affairs, to hatred and murder. The sin was the more aggravated

that he was their king, and the messengers had invited them to a

feast, and that one in which every loyal subject should have rejoiced

to take part. Theirs was, therefore, not only murder, but also

rebellion against their sovereign. On this the King, in his wrath sent

forth his armies, which - and here the narrative in point of time

anticipates the event - destroyed the murderers, and burnt their

city.[5345]5345

But the condign punishment of these rebels forms only part of the

Parable. For it still leaves the wedding unprovided with guests, to

sympathise with the joy of the king, and partake of his feast. And so

the narrative continues:[5346]5346 'Then' - after the king had given

commandment for his armies to go forth, he said to his servants, 'The

wedding indeed is ready, but they that were bidden were not worthy. Go

ye therefore into the partings of the highways (where a number of

roads meet and cross), and, as many as ye shall find, bid to the

marriage.' We remember that the Parable here runs parallel to that

other, when first the outcasts from the city-lanes, and then the

wanderers on the world's highway, were brought in to fill the place of

the invited guests.[5347]5347 At first sight it seems as if there were

no connection between the declaration that those who had been bidden

had proved themselves unworthy, and the direction to go into the

crossroads and gather any whom they might find, since the latter might

naturally be regarded as less likely to prove worthy. Yet this is one

of the main points in the Parable. The first invitation had been sent

to selected guests - to the Jews - who might have been expected to be

'worthy,' but had proved themselves unworthy; the next was to be

given, not to the chosen city or nation, but to all that travelled in

whatever direction on the world's highway, reaching them where the

roads of life meet and part.

We have already in part anticipated the interpretation of this

Parable. 'The Kingdom' is here, as so often in the Old and in the New

Testament, likened to a feast, and more specifically to a

marriage-feast. But we mark as distinctive, that the King makes it for

His Son, Thus Christ, as Son and Heir of the Kingdom, forms the

central Figure in the Parable. This is the first point set before us.

The next is, that the chosen, invited guests were the ancient

Covenant-People - Israel. To them God had sent first under the Old

Testament. And, although they had not given heed to His call, yet a

second class of messengers was sent to them under the New Testament.

And the message of the latter was, that 'the early meal' was ready

(Christ's first coming), and that all preparations had been made for

the great evening-meal (Christ's Reign). Another prominent truth is

set forth in the repeated message of the King, which points to the

goodness and longsuffering of God. Next, our attention is drawn to the

refusal of Israel, which appears in the contemptuous neglect and

preoccupation with their things of one party, and the hatred,

resistance, and murder by the other. Then follow in quick succesion

the command of judgement on the nation, and the burning of their city

- God's army being, in this instance, the Romans - and, finally, the

direction to go into the crossways to invite all men, alike Jews and

Gentiles.

With verse 10 begins the second part of the Parable. The 'Servants' -

that is, the New Testament messengers - had fulfilled their

commission; they had brought in as many as they found, both bad and

good: that is, without respect to their previous history, or their

moral and religious state up the time of their call; and 'the wedding

was filled with guests' - that is, the table at the marriage-feast was

filled with those who as guests 'lay around it' (_nakeim_nwn). But, if

ever we are to learn that we must not expect on earth - not even at

the King's marriage-table - a pure Church, it is, surely, from what

now follows. The King entered to see His guests, and among them he

described one of who had not on a wedding garment. Manifestly, the

quickness of the invitation and the previous unpreparedness. As the

guests had been travellers, and as the feast was in the King's palace,

we cannot be mistaken in supposing that such garments were supplied in

the palace itself to all those who sought them. And with this agrees

the circumstance, that the man so addressed 'was speechless'

[literally, 'gagged,' or 'muzzled'].[5348]5348 His conduct argued

utter insensibility as regarded that to which he had been called -

ignorance of what was due to the King, and what became such a feast.

For, although no previous state of preparedness was required of the

invited guests, all being bidden, whether good or bad, yet the fact

remained that, if they were to take part in the feast, they must put

on a garment suited to the occasion. All are invited to the

Gospel-feast; but they who will partake of it must put on the King's

wedding-garment of Evangelical holiness. And whereas it is said in the

Parable, that only one was described without this garment, this is

intended to teach, that the King will only generally view His guests,

but that each will be separately examined, and that no one - no, not a

single individual - will be able to escape discovery amidst the mass

of guests, if he has not the 'wedding-garment.' In short, in that day

of trial, it is not a scrutiny of Churches, but of individuals in the

Church. And so the King bade the servants - diak_noiv - not the same

who had previously carried the invitation (do_loiv), but others -

evidently here the Angels, His 'ministers,' to bind him hand and foot,

and to 'cast him out into the darkness, the outer' - that is, unable

to offer resistance and as a punished captive, he was to be cast out

into that darkness which is outside the brilliantly lighted

guest-chamber of the King. And, still further to mark that darkness

outside, it is added that this is the well-known place of suffering

and anguish: 'There shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.'

And here the Parable closes with the general statement, applicable

alike to the first part of the Parable - to the first invited guests,

Israel - and to the second, the guests from all the world: 'For' (this

is the meaning of the whole Parable) 'many are called, but few

chosen.'[5349]5349 For the understanding of these words we have to

keep in view that, logically, the two clauses must be supplemented by

the same words. Thus, the verse would read: Many are called out of the

world by God to partake of the Gospel-feast, but few out of the world

- not, out of the called - are chosen by God to partake of it. The

call to the feast and the choice for the feast are not identical. The

call comes to all; but it may outwardly accepted, and a man may sit

down to the feast, and yet he may not be chosen to partake of the

feast, because he has not the wedding-garment of converting,

sanctifying grace. And so one may be thrust from the marriage-board

into the darkness without, with its sorrow and anguish.

Thus, side by side, yet wide apart, are these two - God's call and

God's choice. The connecting-link between them is the taking of the

wedding-garment, freely given in the Palace. Yet, we must seek it, ask

it, put it on. And so here also, we have, side by side, God's gift and

man's activity. And still, to all time, and to all men, alike in its

warning, teaching, and blessing, it is true: 'Many are called, but few

are chosen!'

CHAPTER VI.

THE EVENING OF THE THIRD DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - ON THE MOUNT OF

OLIVES:

DISCOURES TO THE DISCIPLES CONCERNING THE LAST THINGS.

(St. Matt. xxiv.; St. Mark xiii.; St. Luke xxi. 5-38; xii. 35-48.)

THE last and most solemn denunciation of Jerusalem had been uttered,

the last and most terrible prediction of judgment upon the Temple

spoken, and Jesus was suiting the action to the word. It was as if He

had cast the dust of His Shoes against 'the House' that was to be

'left desolate.' And so He quitted for ever the Temple and them that

held office in it.

They had left the Sanctuary and the City, had crossed black Kidron,

and were slowly climbing the Mount of Olives. A sudden turn in the

road, and the Sacred Building was once more in full view. Just then

the western sun was pouring his golden beams on tops of marble

cloister and on the terrced courts, and glittering on the golden

spikes on the roof of the Holy Place. In the setting, even more than

in the rising sun, must the vast proportions, the symmetry, and the

sparkling sheen of this mass of snowy marble and gold have stood out

gloriously. And across the black valley, and up the slopes of Olivet,

lay the dark shadows of these gigantic walls built of massive stones,

some of them nearly twenty-four feet long. Even the Rabbis, despite

their hatred of Herod, grow enthusiastic, and dream that the very

Temple-walls would have been covered with gold, had not the variegated

marble, resembling the waves of the sea, seemed more

beauteous.[5350]5350 It was probably as they now gazed on all this

grandeur and strength, that they broke the slience imposed on them by

gloomy thoughts of the near desolaateness of that House, which the

Lord had predicted.[5351]5351 One and another pointed out to Him those

massive stones and splendid buildings, or speak of the rich offerings

with which the Temple was adorned.[5352]5352 It was but natural that

the contrast between this and the predicted desolation should have

impressed them; natural, also, that they should refer to it - not as

matter of doubt, but rather as of question.[5353]5353 Then Jesus,

probably turning to one - perhaps to the first, or else the principal

- of His questioners,[5354]5354 spoke fully of that terrible contrast

between the present and the near future, when, as fulfilled with

almost incredible literality,[5355]5355 not one stone would be left

upon another that was not upturned.

In silence they pursued their way. Upon the Mount of Olives they sat

down, right over against the Temple. Whether or not the others had

gone farther, or Christ had sat apart with these four, Peter and James

and John and Andrew are named[5356]5356 as those who now asked Him

further of what must have weighed so heavily on their hearts. It was

not idle curiosity, although inquiry on such as subject, even merely

for the sake of information, could scarcely have been blamed in a Jew.

But it did concern them personally, for had not the Lord conjoined the

desolateness of that 'House' with His own absence? He had explained

the former as meaning the ruin of the City and the utter destruction

of the Temple. But to His prediction of it had been added these words:

'Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is He that

cometh in the Name of the Lord.' In their view, this could only refer

to His Second Coming, and to the End of the world as connected with

it. This explains the twofold question which the four now addressed to

Christ: 'Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the

sign of thy Coming, and of the consummation of the age?'[5357]5357

Irrespective of other sayings, in which a distinction between these

two events is made, we can scarely believe that the disciple could

have conjoined the desolation of the Temple with the immediate Advent

of Christ and the end of the world. For, in the saying which gave rise

to their question, Christ had placed an indefinite period between the

two. Between the desolation of the House and their new welcome to Him,

would intervene a period of indefinate length, during which they would

not see Him again. The disciples could not have overlooked this; and

hence neither their question, nor yet the Discourse of our Lord, have

been intended to conjoin the two. It is necessary to keep this in view

when studying the words of Christ; and any different impression must

be due to the exceeding compression in the language of St. Matthew,

and to this, that Christ would purposely leave indefinite the interval

between 'the desolation of the house' and His own Return.

Another point of considerable importance remains to be noticed. When

the Lord, on quitting the Temple, Said: 'Ye shall not see Me

henceforth,' He must have referred to Israel in their national

capacity - to the Jewish polity in Church and State. If so, the

promise in the text of visible reappearence must also apply to the

Jewish Commonwealth, to Israel in their national capacity.

Accordingly, it is suggested that in the present passage Christ refers

to His Advent, not from the general cosmic viewpoint of universal, but

from the Jewish standpoint of Jewish, history, in which the

destruction of Jerusalem and the appearance of false Christs are the

last events of national history, to be followed by the dreary blank

and silence of the many centuries of the 'Gentile dispensation,'

broken and silence of the events that usher in His Coming.[5358]5358

Keeping in mind, then, that the disciples could not have conjoined the

desolation of the Temple with the immediate Advent of Christ into His

Kingdom and the end of the world, their question to Christ was

twofold: When would these things be? and, What would be the signs of

His Royal Advent and the consummation of the 'Age?' On the former the

Lord gave no information; to the latter His Discourse on the Mount of

Olives was directed. On one point the statement of the Lord had been

so novel as almost to account for their question. Jewish writings

speak very frequently of the so-called 'sorrows of the Messiah'

(Chebhley shel Mashiach.[5359]5359 [5360]5360) These were partly those

of the Messiah, and partly - perhaps chiefly - those coming of the

Messiah. There can be no purpose in describing them in detail, since

the particulars mentioned vary so much, and the descriptions are so

fanciful. But they may generally be characteristed as marking a period

of internal corruption[5361]5361 and of outward distress, especially

of famine and war, of which land of Palestine was to be the scene, and

in which Israel were to be the chief sufferers.[5362]5362 As the

Rabbinic notices which we posses all date from after the destruction

of Jerusalem, it is, of course, impossible to make any absolute

assertion on the point; but, as a matter of fact, none of them refers

to desolattion of the City and Temple as one of the 'signs' or

'sorrows' of the Messiah. It is true that isolated voices proclaimed

that fate of the Sanctuary, but not in any connection with the

triumphant Advent of Messiah;[5363]5363 and, if we are to judge from

the hope entertained by the fanatics during the last siege of

Jerusalem, they rather expected a Divine, not doubt Messianic,

interposition to save the City and Temple, even at the last

moment.[5364]5364 When Christ, therefore, proclaimed the desolation of

'the house,' and even placed it in indirect connection with His

Advent, He taught that which must have been alike new and unexpected.

This may be the most suitable place for explaining the Jewish

expectation connected with the Advent of the Messiah. Here we have

first to dismiss, as belonging to a later period, the Rabbinic fiction

of two Messiahs: the one, the primary and reigning, the Son of David;

the other, the secondary and warfaring Messiah, the Son of Ephraim or

of Manasseh. The earliest Talmudic reference to this second

Messiah[5365]5365 dates from the third century of our era, and

contains the strange and almost blasphemous notices that the prophecy

of Zechariah,[5366]5366 concerning the mourning for Him Whom they had

pierced, referred to Messiah the Son of Joseph, Who would be killed in

the war of Gog and Magog;[5367]5367 and that, when Messiah the Son of

David saw it, He 'asked life' of God, who gave it to Him, as it is

written in Ps. ii.: 'Ask of Me, and I will give Thee,' upon which God

informed the Messiah that His father David had already asked and

obtained this for Him, according to Ps. xxi. 4. Generally the Messiah,

Son of Joseph, is connected with the gathering and restoration of the

ten tribes. Later Rabibninc writings connect all the sufferngs of the

Messiah for sin with this Son of Joseph.[5368]5368 The war in which

'the Son of Joseph' succumbed would finally be brought to a victorious

termination by 'the Son of David,' when the supremacy of Israel would

be restored, and all nations walk in His Light.

It is scarcely matter for surprise, that the various notices about the

Messiah, Son of Joseph, are confused and sometimes inconsistent,

considering the circumstances in which this dogma originated. Its

primary reason was, no doubt, controversial. When hardly pressed by

Christian argument about the Old Testament prophecies of the

sufferings of the Messiah, the fiction about the Son of Joseph as

distinct from the Son of David would offer a welcome means of

escape.[5369]5369 Besides, when in the Jewish rebellion[5370]5370

under the false Messiah 'BarKokhba' ('the Son of a Star'[5371]5371)

the latter succumbed to the Romans and was killed, the Synagogue

deemed it necessary to rekindle Israel's hope, that had been quenched

in blood, by the picture to two Messiahs, of whom the first should

fall in warfare, while the second, the Son of David, would carry the

contest to a triumphant issue.[5372]5372

In general, we must here remember that there is a difference between

three terms used in Jewish writings to designate that which is to

succeed the 'present dispensation' or 'world' (Olam hazzeh), although

the distinction is not always consistently carried out. This happy

period would begin with 'the days of the Messiah' ({hebrew}). These

would stretch into the 'coming age' (Athid labho), and end with 'the

world to come' (Olam habba) - although the latter is sometimes made to

include the whole of that period.[5373]5373 The most divergent

opinions are expressed of the duration of the Messianic period. It

seems like a round number when we are told that it would last for

three generations.[5374]5374 In the fullness discussion on the

subject,[5375]5375 the opinions of different Rabbis are mentioned, who

variously fix the period at form forty to one, two, and even seven

thousands years, according to fanciful analogies.[5376]5376

Where statements rest on such fanciful considerations, we can scarecly

attach serious value to them, nor expect agreement. This remark holds

equally true in regard to most of the other points involved. Suffice

it to say, that, according to general opinion, the Birth of the

Messiah would be unknown to His contemporaries;[5377]5377 that He

would appear, carry on His work, then disappear - probably for

forty-five days; then reappear again, and destroy the hostile powers

of the world, notably 'Edom,' 'Armilos,' the Roman Power - the fourth

and last world-empire (sometimes it is said: through Ishmael).

Ransomed Israel would now be miraculously gathered from the ends of

the earth, and brought back to their own land, the ten tribes sharing

in their restoration, but this only on condition of their having

repented of their former sins.[5378]5378 According to the

Midrash,[5379]5379 all circumcised Israel would then be released from

Gehenna, and the dead be raised - according to some authorities, by

the Messiah, to Whom God would give 'the Key of the Resurrection of

the Dead.'[5380]5380 This Resurrection would take place in the land of

Israel, and those of Israel who had been buried elsewhere would have

to roll under ground - not without suffering pain[5381]5381 - till

they reach the sacred soil. Probably the reason of this strange idea,

which was supported by an appeal to the direction of Jocob and Joseph

as to their last resting-place, was to induce the Jews, after the

final desolation of their land, not to quit Palestine. This

Ressurection, which is variously supposed to take place at the

beginning or during the course of the Messianic manifestation, would

be announced by the blowing of the great trumpet.[5382]5382 [5383]5383

It would be difficult to say how many of these strange and confused

views prevailed at the time of Christ;[5384]5384 which of them were

universally entertained as real dogmas; or from what source they had

been originally derived. Probably many of them were popularly

entertained, and afterwards further developed - as we believe, with

elements distorted from Christian teaching.

We have now reached the period of the 'coming age' (the Athid labho,

or sæculum futurum). All the resistance to God would be concentrated

in the great war of Gog and Magog, and with it the prevalence of all

the wickedness be conjoined. And terrible would be the straits of

Israel. Three times would the enemy seek to storm the Holy City. But

each time would the assault be repelled - at the last with complete

destruction of the enemy. The sacred City would now be wholly rebuilt

and inhabited. But oh, how different from of old! Its

Sabbath-boundaries would be strewed with pearls and precious gems. The

City itself would be lifted to a height of some nine miles - nay, with

realistic application of Is. xlix. 20, it would reach up to the throne

of God, while it would extend from Joppa as far as the gates of

Damascus! For, Jerusalem was to be the dwelling-place of Israel, and

the resort of all nations. But more glorious in Jerusalem would be the

new Temple which the Messiah was to rear, and to which those five

things were to be restored which had been wanting in the former

Sanctuary; the Golden Candlestick, the Ark, and Heaven-lit fire on the

Altar, the Holy Ghost, and the Cherubim. And the land of Israel would

then be as wide as it had been sketched in the promise which God had

given to Abraham, and which had never before been fulfilled - since

the largest extent of Israel's rule had only been over seven nations,

whereas the Divine promise extended it over ten, if not over the whole

earth.

Strangely realistic and exaggerated by Eastern imagination as these

hopes sound, there is connected with them, a point of deepest interest

on which, as explained in another place,[5385]5385 remarkable

divergence of opinion prevailed. It concerns the Services of the

rebuilt Temple, and the observance of The Law in Messianic days. One

party here insisted on the restoration of all the ancient Services,

and the strict observance of the Mosiac and Rabbinic Law - nay, on its

full imposition on the Gentile nation.[5386]5386 But this view must

have been at least modified by the expectation, that the Messiah would

give a new Law.[5387]5387 But was this new Law to apply only to the

Gentiles, or also to Israel? Here again there is divergence of

opinions. According to some, this Law would be binding on Israel, but

not on the Gentiles, or else the latter would have a modified or

condensed series of ordinances (at most thirty commandments). But the

most liberal view, and, as we may suppose, that most accetptable to

the enlightened, was, that in the furture only these two festive

seasons would be observed: The Day of Atonment, and the Feast of

Esther (or else that of Tabernacles), and that of all the sacrifices

only thank-offerings would be continued.[5388]5388 Nay, opinion went

even further, and many held that in Messianic days the distictions of

pure and impure, lawful and unlawful, as regarded food, would be

abolished.[5389]5389 There can be little doubt that these different

views were entertained even in the days of our Lord and in Apostolic

times, and they account for the exceeding bitterness with which the

extreme Pharisaic party in the Church at Jerusalem contended, that the

Gentile converts must be circumcised, and the full weight of the yoke

of the Law laid on their necks. And with a view to this new Law, which

God would give to his world through the Messiah, the Rabbis divided

all time into three periods: the primitive, that under the Law, and

that of the Messiah.[5390]5390

It only remains briefly to describe the beatitude of Israel, both

physical and moral, in those days, the state of the nations, and,

lastly, the end of that 'age' and its merging into 'the world to come'

(Olam habba). Morally, this would be a period of holiness, of

forgiveness, and of peace. Without, there would be no longer enemies

nor oppressors. And within the City and Land a more than Paradisiacal

state would prevail, which is depicted in even more than the usual

realistic Eastern language. For that vast new Jerusalem (not in

heaven, but in the literal Palestine) Angels were to cut gems 45 feet

long and broad (30 cubits), and place them in its gates;[5391]5391 the

windows and gates were to be of precious stones, the walls of silver,

gold, and gems, while all kinds of jewels would be strewed about, of

which every Israelite was at liberty to take. Jerusalem would be as

large as, at present, all Palestine, and Palestine as all the

world.[5392]5392 Corresponding to this miraculous extension would be a

miraculous elevation of Jerusalem into the air.[5393]5393 And it is

one of the strangest mixtures of self-righteousness and realism with

deeper and more spiritual thoughts, when the Rabbis prove by

references to the prophetic Scriptures, that every event and miracle

in the history of Israel would find its counterpart, or rather larger

fulfilment, in Messianic days. Thus, what was recorded of

Abraham[5394]5394 would, on account of his merit, find, clause by

clause, its counterpart in the future: 'Let a little water be

fetched,' in what is predicted in Zech. xiv. 8; 'wash your feet,' in

what is predicted in Is. iv. 5; 'rest yourselves under the tree,' in

what is said in Is. iv. 4; and 'I will fetch a morsel of bread,' in

the promise of Ps. lxxii. 16.[5395]5395

But by the side of this we find much coarse realism. The land would

spontaneously produce the best dresses and the finest cakes;[5396]5396

the wheat would grow as high as palm-trees, nay, as the mountains,

while the wind would miraculously convert the grain into flour, and

cast it into the valleys. Every tree would become

fruit-bearing;[5397]5397 nay, they were to break forth, and to bear

fruit every day;[5398]5398 daily was every woman to bear child, so

that ultimately every Israelitish family would number as many as all

Israel at the time of the Exodus.[5399]5399 All sickness and disease,

and all that could hurt, would pass away. As regarded death, the

promise of its final abolition[5400]5400 was, with characteristic

ingenuity, applied to Israel, while the statement that the child

should die an hundred years old[5401]5401 was understood as referring

to the Gentiles, and as teaching that, although they would die, yet

their age would be greatly prolonged, so that a centenarian would be

regarded as only a child. Lastly, such physical and outward loss as

Rabbinism regarded as the consequence of the Fall,[5402]5402 would be

again restored to man.[5403]5403 [5404]5404

It would be easy to multiply quotations even more realistic than

these, if such could serve any good purpose. The same literalism

prevails in regard to the reign of King Messiah over the nations of

the world. Not only is the figurative language of the prophets applied

in the most external manner, but illustrative details of the same

character are added. Jerusalem would, as the residence of the Messiah,

become the capital of the world, and Israel take the place of the

(fourth) world-monarchy, the Roman Empire. After the Roman Empire none

other was to rise, for it was to be immediately followed by the reign

of Messiah.[5405]5405 But that day, or rather that of the fall of the

(ten) Gentile nations, which would inaugurate the Empire of Messiah,

was among the seven things unknown to man.[5406]5406 Nay, God had

conjured Israel not to communicate to the Gentiles the mystery of the

calculation of the times.[5407]5407 But the very origin of the wicked

world-Empire had been caused by Israel's sin. It had been (ideally)

founded[5408]5408 when Solomon contracted alliance with the daughter

of Pharaoh, while Romulus and Remus rose when Jeroboam set up the

worship of the two calves. Thus, what would have become the universal

Davidic Rule had, through Israel's sin, been changed into subjection

to the Gentiles. Whether or not these Gentiles would in the Messianic

future become proselytes, seems a moot question. Sometimes it is

affirmed;[5409]5409 at others it is stated that no proselytes would

then be received,[5410]5410 and for this good reason, that in the

final war and rebellion those proselytes would, from fear, cast off

the yoke of Judaism and join the enemies.

That war, which seems a continuation of that Gog and Magog, would

close the Messianic era. The nations, who had hitherto given tribute

to Messiah, would rebel against Him, when He would destroy them by the

breath of His mouth, so that Israel alone would be left on the face of

the earth.[5411]5411 The duration of that period of rebellion is

stated to be seven years. It seems, at least, a doubtful point,

whether a second or general Resurrection was expected, the more

probable view being, that there was only one Resurrection, and that of

Israel alone,[5412]5412 or, at any rate, only of the studious and the

pious,[5413]5413 and that this was to take place at the beginning of

the Messianic reign. If the Gentiles rose at all, it would only be

immediately again to die.[5414]5414 [5415]5415

Then the final Judgment would commence. We must here once more make

distinction between Israel and the Gentiles, with whom, nay, as more

punishable than they, certain notorious sinners, heretics, and all

apostates, were to be ranked. Whereas to Israel the Gehenna, to which

all but the perfectly righteous had been consigned at death, had

proved a kind of purgatory, from which they were all ultimately

delivered by Abraham,[5416]5416 or, according to some of the later

Midrashim, by the Messiah, no such deliverance was in prospect for the

heathen nor for sinners of Israel.[5417]5417 The question whether the

fiery torments suffered (which are very realistically described) would

at last end in annihilation, is one which at different times received

different answeres, as fully explained in another place.[5418]5418 At

the time of Christ the punishment of the wicked was certainly regarded

as of eternal duration. Rabbi José, a teacher of the second century,

and a representative of the more rationalistic school, says expressly,

'The fire of Gehinnom is never quenched.'[5419]5419 And even the

passage, so often (although only partially) quoted, to the effect,

that the final torments of Gehenna would last for twelve months, after

which body and soul would be annihilated, excepts from this a number

of Jewish sinners, specially mentioned, such as hereties, Epicureans,

apostates, and persecutors, who are designated as 'children of

Gehenna' (ledorey doroth, to 'ages of ages').[5420]5420 And with this

other statements agree,[5421]5421 so that at most it would follow

that, while annihilation would await the less guilty, the most guilty

were to be reserved for etenal punishment.

Such, then, was the final Judgment, to be held in the valley of

Jehoshaphat by God, at the head of the Heavenly Sanhedrin, composed of

the elders of Israel.[5422]5422 Realistic as its description is, even

this is terribly surpassed by a passage[5423]5423 in which the

supposed pleas for mercy by the various nations are adduced and

refuted, when, after an unseemly contention between God and the

Gentiles - equally shocking to good taste and blasphemous - about the

partiality that had been shown to Israel, the Gentiles would be

consigned to punishment. All this in a manner revolting to all

reverent feeling. And the contrast between the Jewish picture of the

last Judgment and that outlined in the Gospel is so striking, as alone

to vindicate (were such necessary) the eschatological parts of the New

Testament, and to prove what infinite distance there is between the

Teaching of Christ and the Theology of the Synagogue.

After the final judgment we must look for the renewal of heaven and

earth. In the latter neither physical[5424]5424 nor moral darkness

would any longer prevail, since the Yetser haRa, or 'Evil impulse,'

would be destroyed.[5425]5425 [5426]5426 And renewed earth would bring

forth all without blemish and in Paradisiacal perfection, while alike

physical and moral evil had ceased. Then began the 'Olam habba,' or

'world to come.' The question, whether any functions or enjoyments of

the body would continue, is variously answered. The reply of the Lord

to the question of the Sadducees about marriage in the other world

seems to imply, that materialistic views on the subject were

entertained at the time. Many Rabbinic passages, such as about the

great feast upon Leviathan and Behemoth prepared for the righteous in

the latter days,[5427]5427 confirm only too painfully the impression

of grossly materialistic expectations.[5428]5428 On the other hand,

passages may be quoted in which the utterly unmaterial character of

the 'world to come' is insisted upon in most emphatic

language.[5429]5429 In truth, the same fundamental divergences here

exist as on other points, such as the abode of the beatified, the

visible or else invisible glory which they would enjoy, and even the

new Jerusalem. And in regard to the latter,[5430]5430 as indeed to all

those references to the beatitudes of the world to come, it seems at

least doubtful, whether the Rabbis may not have intended to describe

rather the Messianic days than the final winding up of all things.

To complete this sketch of Jewish opinions, it is necessary, however

briefly, to refer to the Pseudepigraphic Writings,[5431]5431 which, as

will be remembered, expressed the Apocalyptic expectancies of the Jews

before the time of Christ. But here we have always to keep in mind

this twofold difficulty: that the language used in works of this kind

is of a highly figurative character, and must therefore not be

literally pressed; and that more than one of them, notably IV. Esdras,

dates from post-Christian times, and was, in important respects,

admittedly influenced by Christian teaching. But in the main the

picture of Messianic times in these writings is the same as the

presented by the Rabbis. Briefly, the Pseudepigraphic view may be thus

sketched.[5432]5432 Of the so-called 'Wars of the Messiah' there had

been already a kind of prefigurement in the days of Antiochus

Epiphanes, when armed soldiery had been seen to carry on warfare in

the air.[5433]5433 This sign is mentioned in the Sibylline

Books[5434]5434 as marking the coming end, together with the sight of

swords in the starlit sky at night, the falling of dust from heaven,

the extinction of the sunlight and appearance of the moon by day, and

the dropping of blood from the rocks. A somewhat similar, though even

more realistic, picture is presented in connection with the blast of

the third trumpet in IV. (II.) Esdras.[5435]5435 Only that there the

element of moral judgment is more clearly introduced. This appears

still more fully in another passage of the same book,[5436]5436 in

which, apparently in connection with the Judgment, the influence of

Christian teaching, although in an externalised form, may be clearly

traced. A perhaps even more detailed description of the wickedness,

distress, and physical desolation upon earth at that time, is given in

the Book of Jubilees.[5437]5437

At last, when these distresses have reached their final height, when

signs are in the sky, ruin upon earth, and the unburied bodies that

cover the ground are devoured by birds and wild beasts, or else

swallowed up by the earth,[5438]5438 would God send 'the King,' Who

would put an end to unrighteousness. Then would follow the last war

against Jerusalem, in which God would fight from heaven with the

nations, when they would submit to, and own Him.[5439]5439 But while

in the Book of Enoch and in another work of the same class[5440]5440

the judgment is ascribed to God, and the Messiah represented as

appearing only afterwards,[5441]5441 [5442]5442 in the majority of

these works the judgment or its execution is assigned to the

Messiah.[5443]5443

In the land thus restored to Israel, and under the rule of King

Messiah, the new Jerusalem would be the capital, purified from the

heathen,[5444]5444 enlarged, nay, quite transformed. This Jerusalem

had been shown to Adam before his Fall,[5445]5445 but after that both

it and Paradise had been withdrawn from him. It had again been shown

to Abraham,[5446]5446 to Moses, and to Ezra.[5447]5447 The splendour

of this new Jerusalem is described in most glowing language.[5448]5448

[5449]5449 Of the glorious Kingdom thus instituted, the Messiah would

be King,[5450]5450 [5451]5451 although under the supremacy of God. His

reign would extend over the heathen nations. The character of their

submission was differently viewed, according to the more or less

Judaic standpoint of the writers. Thus, in the Book of

Jubilees[5452]5452 the seed of Jacob are promised possession of the

whole earth; they would 'rule over all nations according to their

pleasure; and after that draw the whole earth unto themselves, and

inherit it for ever.' In the 'Assumption of Moses'[5453]5453 this

ascendency of Israel seems to be conjoined with the idea of vengeance

upon Rome,[5454]5454 although the language employed is highly

figurative.[5455]5455 On the other hand, in the Sibylline

Books[5456]5456 the nations are represented as, in view of the

blessings enjoyed by Israel, themselves turning to acknowledge God,

when perfect mental enlightenment and absolute righteousness, as well

as physical well-being, would prevail under the rule and judgeship

(whether literal or figurative) of the Prophets.[5457]5457 The most

'Grecian' view of the Kingdom, is, of course, that expressed by Philo.

He anticipates, that the happy moral condition of man would ultimately

affect the wild beasts, which, relinquishing their solitary habits,

would first become gregarious; then, imitating the domestic animals,

gradually come to respect man as their master, nay, become as

affectionate and cheerful as 'Maltese dogs.' Among men, the pious and

virtuous would bear rule, their dignity inspiring respect, their

terror fear, and their beneficence good will.[5458]5458 Probably

intermediate between this extreme Grecian and the Judaic conception of

the Millennium, are such utterances as ascribe the universal

acknowledgment of the Messiah to the recognition, that God had

invested Him with glory and power, and that His Reign was that of

blessing.[5459]5459

It must have been remarked, that the differences between the

Apocalyptic teaching of the Pseudepigrapha and that of the New

Testament are as marked as those between the latter and that of the

Rabbis. Another point of divergence is, that the Pseudepigrapha

uniformly represent the Messianic reign as eternal, not broken up by

any further apostasy or rebellion.[5460]5460 Then would the earth be

renewed,[5461]5461 [5462]5462 and this would be followed, lastly, by

the Resurrection. In the Apocalypse of Baruch,[5463]5463 as by the

Rabbis, it is set forth that men would rise in exactly the same

condition which they had borne in life, so that, by being recognised,

the reality of the Resurrection would be attested, while in the

re-union of body and soul each would receive its due meed for the sins

committed in their state of combination while upon earth.[5464]5464

But after that a transformation would take place: of the just into the

Angelic splendour of their glory, while, on view of this, the wicked

would correspondingly fade away.[5465]5465 Josephus states that the

Pharisees taught only a Resurrection of the Just.[5466]5466 As we know

that such was not the case, we must regard this as one of the many

assertions made by that writer for purposes of his own - probably to

present to outsiders the Pharisaic doctrine in the most attractive and

rational light of which it was capable. Similarly, the modern

contention, that some of the Pseudepigraphic Writings propound the

same view of only a Resurrection of the Just,[5467]5467 is contrary to

evidence.[5468]5468 There can be no question that, according to the

Pseudepigrapha, in the general Judgment, which was to follow the

universal Resurrection, the reward and punishment assigned are

represented as of eternal duration, although it may be open to

question, as in regard to Rabbinic teaching, which of those who had

been sinners would suffer final and endless torment.

The many and persistent attempts, despite the gross inconsistencies

involved, to represent the teaching of Christ concerning 'the Last

Things' as only the reflection of contemporary Jewish opinion, have

rendered detailed evidence necessary. When, with the information just

summarised, we again turn to the questions addressed to Him by the

disciples, we recall that (as previously shown) they could not have

conjoined, or rather confounded, the 'when' of 'these things' - that

is, of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple - with the 'when'

of His Second Coming and the end of the 'Age.' We also recall the

suggestion, that Christ referred to His Advent, as to His

disappearance, from the Jewish standpoint of Jewish, rather than from

the general cosmic view-point of universal, history.

As regards the answer of the Lord to the two questions of His

disciples, it may be said that the first part of His

Discourse[5469]5469 is intended to supply information on the two facts

of the future: the destruction of the Temple, and His Second Advent

and the end of the 'Age,' by setting before them the signs indicating

the approach or beginning of these events. But even here the exact

period of each is not defined, and the teaching given intended for

purely practical purposes. In the second part of His

Discourse[5470]5470 the Lord distinctly tells them, what they are not

to know, and why; and how all that was communicated to them was only

to prepare them for that constant watchfulness, which has been to the

Church at all times the proper outcome of Christ's teaching on the

subject. This, then we may take as a guide in our study: that the

words of Christ contain nothing beyond what was necessary for the

warning and teaching of the disciples and of the Church.

The first Part of Christ's Discourse[5471]5471 consists of four

Sections,[5472]5472 of which the first describes 'the beginning of the

birth-woes'[5473]5473 [5474]5474 of the new 'Age' about to appear. The

expression: 'The End is not yet'[5475]5475 clearly indicates, that it

marks only the earliest period of the beginning - the farthest

terminus a quo of the 'birth-woes.'[5476]5476 Another general

consideration, which seems of importance, is, that the Synoptic

Gospels report this part of the Lord's Discourse in almost identical

language. If the inference from this seems that their accounts were

derived from a common source - say, the report of St. Peter - yet this

close and unvarying repetition also conveys an impression, that the

Evangelists themselves may not have fully understood the meaning of

what they recorded. This may account for the rapid and unconnected

transitions from subject to subject. At the same time it imposes on us

the duty of studying the language anew, and without regard to any

scheme of interpretation. This only may be said, that the obvious

difficulties of negative criticism are here equally great, whether we

suppose the narratives to have been written before or after the

destruction of Jerusalem.

1. The purely practical character of the Discourse appears from its

opening words.[5477]5477 They contain a warning, addressed to the

disciples in their individual, not in their corporate, capacity,

against being 'led astray.' This, more particularly in regard to

Judaic seductions leading them after false Christs. Though in the

multitude of impostors, who, in the troubled times between the rule of

Pilate and the destruction of Jerusalem, promised Messianic

deliverance to Israel, few names and claims of this kind have been

specially recorded, yet the hints in the New Testament,[5478]5478 and

the references, however guarded, by the Jewish historian,[5479]5479

imply the appearance of many such seducers. And their influence, not

only upon Jews, but on Jewish Christians, might be the more dangerous,

that the latter would naturally regard 'the woes,' which were the

occasion of their pretensions, as the judgements which would usher in

the Advent of their Lord. Against such seduction they must be

peculiarly on their guard. So far for the 'things' connected with the

destruction of Jerusalem and the overthrow of the Jewish commonwealth.

But, taking a wider and cosmic view, they might aslso be misled by

either rumours of war at a distance, or by actual warfare,[5480]5480

so as to believe that the dissolution of the Roman Empire, and with it

the Advent of Christ, was at hand.[5481]5481 [5482]5482 This also

would be a Misapprehension, grievously misleading, and to be carefully

guarded against.

Although primarily applying to them, yet alike the peculiarly Judaic,

or, it might be even Christian, and the general cosmic sources of

misapprehension as to the near Advent of Christ, must not be limited

to the times of the Apostles. They rather indicate these twofold

grounds of misapprehension which in all ages have misled Christians

into an erroneous expectancy of the immediate Advent of Christ: the

seductions of false Messiahs, or, it may be, teachers, and violent

distrubances in the political world. So far as Israel was concerned,

these attained their climax in the great rebellion against Rome under

the false Messiah, Bar Kokhba, in the time of Hadrian,[5483]5483

although echoes of similar false claims, or hope of them, have again

and again roused Israel during the night of these any centuries into

brief, startled waking. And, as regards the more general cosmic signs,

have not Christians, in the early ages watched, not only the wars on

the boundaries of the Empire, but the condition of the state in the

age of Nero the risings, turmoils, and threatenings; and so onwards,

those of later generations, even down to the commotions of our own

period, as if they betokened the immediate Advent of Christ, instead

of marking in them only the beginning of the birth-woes of the new

'Age?'

2. From the warning to Christians as individuals, the Lord next turns

to give admonition to the Church in her corporate capacity. Here we

mark, that the events now described[5484]5484 must not be regarded as

following, with strict chronological precision, those referred to in

the previous verses. Rather is it intended to indicate a general nexus

and partly after, those formerly predicted. They form, in fact, the

continuation of the 'birth-woes.' This appears even from the language

used. Thus, while St. Matthew writes: 'Then' (t_te at that time)

'shall they deliver you up,' St. Luke places the persecutions 'before

all these things;'[5485]5485 while St. Mark, who reports this part of

the Discourse most fully, omits every note of time, and only

emphasises the admonition which the fact conveys.[5486]5486 As regards

the admonition itself, expressed in this part of the Lord's

Discourse,[5487]5487 we notice that, as formerly to individuals, so

now to the Church, two sources of danger are pointed out: internal

from heresies ('false prophets') and the decay of faith,[5488]5488 and

external, from persecutions, whether Judaic and from their own

kindred, or from the secular powers throughout the world. But, along

with these two dangers, two consoling facts are also pointed out. As

regards the persecutions in prospect, full Divine aid is promised to

Christians - alike to individuals and to the Church. Thus all care and

fear may be dismissed: their testimony shall neither be silenced, nor

shall the Church be suppressed or extinguished; but inward joyousness,

outward perseverance, and final triumph, are secured by the Presence

of the Risen Saviour with, and the felt indwelling of the Holy Ghost

in His Church. And, as for the other and equally consoling fact:

despite the persecution of Jews and Gentiles, before the End cometh

'this the Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the inhabited

earth for a testimony to all the nations.'[5489]5489 This, then, is

really the only sign of 'the End' of the present 'Age.'

3. From these general predicitons, the Lord proceeds, in the third

part of this Discourse,[5490]5490 to advertise the Disciples of the

great historic fact immediately before them, and of the dangers which

might spring from it. In truth, we have here His answer to their

question, 'When shall these things be?'[5491]5491 not, indeed, as

regards the when, but the what of them. And with this He conjoins the

present application of His general warning regarding false Christs,

given in the first part of this Discourse.[5492]5492 The fact of which

He now, in this third part of His Discourse, advertises them, is the

destruction of Jerusalem. Its twofold dangers would be - outwardly,

the difficulties and perils which at that time would necessarily beset

men, and especially the members of the infant-Church; and,

religiously, the pretensions and claims of false Christs or prophets

at a period when all Jewish thinking and expectancy would lead men to

anticipate the near Advent of the Messiah. There can be no question,

that from both these dangers the warning of the Lord delivered the

Church. As directed by him, the members of the Christian Church fled

at an early period of the siege.[5493]5493 of Jerusalem to Pella,

while the words in which He had told that His Coming would not be in

secret, but with the brighteness of that lightning which shot across

the sky, prevented not only their being deceived, but perhaps even the

record, if not the rise of many who otherwise would have deceived

them. As for Jerusalem, the prophetic vision initially fulfilled in

the days of Antiochus[5494]5494 would once more, and now fully, become

reality, and the abomination of desolation[5495]5495 stand in the Holy

Place. This, together with tribulation to Israel, unparalledled in the

terrible past of its history, and unequalled even in its bloody

future. Nay, so dreadful would be the persecution, that, if Divine

mercy had not interposed for the sake of the followers of Christ, the

whole Jewish race that inhabited the land would have been swept

away.[5496]5496 But on the morrow of that day no new Maccabee would

arise, no Christ come, as Israel fondly hoped; but over that carcase

would the vultures gather;[5497]5497 and so through all the Age of the

Gentiles, till converted Israel should raise the welcoming shout:

'Blessed be He that cometh in the Name of the Lord!'

4.[5498]5498 The Age of the Gentiles, 'the end of the Age,' and with

it the new allegiance of His now penitent people Israel; 'the sign of

the Son of Man in heaven,' perceived by them; the conversion of all

the world, the Coming of Christ, the last Trumpet, the Resurrection of

the dead - such, in most rapid sketch, is the outline which the Lord

draws of His Coming and the End of the world.

It will be remembered that this had been the second question of the

disciples.[5499]5499 We again recall, that the disciples did not,

indeed, could not have connected, as immediately subsequent events,

the destruction of Jerusalem and His Second Coming, since he had

expressly placed between them the period - apparently protracted - of

His Absence,[5500]5500 with the many events that were to happen in it

- notably, the preaching of the Gospel over the whole inhabited

earth.[5501]5501 Hitherto the Lord had, in His Discourse, dwelt in

detail only on those events which would be fulfilled before this

generation should pass.[5502]5502 It had been for admonition and

warning that He had spoken, not for the gratification of curiosity. It

had been prediction of the immediate future for practical purposes,

with such dim and general indication of the more distant future of the

Church as was absolutely necessary to mark her position in the world

as one of persecution, with promise, however, of His Presence and

Help; with indication also of her work in the world, to its terminus

ad quem - the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom to all nations on

earth.

More than this concerning the future of the Church could not have been

told without defeating the very object of the admonition and warning

which Christ had exclusively in view, when answering the question of

the disciples. Accordingly, what follows in ver. 29, describes the

history, not of the Church - far less any visible physical signs in

the literal heavens - but, in prophetic imagery, the history of the

hostile powers of the world, with its lessons. A constant succession

of empires and dynasties would characterise politically - and it is

only the political aspect with which we are here concerned - the whole

period after the extinction of the Jewish State.[5503]5503 Immediately

after that would follow the appearance to Israel of the 'Sign' of the

Son of Man in heaven, and with it the conversion of all nations (as

previously predicted),[5504]5504 the Coming of Christ,[5505]5505 and,

finally, the blast of the last Trumpet and the Resurrection.[5506]5506

5. From this rapid outline of the future the Lord once more turned to

make present application to the disciplies; nay, application, also, to

all times. From the fig-tree, under which, on that spring afternoon,

they may have rested on the Mount of Olives, they were to learn a

'parable.'[5507]5507 We can picture Christ taking one of its twigs,

just as its softening tips were bursting into young leaf. Surely, this

meant that summer was nigh - not that it had actually come. The

distinction is important. For, it seems to prove that 'all these

things,' which were to indicate to them that it[5508]5508 was near,

even at the doors, and which were to be fulfilled ere this generation

had passed away, could not have referred, to the last signs connected

with the immediate Advent of Christ,[5509]5509 but must apply to the

previous prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Jewish

Commonwealth. At the same time we again admit, that the language of

the Synoptists seems to indicate, that they had not clearly understood

the words of the Lord which they reported, and that in their own minds

they had associated the 'last signs' and the Advent of Christ with the

fall of the City. Thus may they have come to expect that Blessed

Advent even in their own days.

II. It is at least a question, whether the Lord, while distinctly

indicating these facts, and intended to remove the doubt and

uncertainty of their sucession from the minds of His disciples. To

have done so would have necessitated that which, in the opening

sentence of the Second Division of this Discourse,[5510]5510 He had

expressly declared to lie beyond their ken. The 'when' - the day and

the hour of His Coming - was to remain hidden from men and

Angels.[5511]5511 Nay, even the Son Himself - as they viewed Him and

as He spake to them - knew it not.[5512]5512 It formed no part of His

present Messianic Mission, nor subject for His Messianic Teaching. Had

it done so, all the teaching that follows concerning the need of

constant watchfulness, and the pressing duty of working for Christ in

faith, hope, and love - with purity, self-denial, and endurance -

would have been lost. The peculiar attitude of the Church: with loins

grit for work, since the time was short, and the Lord might come at

any moment; with her hands busy; her mind faithful; her face upturned

towards the Sun that was so soon to rise; and her ear straining to

catch the first notes of heaven's song of triumph - all this would

have been lost! What has sustained the Church during the night of

sorrow these many centuries; what has nerved her courage for the

battle, with steadfastness to bear, with love to work, with patience

and joy in disappointments - would all have been lost! The Church

would not have been that of the New Testament, had she known the

mystery of that day and hour, and not ever waited as for the immediate

Coming of her Lord and Bridegroom.

And what the Church of the New Testament has been, and is, that her

Lord and Master made her, and by no agency more effectually than by

leaving undetermined the precise time of His return. To the world this

would indeed become the occasion for utter carelessness and practical

disbelief of the coming Judgment.[5513]5513 As in the days of Noah the

long delay of threatened judgment had led to absorption in the

ordinary engagements of life, to the entire disbelief of what Noah had

preached, so would it be in the future. But that day would come

certainly and unexpectedly, to the sudden seperation of those who were

engaged in the same daily business of life, of whom one might be taken

up (paralamb_netai, 'received'), the other left to the destruction of

the coming Judgment.[5514]5514

But this very mixture of the Church with the world in the ordinary

avocations of life indicated a greater danger. As in all such, the

remedy which the Lord would set before us is not negative in the

avoidance of certain things, but positive.[5515]5515 We shall best

succeed, not by going out of the world, but by being watchful in it,

and keeping fresh on our hearts, as well as our minds, the fact that

he is our Lord, and that we are, and always most lovingly, to look and

long for His Return. Otherwise twofold damage might come to us. Not

expecting the arrival of the Lord in the night-time (which is the most

unlikely for His Coming), we might go to sleep, and the Enemy, taking

advantage or it, rob us of our peculiar treasure.[5516]5516 Thus the

Church, not expecting her lord, might become as poor as the world.

This would be loss. But there might be even worse. According to the

Master's appointment, each one had, during Christ's absence, his work

for Him, and the reward of grace, or else the punishment of neglect,

were in assured prospect. The faithful steward, to whom the Master had

entrusted the care of His household, to supply His found faithful, be

rewarded by advancement to far larger and more responsible work. On

the other hand, belief on the delay of the Lord's Return would lead to

neglect to the Master's work, to unfaithfulness, tyranny,

self-indulgence and sin.[5517]5517 And when the Lord suddenly came, as

certianly he would come, there would be not only loss, but damage,

hurt, and the punishment awarded to the hypocrites. Hence, let the

Church be ever on her watch,[5518]5518 let her ever be in

readiness![5519]5519 And how terribly the moral consequences of

unreadiness, and the punishment threatened, have ensued, the history

of the Church during these eighteen centuries has only too often and

too sadly shown.[5520]5520

CHAPTER VII.

EVENING OF THE THIRD DAY IN PASSION-WEEK-ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES-LAST

PARABLES: TO THE DISCIPLES CONCERNING THE LAST THINGS-THE PARABLE

OF THE TEN

VIRGINS-THE PARABLE OF THE TALENTS-SUPPLEMENTARY PARABLE OF THE

MINAS AND

THE KING'S RECKONING WITH HIS SERVANTS AND HIS REBELLIOUS CITIZENS

(St. Matt. xxv. 1-13; St. Matt. xxv. 14-30; St. Luke xix. 11-28.)

1. As might have been expected, the Parables concerning the Last

Things are closely connected with the Discourse of the Last Things,

which Christ had just spoken to His Disciples. In fact, that of the

Ten Virgins, which seems the fullest in many-sided meaning, is, in its

main object, only an illustration of the last part of Christ's

Discourse.[5521]5521 Its great practical lessons had been: the

unexpectedness of the Lord's Coming; the consequences to be apprehend

from its delay; and the need of personal and constant preparedness.

Similarly, the Parable of the Ten Virgins may, in its great outlines,

be thus summarised: Be ye personally prepared; be ye prepared for any

length of time; be ye prepared to go to Him directly.

Before proceeding, we mark that this Parable also is connected with

those that had preceeded. But we notice not only connection, but

progression. Indeed, it would be deeply interesting, alike

historically and for the better understanding of Christ's teaching,

but especially as showing its internal unity and development, and the

credibility of the Gospel-narratives, generally to trace this

connection and progress. And this, not merely in the three series of

parables which mark the three stages of His History - the Parables of

the Founding of the Kingdom, of its Character, and of its Consummation

- but as regards the parables themselves, that so the first might be

joined to the last as a string of heavenly pearls. But this lies

beyond our task. Not so, to mark the connection between the Parable of

the Ten Virgins and that of the Man without the Wedding-Garment.

Like the Parable of the Ten Virgins, it had pointed to the future. If

the exclusion and punishment of the Unprepared Guest did not primarily

refer to the Last Day, or to the Return of Christ, but perhaps rather

to what would happen in death, it pointed, at least secondarily, to

the final consummation. On the other hand, in the Parable of the Ten

Virgins this final consumation is the primary point. So far, then,

there is both connection and advance. Again, from the appearance and

the fate of the Unprepared Guest we learned, that not every one who,

following the Gospel-call, comes to the Gospel-feast, will be allowed

to partake of it; but that God will search and try each one

individually. There is, indeed, a society of guests - the Church; but

we must not expect either that the Church will, while on earth, be

wholly pure, or that its purification will be achieved by man. Each

guest may, indeed, come to the banqueting-hall, but the final judgment

as to his worthiness belongs to God. Lastly, the Parable also taught

the no less important opposite lesson, that each individual is

personally responsible; that we cannot shelter ourselves in the

community of the Church, but that to partake of the feast requireth

personal and individual preparation. To express it in modern

terminology: It taught Churchism as against one-sided individualism,

and spiritual individualism as against dead Churchism. All these

important lessons are carried forward in the Parable of the Ten

Virgins. If the union of the Ten Virgins for the purpose of meeting

the Bridegroom, and their à priori claims to enter in with Him - which

are, so to speak, the historical data and necessary premisses in the

Parable - point to the Church, the main lessons of the Parade are the

need of individual, personal, and spirtual preparation. Only such will

endure the trial of the long delay of Christ's Coming; only such will

stand that of an immediate summons to meet the Christ.

It is late at even - the world's long day seems past, and the Coming

of the Bridegroom must be near. The day and the hour we know not, for

the bridegroom has been far away. Only this we know, that it is the

Evening of the Marriage which the Bridegroom had fixed, and that his

word of promise may be relied upon. Therefore all has been made ready

within the bridal house, and is in waiting there; and therefore the

Virgins prepare to go forth to meet Him on His Arrival. The Parable

proceeds on the assumption that the Bridegroom is not in the town, but

somewhere far away; so that it cannot be known at what precise hour He

may arrive. But it is known that He will come that night; and the

Virgins who are to meet Him have gathered - presumably in the house

where the Marriage is to take place - waiting for the summons to go

forth and welcome the Bridegroom. The common mistake, that the Virgins

are represented in verse 1 as having gone forth on the road to meet

the Bridegroom, is not only irrational - since it is scarcely credible

that they would all have fallen asleep by the wayside, and with lamps

in their hands - but incompatible with the circumstance,[5522]5522

that at midnight the cry is suddenly raised to go forth and meet Him.

In these circumstances, no precise parallel can be derived from the

ordinary Jewish marriage-processions, where the bridgegroom,

accompanied by his groomsmen and friends, went to the bride's house,

and thence conducted the bride, with her attendant maidens and

friends, into his own or his parents' home. But in the Parable, the

Bridegroom comes from a distance and goes to the bridal house.

Accordingly, the bridal procession is to meet Him on His Arrival, and

escort Him to the bridal place. No mention is made of the Bride,

either in this Parable of in that or the Marriage of the King's Son.

This, for reasons connected with their application: since in the one

case the Wedding Guests, in the other the Virgins, occupy the place of

the Bride. And here we must remind ourselves of the general canon,

that, in the interpretation of a Parable, details must not be too

closely pressed. The Parables illustrate the Sayings of Christ, as the

Miracles His Doings; and alike the Parables and the Miracles present

only one or another, not all the aspects of the truth.

Another archæological inquiry will, perhaps, be more helpful to our

understanding of this Parable. The 'lamps' - not 'torches' - which the

Ten Virgins carried, were of well-known construction. They bear in

Talmudic wrtings commonly the name Lappid, but the Aramaised from the

Greek word in the New Testament also occurs as Lampad and

Lampadas.[5523]5523 The lamp consisted of a round receptacle for pitch

or oil for the wick. This was placed in a hollow cup or deep saucer -

the Beth Shiqqua[5524]5524 - which was fastened by a pointed end into

a long wooden pole, on which it was borne aloft. According to Jewish

authorities,[5525]5525 it was the custom in the East to carry in a

bridal procession about ten such lamps. We have the less reason to

doubt that such was also the case in Palestine, since, according to

rubric, ten was the number required to be present at any office or

ceremony, such as at the benedictions accompanying the

marriage-ceremonies. And, in the peculiar circurmstances supposed in

the Parable, Ten Virgins are represented as going forth to meet the

Bridegroom, each bearing her lamp.

The first point which we mark is, that the Ten Virgins brought,

presumably to the bridal house, 'their own[5526]5526 lamps.' Emphasis

must be laid on this. Thus much was there of personal preparation on

the part of all. But while the five that were wise brought also 'oil

in the vessels'[5527]5527 [presumably the hollow receptacles in which

the lamp proper stood], the five foolish Virgins neglected to do so,

no doubt expecting that their lamps would be filled out of some common

stock in the house. In the text the foolish Virgins are mentioned

before the wise,[5528]5528 because the Parable turns to this. We

cannot be at a loss to interpret the meaning of it. The Brideggroom

far away is Christ, Who is come for the Marriage-Feast from 'the far

country' - the Home above - certainly on that night, but we know not

at what hour of it. The ten appointed bridal companions who are to go

forth to meet Him are His professed disciples, and they gather in the

bridal house in readiness to welcome His arrival. It is night, and a

marriage-procession: therefore, they must go forth with their lamps.

All of them have brought their own lamps, they all have the Christian,

or say, the Church-profession: the lamp, in the hollow cup on the top

of the pole. But only the wise Virgins have more than this - the oil

in the vessels, without which the lamps cannot give their light. The

Christian or Church-profession is but an empty vessel on the top of a

pole, without the oil in the vessels. We here remember the words of

Christ: 'Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your

good works, and glorify your Father Which is in heaven.'[5529]5529 The

foolishness of the Virgins, which consisted in this that they had

ommited to bring their oil, is thus indicated in the text: 'All they

which [a_tinev][5530]5530 were foolish, when they brought their own

lamps, brought not with them oil:' they brought their own lamps, but

not their own oil. This (as already explained), probably, not from

forgetfulness - for they could scarcely have forgotten the need of

oil, but from the wilful neglect, in the belief that there would be a

common stock in the house, out of which they would be supplied, or

that there would be sufficient time for the supply of their need after

the announcement that the Bridegroom was coming. They had no

conception either of any personal obligation in this matter, nor that

the call would come so suddenly, nor yet that there would be so little

interval between the arrival of the Bridegroom and 'the closing of the

door.' And so they deemed it not necessary to undertake what must have

involved both trouble and carefulness, the bringing their own oil in

the hollow vessels in which the lamps were fixed.

We have proceeded on the supposition that the oil was not carried in

separate vessels, but in those attached to the lamps. It seems

scarcely likely that these lamps had been lighted while waiting in the

bridal house, where the Virgins assembled, and which, no doubt, was

festively illuminated: Many practical objections to this view will

readily occur. The foolishness of the five Virgins therefore

consisted, not (as is commonly supposed) in their want of perseverance

- as if the oil had been consumed before the Bridegroom came, and they

had only not provided themselves with a sufficient extra-supply - but

in the entire absence of personal preparation,[5531]5531 having

brought no oil of their own in their lamps. This corresponds to their

conducts, who, belonging to the Church - having the 'profession' -

being bridal companions provided with lamps, ready to go forth, and

expecting to share in the wedding feast - neglect the preparation of

grace, personal conversation and holiness, trusting that in the hour

of need the oil may be supplied out of the common stock. But they know

not, or else heed not, that every one must be personally prepared for

meeting the Bridegroom, that the call will be sudden, that the stock

of oil is not common, and that the time between His arrival and the

shutting of the door will be awfully brief.

For - and here begins the second scene in the Parable - the interval

between the gathering of the Virgins in readiness to meet Him, and the

arrival of the Bridegroom is much longer than had been anticipated.

And so it came, that both the wise and the foolish Virgins 'slumbered

and slept.' Manifestly, this is but a secondary trait in the Parable,

chiefly intended to accentuate the surprise of the sudden announcement

of the Bridegroom. The foolish Virgins did not ultimately fail because

of their sleep, nor yet were the wise reproved of it. True, it was

evidence of their weakness - but then it was night; all the world was

asleep; and their own drowsiness might be in proportion to their

former excitement. What follows is intended to bring into prominence

the startling suddenness of the Bridegroom's Coming. It is midnight -

when sleep is deepest - when suddenly 'there was a cry, Behold, the

Bridegroom cometh! Come ye out to the meeting of Him. Then all those

Virgins awoke, and prepared (trimmed) their lamps.' This, not in the

sense of heightening the low flame in their lamps, but in that of

hastily drawing up the wick and lighting it, when, as there was no oil

in the vessels, the flame, of course, immediately died out. 'Then the

foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are

going out. But the wise answered, saying: Not at all[5532]5532 - it

will never[5533]5533 suffice for us and you! Go ye rather to the

sellers, and buy for your own selves.'

This advice must not be regarded as given in irony. This trait is

introduced to point out the proper source of supply - to emphasise

that the oil must be their own, and also to prepare for what follows.

'But while they were going to buy, the Bridegroom came; and the ready

ones [they that were ready] went in with Him to the Marriage-Feast,

and the door was shut,' The sudden cry at midnight: 'The Bridegroom

cometh!' had come with startling surprise both to the wise and the

foolish Virgins; to the one class it had come only unexpectedly, but

to the other also unpreparedly. Their hope of sharing or borrowing the

oil of the wise Virgins being disappointed, the foolish were, of

course, unable to meet the Bridegroom. And while they hurried to the

sellers of oil, those that had been ready not only met; but entered

with the Bridegroom into the bridal house, and the door was shut. It

is of no importance here, whether or not the foolish Virgins finally

succeeded in obtaining oil - although this seems unlikely at that time

of night - since it could no longer be of any possible use, as its

object was to serve in the festive procession, which was now past.

Nevertheless, and when the door was shut, those foolish Virgins came,

calling on the Bridegroom to open to them. But they had failed in that

which could alone give them a claim to admission. Professing to be

bridesmaids, they had not been in the bridal procession, and so, in

truth and righteousness, He could only answer from within: 'Verily I

say unto you, I know you not.' This, not only in punishement, but in

the right order of things.

The personal application of this Parable to the disciples, which the

Lord makes, follows almost of necessity. 'Watch therefore, for ye know

not the day, nor the hour.'[5534]5534 Not enough to be in waiting with

the Church; His Coming will be far on in the night; it will be sudden;

it will be rapid: be prepared therefore, be ever and personnally

prepared! Christ will come when least expected - at midnight - and

when the Church, having become accustomed to His long delay, has gone

to sleep. So sudden will be His Coming, that after the cry of

announcement there will not be time for anything but to go forth to

meet Him; and so rapid will be the end, that, ere the foolish Virgins

can return, the door has been for ever closed. To present all this in

the most striking manner, the Parable takes the form of a dialogue,

first between the foolish and the wise Virgins, in which the latter

only state the bare truth when saying, that each has only sufficient

oil for what is superfluous. Lastly, we are to learn from the dialogue

between the foolish Virgins and the Bridegroom, that it is impossible

in the day of Christ's Coming to make up for neglect of previous

preparation, and that those who have failed to meet Him, even though

the bridal Virgins, shall be finally excluded as being strangers to

the Bridegroom.

2. The Parable of the Talents - their use and misuse[5535]5535 -

follows closely on the admonition to watch, in view of the sudden and

certain Return of Christ, and the reward or punishment which will then

be meted out. Only that, whereas in the Parable of the Ten Virgins the

reference was to the personal state, in that of 'the Talents' it is to

the personal work of the Disciples. In the former instance, they are

portrayed as the bridal maidens who are to welcome His Return; in the

latter, as the servants who are to give an account of their

stewardship.

From its close connection with what precedes, the Parable opens almost

abruptly with the words: 'For [it is] like a Man going abroad, [who]

called His own servants, and delivered to them His goods.' The

emphasis rests on this, that they were His own servants, and to act

for His interest. His property was handed over to them, not for safe

custody, but that they might do with it as best they could in the

interest of their Master. This appears from what immediately follows:

'and so to one He gave five talents (about 1,170l.), but to one two

(about 468l.), and to one one (=6,000 denarii, about 234l.), to each

according to his own capability'[5536]5536 - that is, He gave to each

according to his capacity, in proportion as He deemed severally

qualified for larger or smaller administration. 'And He journeyed

abroad straightway.'[5537]5537 Having entrusted the management of His

affairs to His servants, according to their capacity, He at once went

away.

Thus far we can have no difficulty in understanding the meaning of the

Parable. Our Lord, Who has left us for the Father's Home, is He Who

has gone on the journey abroad, and to His own servants has He

entrusted, not for custody, but to use for Him in the time between His

departure and His return, what He claims as His own 'goods.' We must

not limit this to the administration of His Word, nor to the Holy

Ministry, although these may have been pre-eminently in view. It

referes generally to all that a man has, wherewith to serve Christ;

for, all that the Christian has - his time, money, opportunities,

talents, or learning (and not only 'the Word'), is Christ's, and is

entrusted to us, not for custody, but to trade withal for the absent

Master - to further the progress of His Kingdom. And to each of us He

gives according to our capacity for working - mental, moral, and even

physical - to one five, to another two, and to another one 'talent.'

This capacity for work lies not within our own power; but it is in our

power to use for Christ whatever we may have.

And here the characteristic difference appears. 'He that received the

five talents went and traded with them, and made other five talents.

In like manner he that had received the two gained[5538]5538 other

two.' As each had received according to his ability, so each worked

according to his power, as good and faithful servants of their Lord.

If the outward result was different, their labour, devotion, and

faithfulness were equal. It was otherwise with him who had least to do

for his Master, since only one talent had been entrusted to him. He

'went away, digged up earth, and hid the money of his Lord.' The

prominent fact here is, that he did not employ it for the Master, as a

good servant, but shunned alike the labour and the responsibility, and

acted as if it had been some stranger's, and not his Lord's property.

In so doing he was not only unfaithful to his trust, but practically

disowned that he was a servant who had received much, two others are

introduced in the Parable, who had both received comparatively little

- one of whom was faithful, while the other in idle selfishness hid

the money, not heeding that it as 'his Lord's.' Thus, while the second

servant, although less had been entrusted to him was as faithful and

conscientious as he to whom much had been given, and while both had,

by their gain, increased the possessions of their Master, the third

had by his conduct rendered the money of his Lord a dead, useless,

buried thing.

And now the second scene opens. 'But after a long time cometh the Lord

of those servants, and maketh reckoning[5539]5539 with them.' The

notice of the long absence of the Master not only connects this with

the Parable of the Ten Virgins, but is intended to show that the delay

might have rendered the servants who traded more careless, while it

also increased the guilt of him, who all this time had not done

anything with his Master's money. And now the first of the servants,

without speaking of his labour in trading, or his merit in 'making'

money, answers with simple joyousness: 'Lord, five talents deliveredst

Thou unto me. See, other five talents have I gained

besides.'[5540]5540 We can almost see his honest face beaming with

delight, as he points to his Master's increased possession. His

approval was all that the faithful servant had looked for, for which

he had toiled during that long absence. And we can understand, how the

Master welcomed and owned that servant, and assigned to him meet

reward. The latter was twofold. Having proved his faithfulness and

capacity in a comparatively limited sphere, one much greater would be

assigned to him. For, to do the work, and increase the wealth of his

Master, had evidently been his joy and privilege, as well as his duty.

Hence also the second part of his reward - that of entering into the

joy of his Lord - must not be confined to sharing in the festive meal

at His return, still less to advancement from the position of a

servant to that of a friend who shares his Master's lordship. It

implies far more than this: even satisfied heart-sympathy with the

aims and gains of his Master, and participation in them, with all that

thus conveys.

A similar result followed on the reckoning with the servant to whom

two talents had been entrusted. We mark that, although he could only

speak of two talents gained, he met his Master with the same frank

joyness as he who had made five. For he had been as faithful, and

laboured as earnestly as he to whom more had been entrusted. And what

is more important, the former difference between the two servants,

dependent on greater or less capacity for work, now ceased, and the

second servant received precisely the same welcome and exactly the

same reward, and in the same terms, as the first. And yet a deeper,

and in some sense mysterious, truth comes to us in connection with the

words: 'Thou has been faithful over a few things, I will set thee over

many things.' Surely, then, if not after death, yet in that other

'dispensation,' there must be work to do for Christ, for which the

preparation is in this life by faithful application for Him of what He

has entrusted to us - be it much or little. This gives quite a new and

blessed meaning to the life that now is - as most truly and in all its

aspects part of that into which it is to unfold. No; not the smallest

share of 'talents,' if only faithfully used for Christ, can be lost,

not merely as regards His acknowledgement, but also their further and

wider employment. And may we not suggest, that this may, if not

explain, yet cast the halo of His purpose and Presence around what so

often seems mysterious in the removal of those who had just attained

to opening, or to full usefulness, or even of those who are taken from

us in the early morn of youth and loveliness. The Lord may 'have need'

of them, where or how we know not - and beyond this working-day and

working-world there are 'many things' over which the faithful servant

in little may be 'set,' that he may still do, and with greatly

enlarged opportunities and powers, the work for Christ which he had

loved so well, while at the same time he also shares the joy of his

Lord.

It only remains to refer to the third servant, whose sad

unfaithfulness and failure of service we already, in some measure,

understand. Summoned to his account, he returned the talent entrusted

to him with this explanation, that, knowing his Master to be a hard

man, reaping where he did not sow, and gathering (the corn) where He

did not 'winnow,'[5541]5541 he had been afraid of incurring

responsibility,[5542]5542 and hence hid in the earth the talent which

he now restored. It needs no comment to show that his own words,

however honest and self-righteous they might sound, admitted

dereliction of his work and duty as a servant, and entire

misunderstanding as well as heart-alienation from his Master. He

served Him not, and he knew Him not; he loved Him not, and he

sympathised not with Him. But, besides, his answer was also an insult

and a medacious pretext. He had been idle and unwilling to work for

his Master. If he worked it would be for himself. He would not incur

the difficulties, the self-denial, perhaps the reproach, connected

with his Master's work. We recognise here those who, although His

servants, yet, from self-indulgence and wordliness, will not do work

for Christ with the one talent entrusted to them - that is, even

though the responsibility and claim upon them be the smallest; and who

deem it sufficient to hide it in the ground - not to lose it - or to

preserve it, as they imagine, from being used for evil, without using

it to trade for Christ. The falseness of the excuse, that he was

afraid to do anything with it - an excuse too often repeated in our

days - lest, peradventure, he might do more harm than good, was now

fully exposed by the Master. Confessedly, it proceeded from a want of

knowledge of Him, as if He were a hard, exacting Master, not One Who

reckons even the least service as done to Himself; from

misunderstanding also of what work for Christ is, in which nothing can

ever fail or be lost; and, lastly, from want of joyous sympathy with

it. And so the Master put aside the flimsy pretext. Addressing him as

a 'wicked and slothful servant,' He pointed out that, even on his own

showing, if he had been afraid to incur responsibility , he might have

'cast' (a word intended to mark the absence of labour) the money to

'the bankers,' when, at His return, He would have received His own,

'with interest.' Thus he might, without incurring responsibility, or

much labour, have been, at least in a limited sense, faithful to his

duty and trust as a servant.

The reference to the practice of lodging money, at interest, with the

bankers, raises questions too numerous and lengthly for full

discussion in this place. The Jewish Law distinguished between

'interest' and 'increase' (neshekh and tarbith), and entered into many

and intricate details on the subject.[5543]5543 Such transactions were

forbidden with Israelites, but allowed with Gentiles. As in Rome, the

business of 'money-changers' (argentarii, nummularii) and that of

'bankers' (collectarii, mensularii) seem to have run into each other.

The Jewish 'bankers' bear precisely the same name (Shulchani,

mensularius, trapez_tjv). In Rome very high interest seems to have

been charged in early times; by-and-by it was lowered, till it was

fixed, first at 8½, and then at 4 1/6, per cent. But these laws were

not of permanent duration. Practically, usury was unlimited. It soon

became the custom to charge monthly interest at the rate of 1 per cent

a month. Yet there were prosperous times, as at the close of the

Republic, when the rate of interest was so low as 4 percent; during

the early Empire it stood at 8 per cent. This, of course, in what we

may call fair business transactions. Beyond them, in the almost

incredible extravagance, luxury, and indebtedness of even some of the

chief historical personages, most usurious transactions took place

(especailly in the provinces), and that by people in high position

(Brutus in Cyprus, and Seneca in Britain). Money was lent at 12, 24,

and even 48 per cent.; the bills bore a larger sum than that actually

received; and the interest was added to the capital, so that debt and

interest alike grew. In Greece there were regular State banks, while

in Rome such provision was only made under exceptional circumstances.

Not unfrequently the twofold business of money-changing and banking

was combined. Such 'bankers' undertook to make payments, to collect

moneys and accounts, to place out money at interest - in short, all

the ordinary business of this kind.[5544]5544 There can be no question

that the Jewish bankers of Palestine and elsewhere were engaged in the

same undertakings, while the dispersion of their race over the world

would render it more easy to have trusted correspondents in every

city. Thus, we find that Herod Agrippa borrowed from the Jewish

Alabarch at Alexandria the sum of 20,000 drachms, which was paid him

in Italy, the commission and interest on it amounting to no less than

8 1/2 per cent. (2,500 drachms).[5545]5545

We can thus understand the allusion to 'the bankers,' with whom the

wicked and unfaithful servant might have lodged his lord's money, if

there had been truth in his excuse. To unmask its hollowness is the

chief object of this part of the Parable. Accordingly, it must not be

too closely pressed; but it would be in the spirit of the Parable to

apply the expression to the indirect employment of money in the

service of Christ, as by charitable contributions, &c. But the great

lesson intended is, that every good and faithful servant of Christ

must, whatever his circumstances, personally and directly use such

talent as he may have to make gain for Christ. Tried by this test, how

few seem to have understood their relation to Christ, and how cold has

the love of the Church grown in the long absence of her lord!

But as regards the 'unprofitable' servant in the Parable, the

well-known punishment of him that had come to the Marriage-Feast

without the wedding-garment shall await him, while the talent, which

he had failed to employ for his master, shall be entrusted to him who

had shown himself most capable of working. We need not seek an

elaborate interpretation for this. It points to the principle, equally

true in every administration of God, that 'unto every one that hath

shall be given, and he shall be placed in abundance;[5546]5546 but as

to him that hath not,[5547]5547 also what he hath shall be away from

him.' Not a cynical rule this, such as the world, in its selfishness

or worship of success, caricatures it; nor yet the worship of superior

force; but this, that faithful use for God of every capacity will ever

open fresh opportunities, in proportion as the old ones have been

used, while spiritual unprofitableness must end in utter loss even of

that which, however humble, might have been used, at one time or

another, for God and for good.

3. To these Parables, that of the King who on his return makes

reckoning with His servants and His enemies may be regarded as

supplemental. It is recorded only by St. Luke, and placed by him in

somewhat loose connection with the conversion of Zacchæus.[5548]5548

The most superficial perusal will show such unmistakable similarity

with the Parable of 'The Talents,' that their identity will naturally

suggest itself to the reader. On the other hand, there are remarkable

divergences in detail, some of which seem to imply a different

standpoint from which the same truth is viewed. We have also now the

additional feature of the message of hatred on the part of the

citizens, and their fate in consequence of it. It may have been that

Christ spoke the two Parables on the two different occasions mentioned

respectively by St. Luke and St. Matthew - the one on the journey to

Jerusalem, the other on the Mount of Olives. And yet it seems

difficult to believe that He would, with a few days of telling the

Parable recorded by St. Luke, have repeated it in almost the same

words to the disciples, who must have heard it in Jericho. This

objection would not be so serious, if the Parable addressed, in the

first instance, to the disciples (that of the Talents) had been

afterwards repeated (in the record of St. Luke) in a wider circle, and

not, as according to the Synoptists, the opposite. If, however, we are

to regard the two Parables of the Talents and of the Pieces of Money

as substantially the same, we would be disposed to consider the

recension by St. Matthew as the original, being the more homogeneous

and compact, while that of St. Luke would seem to combine with this

another Parable, that of the rebellious citizens. Perhaps it is safest

to assume, that, on His way to Jerusalem, when his adherents (not

merely the disciples) would naturally expect that He would inaugurate

His Messianic Kingdom, Christ may have spoken the latter Parable, to

teach them that the relation in which Jerusalem stood towards Him, and

its fate, were quite different form what they imagined, and that His

Entrance into the City and the Advent of His Kingdom would be

separated by a long distance of time. Hence the prospect before them

was that of working, not of reigning; after that would the reckoning

come, when the faithful worker would become the trusted ruler. These

points were, of course, closely connected with the lessons of the

Parable of the Talents, and, with the view of presenting the subject

as a whole, St. Luke may have borrowed details from that Parable, and

supplemented its teaching by presenting another aspect of it.

It must be admitted, that if St. Luke had really these two Parables in

view (that of the King and of the Talents), and wished to combine them

into new teaching, he has most admirably welded them together. For, as

the Nobleman Who is about to entrust money to His servants, is going

abroad to receive a Kingdom, it was possible to represent Him alike in

relation to rebellious citizens and to His own servants, and to

connect their reward with His 'Kingdom.' And so the two Parables are

joined by deriving the illustration from political instead of social

life. It has been commonly supposed, that the Parable contains an

allusion to what had happened after the death of Herod the Great, when

his son Archelaus hastened to Rome to obtain confirmation of his

father's will, while a Jewish deputation followed to oppose his

appointment - an act of rebellion which Archelaus afterwards avenged

in the blood of his enemies. The circumstance must have been still

fresh in popular remembrance, although more than thirty years had

elapsed. But if otherwise, applications to Rome for installation to

the government, and popular opposition thereto, were of such frequent

occurence amidst the quarrels and intrigues of the Herodians, that no

difficulty could have been felt in understanding the allusions of the

Parable.

A brief analysis will suffice to point out the special lessons of this

Parable. It introduces 'a certain Nobleman,' Who has claims to the

throne, but has not yet received the formal appointment from the

suzerain power. As He is going away to receive it, He deals as yet

only with His servants. His object, apparently, is to try their

aptitude, devotion, and faithfulness: and so He hands - not to each

according to his capacity, but to all equally, a sum, not large (such

as talents), but small - to each a 'mina,' equal to 100 drachms, or

about 3l. 5s. of our money. To trade with so small a sum would, of

course, be much more difficult, and success would imply greater

ability, even as it would require more constant labour. Here we have

some traits in which this differs from the Parable of the Talents. The

same small sum is supposed to have been entrusted to all, in order to

show which of them was most able and most earnest, and hence who

should be called to largest employment, and with it to greatest honour

in the Kingdom. While 'the Nobleman' was at the court of His suzerain,

a deputation of His fellow-citizens arrived to urge this resolution of

theirs: 'We will not that this One reign over us.' It was simply an

expression of hatred; it stated no reason, and only urged personal

opposition, even if such were in the face of the personal wish of the

sovereign who appointed him king.

In the last scene, the King, now duly appointed, has returned to His

country. He first reckons with His servants, when it is found that all

but one have been faithful to their trust, though with varying success

(the mina of the one having grown into ten; that of another into five,

and so on). In strict accordance with that success is now their

further appointment to rule - work here corresponding to rule there,

which, however, as we know from the Parable of the Talents, is also

work for Christ: a rule that is work, and work that is rule. At the

same time, the acknowledgment is the same to all the faithful

servants. Similarly, the motives, the reasoning, and the fate of the

unfaithful servant are the same as in the Parable of the Talents. But

as regards His 'enemies,' that would not have Him reign over them -

manifestly, Jerusalem and the people of Israel - who, even after He

had gone to receive the Kingdom, continued the personal hostility of

their 'We will not that this One shall reign over us' - the ashes of

the Temple, the ruins of the City, the blood of the fathers, and the

homeless wanderings of their children, with the Cain curse branded on

their brow and visible to all men, attest, that the King has many

ministers to execute that judgment which obstinate rebellion must

surely bring, if His Authority is to be vindicated, and His Rule to

secure submission.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE FOURTH DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - JESUS IN HIS LAST SABBATIC REST

BEFORE HIS

AGONY, AND THE SANHEDRISTS IN THEIR UNREST - THE BETRAYAL - JUDAS: HIS

CHARACTER, APOSTASY, AND END.

(St. Matt. xxvi. 1-5, 14-16; St. Mark xiv. 1, 2, 10, 11; St. Luke

xxii. 1-6.)

FROM the record of Christ's Sayings and Doings, furnished by St.

Matthew, we turn once more to that of public events, as, from one or

another aspect they are related by all the Evangelists. With the

Discourses in the Temple the public Teaching of Christ had come to an

end; with that spoken on the Mount of Olives, and its application in

the Parables of the 'Virgins' and the 'Talents,' the instruction of

the disciples had been concluded. What follows in His intercourse with

His own is parænetic,[5549]5549 rather than teaching - exhortation,

advice, and consolation: rather, perhaps, all these combined.

The three busy days of Passion-Week were past. The day before that on

which the Paschal Lamb was to be slain, with all that was to follow,

would be one of rest, a Sabbath to His Soul before its Great Agony. He

would refresh Himself, gather Himself up for the terrible conflict

before Him. And He did so as the Lamb of God - meekly submitting

Himself to the Will and Hand of His Father, and so fulfilling all

types, from that of Isaac's sacrifice on Mount Moriah to the Paschal

Lamb in the Temple; and bringing the reality of all prophecy, from

that of the Woman's Seed that would crush the Serpent's head to that

of the Kingdom of God in its fullness, when its golden gates would be

flung open to all men, and Heaven's own light flow out to them as they

sought its way of peace. Only two days more, as the Jews reckoned

them[5550]5550 - that Wednesday and Thursday - and at its Even the

Paschal supper! And Jesus knew it well, and He passed that day of rest

and preparation in quiet retirement with His disciples - perhaps in

some hollow of the Mount of Olives, near the home of Bethany -

speaking to them of His Crucifixion on the near Passover. They sorely

needed His words; they, rather than He, needed to be prepared for what

was coming. But what Divine calm, what willing obedience, and also

what outgoing of love to them, with full consciousness of what was

before Him, to think and speak of this only on that day! So would not

a Messiah of Jewish conception have acted; nay, He would not have been

placed in such circumstances. So would not a Messiah of ambitious aims

or of Jewish Nationalist aspirations have acted; He would have done

what the Sanhedrin feared, and raised a 'tumult of the people,'

prepared for it as the multitude was, which had so lately raised the

Hosanna-cry in street and Temple. So would a disillusioned enthusiast

not have acted; he would have withdrawn from the impending fate. But

Jesus knew it all - far more the agony of shame and suffering, even

the unfathomable agony of soul. And the while He thought only of them

in it all. Such thinking and speaking is not that of Man - it is that

of the Incarnate Son of God, the Christ of the Gospels.

He had, indeed, before that, sought gradually to prepare them for what

was to happen on the morrow's night. He had pointed to it in dim

figure at the very opening of His Ministry, on the first occasion that

he had taught in the Temple,[5551]5551 as well as to

Nicodemus.[5552]5552 He had hinted it, when He spoke of the deep

sorrow when the Bridegroom would be taken from them,[5553]5553 of the

need of taking up His cross,[5554]5554 of the fulfilment in Him of the

Jonah-type,[5555]5555 of His Flesh which He would give for the life of

the world,[5556]5556 as well as in what might have seemed the

Parabolic teaching about the Good Shepherd, Who laid down His life for

the Sheep,[5557]5557 and the Heir Whom the evil husbandmen cast out

and killed.[5558]5558 But He had also spoken of it quite directly -

and this, let us specially notice, always when some highpoint in His

History had been reached, and the disciples might have been carried

away into Messianic expectations of an exaltation without humiliation,

a triumph not a sacrifice. We remember, that the first occasion on

which He spoke thus clearly was immediately after that confession of

Peter, which laid the foundation of the Church, against which the

gates of hell should not prevail;[5559]5559 the next, after descending

from the Mount of Transfiguration;[5560]5560 the last, on preparing to

make His triumphal Messianic Entry into Jerusalem.[5561]5561 The

darker hints and Parabolic sayings might have been misunderstood. Even

as regarded the clear prediction of His Death, preconceived ideas

could find no room for such a fact. Deep veneration, which could not

associate it with His Person, and love which could not bear the

thought of it, might, after the first shock of the words was past, and

their immediate fulfilment did not follow, suggest some other possible

explanation of the prediction. But on that Wednessday it was

impossible to misunderstand; it could scarcely have been possible to

doubt what Jesus said of His near Crucifixion.[5562]5562 If illusions

had still existed, the last two days must have rudely dispelled them.

The triumphal Hosannas of His Entry into the City, and the

acclamations in the Temple, had given place to the cavils of

Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes, and with a 'Woe' upon it Jesus had

taken His last departure from Israel's sanctuary. And better far than

those rulers, whom conscience made cowards, did the disciples know how

little reliance could be placed on the adherence of the 'multitude.'

And now the Master was telling it to them in plain words; was camly

contemplating it, and that not as in the dim future, but in the

immediate present - at that very Passover, from which scarcely two

days separated them. Much as we wonder at their brief scattering on

His arrest and condemnation, those humble disciples must have loved

Him much to sit around Him in mournful silence as He thus spake, and

to follow Him unto His Dying.

But to one of them, in whose heart the darkness had long been

gathering, this was the decisive moment. The prediction of Christ,

which Judas as well as the others must have felt to be true,

extinguished the last glimmering of such light of Christ as his soul

had been capable of receiving. In its place flared up the lurid flame

of hell. By the open door out of which he had thrust the dying Christ

'Satan entered into Judas.'[5563]5563 Yet, even so, not

permanently.[5564]5564 It may, indeed, be doubted, whether, since God

is in Christ, such can ever be the case in any human soul, at least on

this side eternity. Since our world's night has been lit up by the

promise from Paradise, the rosy hue of its morning has lain on the

edge of the horizon, deepening into gold, brightening into day,

growing into midday-strength and evening-glory. Since God's Voice

wakened earth by its early Christmas-Hymn, it has never been quite

night there, nor can it ever be quite night in any human

soul.[5565]5565

But it is a terrible night-study, that of Judas. We seem to tread our

way over loose stones of hot molten lava, as we climb to the edge of

the crater, and shudderingly look down its depths. And yet there, near

there, have stood not only St. Peter in the night of his denial, but

mostly all of us, save they whose Angels have always looked up into

the Face of our Father in heaven. And yet, in our weakness, we have

even wept over them! There, near there, have we stood, not in the

hours of our weakness, but in those of our sore temptation, when the

blast of doubt had almost quenched the flickering light, or the storm

of passion or self-will broken the bruised reed. But He prayed for us

- and through the night came over desolate moor and stony height the

Light of His Presence, and above the wild storm rose the Voice of Him,

Who has come to seek and to save that which was lost. Yet near to us,

close to us, was the dark abyss; and we can never more forget out

last, almost sliding, foothold as we quitted its edge.

A terrible night-study this of Judas, and best to make it here, at

once, from its beginning to its end. We shall indeed, catch sudden

glimpse of him again, as the light of the torches flashes on the

traitor-face in Gethsemane; and once more hear his voice in the

assemblage of the haughty, sneering councillors of Israel, when his

footfall on the marble pavement of the Temple-halls; and the clink of

those thirty accursed pieces of silver shall waken the echoes, wake

also the dirge of despair in his soul, and he shall flee from the

night of his soul into the night that for ever closes around him. But

all this as rapidly as we may pass from it, after this present brief

study of his character and history.

We remember, that 'Judas, the man of Kerioth,' was, so far as we know,

the only disciple of Jesus from the province of Judæa. This

circumstance; that he carried the bag, i.e. was treasurer and

administrator of the small common stock of Christ and His disciples;

and that he was both a hypocrite and a thief[5566]5566 - this is all

that we know for certain of his history. From the circumstance that he

was appointed to such office of trust in the Apostolic community, we

infer that he must have been looked up to by the others as an able and

prudent man, a good administrator. And there is probably no reason to

doubt, that he possessed the natural gift of administration or of

'government' (kub_rnjsiv).[5567]5567 The question, why Jesus left him

'the bag' after he knew him to be a thief - which, as we believe, he

was not at the beginning, and only became in the course of time and in

the progress of disappointment - is best answered by this other: Why

He originally allowed it to be entrusted to Judas? It was not only

because he was best fitted - probably, absolutely fitted - for such

work, but also in mercy to him, in view of his character. To engage in

that for which a man is naturally fitted is the most likely means of

keeping him from brooding, dissatisfaction, alienation, and eventual

apostasy. On the other hand, it must be admitted that, as mostly all

our life-temptations come to us from that for which we have most

aptitude, when Judas was alienated and unfaithful in heart, this very

thing became also his greatest temptation, and, indeed, hurried him to

his ruin. But only after he had first failed inwardly. And so, as ever

in like circumstances, the very things which might have been most of

blessing become most of curse, and the judgment of hardening fulfills

itself by that which in itself is good. Nor could 'the bag' have been

afterwards taken from him without both exposing him to the others, and

precipitating his moral destruction. And so he had to be left to the

process of inward ripening, till all was ready for the sickle.

This very gift of 'government' in Judas may also help us to understand

how he may have been first attracted to Jesus, and through what

process, when alienated, he came to end in that terrible sin which had

cast its snare about him. The 'gift of government' would, in its

active aspect, imply the desire for it. From thence to ambition in its

worst, or selfish, aspect, there is only a step - scarcely that:

rather, only different moral premisses.[5568]5568 Judas was drawn to

Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, and he believed in Him as such, possibly

both earnestly and ardently; but he expected that His would be the

success, the result, and the triumphs of the Jewish Messiah, and he

also expected personally and fully to share in them. How deep-rooted

were such feelings even in the best, purest, and most unselfish of

Jesus' disciples, we gather from the request of the mother of John and

James for her sons, and from Peter's question: 'What shall we have?'

it must have been sorrow, the misery of moral loneliness, and

humiliation, to Him Who was Unselfishness Incarnate, Who lived to die

and was full to empty Himself, to be associated with such as even His

most intimate disciples, who in this sense also could not watch with

Him even one hour, and in whom, at the end of His Ministry, such

heaviness was mentally and morally the outcrop, if not the outcome.

And in Judas all this must have been an hundredfold more than in them

who were in heart true to Christ.

He had, from such conviction as we have described, joined the movement

at its very commencement. Then, multitudes in Galilee followed His

Footsteps, and watched for His every appearance; they hung entranced

on His lips in the Synagogue or on 'the Mount;' they flocked to Him

from every town, village, and hamlet; they bore the sick and dying to

His Feet, and witnessed, awestruck, how conquered devils gave their

testimony to His Divine Power. It was the spring-time of the movement,

and all was full of promise - land, people, and disciples. The

Baptist, who had bowed before Him and testified to Him, was still

lifting his voice to proclaim the near Kingdom. But the people had

turned after Jesus, and He swayed them. And, oh! what power was there

in His Face and Word, and His look and deed. And Judas, also, had been

one of them who, on their early Mission, had temporarily had power

given Him, so that the very devils had been subject to them. But, step

by step, had come the disappointment. John was beheaded, and not

avenged; on the contrary, Jesus withdrew Himself. This constant

withdrawing, whether from enemies or from success - almost amounting

to flight - even when they would have made Him a King; this refusal to

show Himself openly, either at Jerusalem, as His own brethen had

taunted Him, or, indeed, anywhere else; this uniform preaching of

discouragement to them, when they came to Him elated and hopeful at

some success; this gathering enmity of Israel's leaders, and His

marked avoidance of, or, as some might have put it, His failure in

taking up the repeated public challenge of the Pharisees to show a

sign from heaven; last, and chief of all, this constant and growing

reference to shame, disaster, and death - what did it all mean, if not

disappointment of all those hopes and expectations which had made

Judas at the first a disciple of Jesus?

He that so knew Jesus, not only in His Words and Deeds, but in His

inmost Thoughts, even to His night-long communing with God on the

hill-side, could not have seriously believed in the coarse Pharisaic

charge of Satanic agency as the explanation of all. Yet, from the then

Jewish standpoint, he could scarcely have found it impossible to

suggest some other explanation of His miraculous power. But, as

increasingly the moral and spiritual aspect of Christ's Kingdom must

have become apparent to even the dullest intellect, the bitter

disappointment of his Messianic thoughts and hopes must have gone on,

increasing in proportion as, side by side with it, the process of

moral alienation, unavoidably connected with his resistance to such

spiritual manifestation, continued and increased. And so the mental

and the moral alienation went on together, affected by and affecting

each other. As if we were pressed to name a definite moment when the

process of disintegration, at least sensibly, began, we would point to

that Sabbath-morning at Capernaum, when Christ had preached about His

Flesh as the Food of the World, and so many of His adherents ceased to

follow after Him; nay, when the leaven so worked even in His

disciplies, that He turned to them with the searching question -

intended to show them the full import of the crisis - whether they

also would leave Him? Peter conquered by grasping the moral element,

because it was germane to him and to the other true disciples: 'To

whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.' But this moral

element was the very cliff on which Judas made shipwreck. After this,

all was wrong, and increasingly so. We see disappointment in his face

when not climbing the Mount of Transfiguration, and disappointment in

the failure to heal the lunatick child. In the disputes by the way, in

the quarrels who was greatest among them, in all the pettiness of

misunderstandings and realistic folly of their questions or answers,

we seem to hear the echo of his voice, to see the result of his

influence, the leaven of his presence. And in it all we mark the

downward hastening of his course, even to the moment when, in contrast

to the deep love of a Mary, he first stands before us unmasked, as

heartless, hyprocritical, full of hatred - disappointed ambition

having broken down into selfishness, and selfishness slid into

covetousness, even to the crime of stealing that which was destined

for the poor.

For, when an ambition which rests only on selfishness gives way there

lies close by it the coarse lust of covetousness, as the kindred

passion and lower expression of that other form of selfishness. When

the Messianic faith of Judas gave place to utter disappointment, the

moral and spiritual character of Christ's Teaching would affect him,

not sympathetically but antipathetically. Thus, that which should have

opened the door of his heart, only closed and double-barred it. His

attachment to the Person of Jesus would give place to actual hatred,

though only of a temporary character; and the wild intenseness of his

Eastern nature would set it all in flame. Thus, when Judas had lost

his slender foothold, or, rather, when it had slipped from under him,

he fell down, down the eternal abyss. The only hold to which he could

cling was the passion of his soul. As he laid hands on it, it gave

way, and fell with him into fathomless depths. We, each of us, have

also some master-passion; and if, which God forbid! we should lose our

foothold, we also would grasp this master-passion, and it would give

way, and carry us with it into the eternal dark and deep.

On that spring day, in the restfulness of Bethany, when the Master was

taking His sad and solemn Farewell of sky and earth, of friends and

disciples, and told them what was to happen only two days later at the

Passover, it was all settled in the soul of Judas. 'Satan entered' it.

Christ would be crucified; this was quite certain. In the general

cataclysm let Judas have at least something. And so, on that sunny

afternoon, he left them out there, to seek speech of them that were

gathered, not in their ordinary meeting-place, but in the

High-Priest's Palace. Even this indicates that it was an informal

meeting, consultative rather than judicial. For, it was one of the

principles of Jewish Law that, in criminal cases, sentence must be

spoken in the regular meeting-place of the Sanhedrin.[5569]5569 The

same inference is conveyed by the circumstance, that the captain of

the Temple-guard and his immediate subordinates seem to have been

taken into the council,[5570]5570 no doubt to concert the measures for

the actual arrest of Jesus. There had previously been a similar

gathering and consultation, when the report of the raising of Lazarus

reached the authorities of Jerusalem.[5571]5571 The practical

resolution adopted at that meeting had apparently been, that a strict

watch should henceforth be kept on Christ's movements, and that every

one of them, as well as the names of His friends, and the places of

His secret retirement, should be communicated to the authorities, with

the view to His arrest at the proper moment.[5572]5572

It was probably in professed obedience to this direction, that the

traitor presented himself that afternoon in the Palace of the

High-Priest Caiaphas.[5573]5573 Those assembled there were the

'chiefs' of the Priesthood - no doubt, the Temple-officials, heads of

the course of Priests, and connections of the High-Priestly family,

who constituted what both Josephus and the Talmud designate as the

Priestly Council.[5574]5574 All connected with the Temple, its ritual,

administration, order, and laws, would be in their hands. Moreover, it

was but natural, that the High-Priest and his council should be the

regular official medium between the Roman authorities and the people.

In matters which concerned, not ordinary misdemeanours, but political

crimes (such as it was wished to represent the movement of Jesus), or

which affected the status of the established religion, the official

chiefs of the Priest-hood would, of course, be the persons to appeal,

in conjunction with the Sanhedrists, to the secular authorities. This,

irrespective of the question - to which reference will be made in the

sequel - what place the Chief Priests held in the Sanhedrin. But in

that meeting in the Palace of Caiaphas, besides these Priestly Chiefs,

the leading Sanhedrists ('Scribes and Elders') were also gathered.

They were deliberating how Jesus might be taken by subtilty and

killed. Probably they had not yet fixed on any definite plan. Only at

this conclusion had they arrived - probably in consequence of the

popular acclamations at His Entry into Jerusalem, and of what had

since happened - that nothing must be done during the Feast, for fear

of some popular tumult. They knew only too well the character of

Pilate, and how in any such tumult all parties - the leaders as well

as the led - might experience terrible vengeance.

It must have been intense relief when, in their perplexity, the

traitor now presented himself before them with his proposals. Yet his

reception was not such as he may have looked for. He probably expected

to be hailed and treated as a most important ally. They were, indeed,

'glad, and covenanted to give him money,' even as he promised to dog

His steps, and watch for the opportunity which they sought. In truth,

the offer of the betrayer changed the whole aspect of matters. What

formerly they dreaded to attempt seemed now both safe and easy. They

could not allow such an opportunity to slip; it was one that might

never occur again. Nay, might it not even seem, from the defection of

Judas, as if dissatisfaction and disbelief had begun to spread in the

innermost circle of Christ's disciples?

Yet, withal, they treated Judas not as an honoured associate, but as a

common informer, and a contemptible betrayer. This was not only

natural but, in the circumstances, the wisest policy, alike in order

to save their own dignity, and to keep most secure hold on the

betrayer. And, after all, it might be said, so as to minimise his

services, that Judas could really not do much for them - only show

them how they might seize Him at unawares in the absence of the

multitude, to avoid the possible tumult of an open arrest. So little

did they understand Christ! And Judas had at last to speak it out

barefacedly - so selling himself as well as the Master: 'What will ye

give me?' It was in literal fulfilment of prophecy,[5575]5575 that

they 'weighed out' to him[5576]5576 from the very Temple-treasury

those thirty pieces of silver (about 3l. 15s.).[5577]5577 And here we

mark, that there is always terrible literality about the prophecies of

judgment, while those of blessing far exceed the words of prediction.

And yet it was surely as much in contempt of the seller as of Him Whom

he sold, that they paid the legal price of a slave. Or did they mean

some kind of legal fiction, such as to buy the Person of Jesus at the

legal price of a slave, so as to hand it afterwards over to the

secular authorities? Such fictions, to save the conscience by a

logical quibble, are not so uncommon - and the case of the Inquisitors

handing over the condemned heretic to the secular authorities will

recur to the mind. But, in truth, Judas could not now have escaped

their toils. They might have offered him ten or five pieces of silver,

and he must still have stuck to his bargain. Yet none the less do we

mark the deep symbolic significance of it all, in that the Lord was,

so to speak, paid for out of the Temple-money which was destined for

the purchase of sacrifices, and that He, Who took on Him the form of a

servant,[5578]5578 was sold and bought at the legal price of a

slave.[5579]5579

And yet Satan must once more enter the heart of Judas at that Supper,

before he can finally do the deed.[5580]5580 But, even so, we believe

it was only temporarily, not for always - for, he was still a human

being, such as on this side eternity we all are - and he had still a

conscience working in him. With this element he had not reckoned in

his bargain in the High Priest's Palace. On the morrow of His

condemnation would it exact a terrible account. That night in

Gethsemane never more passed from his soul. In the thickening and

encircling gloom all around, he must have ever seen only the

torch-light glare as it fell on the pallid Face of the Divine

Sufferer. In the terrible stillness before the storm, he must have

ever heard only these words: 'Betrayest thou the Son of Man with a

kiss?' He did not hate Jesus then - he hated nothing; he hated

everything. He was utterly desolate, as the storm of despair swept

over his disenchanted soul, and swept him before it. No one in heaven

or on earth to appeal to; no one, Angel or man, to stand by him. Not

the priests, who had paid him the price of blood, would have aught of

him, not even the thirty pieces of silver, the blood-money of his

Master and of his own soul - even as the modern Synagougue, which

approves of what has been done,but not of the deed, will have none of

him! With their 'See thou to it!' they sent him reeling back into his

darkness. Not so could conscience be stilled. And, louder than the

ring of the thirty silver pieces as they fell on the marble pavement

of the Temple, rang it ever in his soul, 'I have betrayed innocent

blood!' Even if Judas possessed that which on earth cleaves closest

and longest to us - a woman's love - it could not have abode by him.

It would have turned into madness and fled; or it would have withered,

struck by the lightning-flash of that night of terrors.

Deeper - farther out into the night! to its farthest bounds - where

rises and falls the dark flood of death. The wild howl of the storm

has lashed the dark waters into fury: they toss and break in wild

billows at his feet. One narrow rift in the cloud-curtain over-head,

and, in the pale, deathlike light lies the Figure of the Christ, so

calm and placid, untouched and unharmed, on the storm-tossed waters,

as it had been that night lying on the Lake of Galilee, when Judas had

seen Him come to them over the surging billows, and then bid them be

peace. Peace! What peace to him now - in earth or heaven? It was the

same Christ, but thorn-crowned, with nail-prints in His Hands and

Feet. And this Judas had done to the Master! Only for one moment did

it seem to lie there; then it was sucked up by the dark waters

beneath. And again the cloud-curtain is drawn, only more closely; the

darkness is thicker, and the storm wilder than before. Out into that

darkness, with one wild plunge - there, where the Figure of the Dead

Christ had lain on the waters! And the dark waters have closed around

him in eternal silence.

In the lurid morn that broke on the other shore where the flood cast

him up, did he meet those searching, loving Eyes of Jesus, Whose gaze

he knew so well - when he came to answer for the deeds done in the

flesh?

And - can there be a store in the Eternal Compassion for the Betrayer

of Christ?

CHAPTER IX.

THE FIFTH DAY IN PASSION-WEEK - 'MAKE READY THE PASSOVER!'

St. Matt. xxvi. 17-19; St. Mark xiv. 12-16; St. Luke xxii. 7-13; St.

John xiii. 1.)

When the traitor returned from Jerusalem on the Wednesday afternoon,

the Passover, in the popular and canonical, though not in the Biblical

sense, was close at hand. It began on the 14th Nisan, that is, from

the appearance of the first three stars on Wednesday evening [the

evening of what had been the 13th], and ended with the first three

stars on Thursday evening [the evening of what had been the 14th day

of Nisan]. As this is an exceedingly important point, it is well here

to quote the precise language of the Jerusalem Talmud:[5581]5581 'What

means: On the Pesach?[5582]5582 On the 14th [Nisan].' And so Josephus

describes the Feast as one of eight days,[5583]5583 evidently

reckoning its beginning on the 14th, and its close at the end of the

21st Nisan. The absence of the traitor so close upon the Feast would

therefore, be the less noticed by the others. Necessary preparations

might have to be made, even though they were to be guests in some

house - they knew not which. These would, of course, devolve on Judas.

Besides, from previous conversations, they may also have judged that

'the man of Kerioth' would fain escape what the Lord had all that day

been telling them about, and which was now filling their minds and

hearts.

Everyone in Israel was thinking about the Feast. For the previous

month it had been the subject of discussion in the Academies, and, for

the last two Sabbaths at least, that of discourse in the

Synagogues.[5584]5584 Everyone was going to Jerusalem, or had those

near and dear to them there, or at least watched the festive

processions to the Metropolis of Judaism. It was a gathering of

universal Israel, that of the memorial of the birth-night of the

nation, and of its Exodus, when friends from afar would meet, and new

friends be made; when offerings long due would be brought, and

purification long needed be obtained - and all worship in that grand

and glorious Temple, with its gorgeous ritual. National and religious

feelings were alike stirred in what reached far back to the first, and

pointed far forward to the final Deliverance. On that day a Jew might

well glory in being a Jew. But we must not dwell on such thoughts, nor

attempt a general description of the Feast. Rather shall we try to

follow closely the footsteps of Christ and His disciples, and see or

know only what on that day they saw and did.

For ecclesiastical purposes Bethphage and Bethany seem to have been

included in Jerusalem. But Jesus must keep the Feast in the City

itself, although, if His purpose had not been interrupted, He would

have spent the night outside its walls.[5585]5585 The first

preparations for the Feast would commence shortly after the return of

the traitor. For, on the evening [of the 13th] commenced the 14th of

Nisan, when a solemn search was made with lighted candle throughout

each house for any leaven that might be hidden, or have fallen aside

by accident. Such was put by in a safe place, and afterwards destroyed

with the rest. In Galilee it was the usage to abstain wholly from

work; in Judea the day was divided, and actual work ceased only at

noon, though nothing new was taken in hand even in the morning. This

division of the day for festive purposes was a Rabbinic addition; and,

by way of a hedge around it, an hour before midday was fixed after

which nothing leavened might be eaten. The more strict abstained from

it even an hour earlier (at ten o'clock), lest the eleventh hour might

insensibly run into the forbidden midday. But there could be little

real danger of this, since, by way of public notification, two

desecrated thankoffering cakes were laid on a bench in the Temple, the

removal of one of which indicated that the time for eating what was

leavened had passed; the removal of the other, that the time for

destroying all leaven had come.[5586]5586

It was probably after the early meal, and when the eating of leaven

had ceased, that Jesus began preparations for the Paschal Supper. St.

John, who, in view of the details in the other Gospels, summarises,

and, in some sense, almost passes over, the outward events, so that

their narration may not divert attention from those all-important

teachings which he alone records, simply tells by way of preface and

explanation - alike of the 'Last Supper' and of what followed - that

Jesus, 'knowing that His hour was come that He should depart out of

this world unto the Father[5587]5587 . . . having loved His own which

were in the world, He loved them unto the end.'[5588]5588 But St.

Luke's account of what actually happened, being in some points the

most explicit, requires to be carefully studied, and that without

thought of any possible consequences in regard to the harmony of the

Gospels. It is almost impossible to imagine anything more evident,

than that he wishes us to understand that Jesus was about to celebrate

the ordinary Jewish Paschal Supper. 'And the Day of Unleavened Bread

came, on which the Passover must be sacrificed.'[5589]5589 The

designation is exactly that of the commencement of the Pascha, which,

as we have seen, was the 14th Nisan, and the description that of the

slaying of the Paschal Lamb. What follows is in exact accordance with

it: 'And He sent Peter and John, saying, Go and make ready for us the

Pascha, that we may eat it.' Then occur these three notices in the

same account: 'And . . . they made ready the Pascha;'[5590]5590 'and

when the hour was come, He reclined [as usual at the Paschal Supper],

and the Apostles with Him;'[5591]5591 and, finally, these words of

His:[5592]5592 'With desire I have desired to eat this Pascha with

you.' And with this fully agrees the language of the other two

Synoptists, St. Matt. xxvi. 17-20, and St. Mark xiv. 12-17.[5593]5593

No ingenuity can explain away these facts. The suggestion, that in

that year the Sanhedrin had postponed the Paschal Supper form Thursday

evening (the 14th-15th Nisan) to Friday evening (15-16th Nisan), so as

to avoid the Sabbath following on the first day of the feast - and

that the Paschal Lamb was therefore in that year eaten on Friday, the

evening of the day on which Jesus was crucified, is an assumption void

of all support in history or Jewish tradition.[5594]5594 Equally

untenable is it, that Christ had held the Paschal Supper a day in

advance of that observed by the rest of the Jewish world - a

supposition not only inconsistent with the plain language of the

Synoptists, but impossible, since the Paschal Lamb could not have been

offered in the Temple, and, therefore, no Paschal Supper held, out of

the regular time. But, perhaps, the strangest attempt to reconcile the

statement of the Synoptists with what is supposed inconsistent with it

in the narration of St. John[5595]5595 is, that while the rest of

Jerusalem, including Christ and His Apostles, partook of the Paschal

Supper, the chief priests had been interrupted in, or rather prevented

from it by their proceedings against Jesus - that, in fact, they had

not touched it when they feared to enter Pilate's

Judgment-Hall;[5596]5596 and that, after that, they went back to eat

it, 'turning the Supper into a breakfast.'[5597]5597 Among the various

objections to this extraordinary hypothesis, this one will be

sufficient, that such would have been absolutely contrary to one of

the plainest rubrical directions, which has it: 'The Pascha is not

eaten but during the night, nor yet later than the middle of the

night.'[5598]5598

It was, therefore, with the view of preparing the ordinary Paschal

Supper that the Lord now sent Peter and John.[5599]5599 For the first

time we see them here joined together by the Lord, these two, who

henceforth were to be so closely connected: he of deepest feeling with

him of quickest action. And their question, where He would have the

Paschal Meal prepared, gives us a momentary glimpse of the mutual

relation between the Master and His Disciples; how He was still the

Master, even in their most intimate converse, and would only tell them

what to do just when it needed to be done; and how they presumed not

to ask beforehand (far less to propose, or to interfere), but had

simple confidence and absolute submission as regarded all things. The

direction which the Lord gave, while once more evidencing to them, as

it does to us, the Divine foreknowledge of Christ, had also its deep

human meaning. Evidently, neither the house where the Passover was to

be kept, nor its owner,[5600]5600 was to be named beforehand within

hearing of Judas. That last Meal with its Institution of the Holy

Supper, was not to be interrupted, nor their last retreat betrayed,

till all had been said and done, even to the last prayer of Agony in

Gethsemane. We can scarcely err in seeing in this combination of

foreknowledge with prudence the expression of the Divine and the

Human: the 'two Natures in One Person.' The sign which Jesus gave the

two Apostles reminds us of that by which Samuel of old had conveyed

assurance and direction to Saul.[5601]5601 On their entrance into

Jersalem they would meet a man - manifestly a servant - carrying a

pitcher of water. Without accosting, they were to follow him, and,

when they reached the house, to deliver to its owner this

message:[5602]5602 'The Master saith, My time is at hand - with thee

[i.e. in thy house the emphasis is on this] I hold[5603]5603 the

Passover with My disciples.[5604]5604 Where is My[5605]5605 hostelry

[or 'hall'], where I shall eat the Passover with My

disciples?'[5606]5606

Two things here deserve marked attention. The disciples were not

bidden ask for the chief or 'Upper Chamber,' but for what we have

rendered, for want of better, by 'hostelry,' or 'hall' - kat_luma -

the place in the house where, as in an open Khan, the beasts of burden

were unloaded, shoes and staff, or dusty garment and burdens put down

- if an apartment, at least a common one, certain not the best. Except

in this place,[5607]5607 [5608]5608 the word only occurs as the

designation of the 'inn' or 'hostelry' in Bethlehem, where the

Virgin-Mother brought forth her first-born Son, and laid Him in a

manger.[5609]5609 He Who was born in a 'hostelry' - Katalyma - was

content to ask for His last Meal in a Katalyma. Only, and this we mark

secondly, it must be His own: 'My Katalyma.' It was a common practice,

that more than one company partook of the Paschal Supper in the same

apartment.[5610]5610 [5611]5611 In the multitude of those who would

sit down to the Paschal Supper this was unavoidable, for all partook

of, including women and children,[5612]5612 only excepting those who

were Levitically unclean. And, though each company might not consist

of less than ten, it was not to be larger than that each should be

able to partake of at least a small portion of the Paschal

Lamb[5613]5613 - and we know how small lambs are in the East. But,

while He only asked for His last Meal in the Katalyma, some hall

opening on the open court, Christ would have it His own - to Himself,

to eat the Passover alone with His Apostles. Not even a company of

disciples - such as the owner of the house unquestionably was - nor

yet, be it marked, even the Virgin-Mother, might be present; witness

what passed, hear what He said, or be at the first Institution of His

Holy Supper. To us at least this also recalls the words of St. Paul:

'I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto

you.'[5614]5614

There can be no reasonable doubt that, as already hinted, the owner of

the house was a disciple, although at festive seasons unbounded

hospitality was extended to strangers generally, and no man in

Jerusalem considered his house as strictly his own, far less would let

it out for hire.[5615]5615 But no mere stranger would, in answer to so

mysterious a message, have given up, without further questioning, his

best room. Had he known Peter and John; or recognised Him Who sent the

message by the announcement that it was 'The Master;' or by the words

to which His Teaching had attached such meaning: that His time had

come; or even by the peculiar emphasis of His command: 'With

thee[5616]5616 I hold the Pascha with My disciples?' It matters little

which it was, and, in fact, the impression on the mind almost is, that

the owner of the house had not, indeed, expected, but held himself

ready for such a call. It was the last request of the dying Master -

and could he have refused it? But he would do more than immediately

and unquestioningly comply. The Master would only ask for 'the hall:'

as He was born in a Katalyma, so He would have been content to eat

there His last Meal - at the same time meal, feast, sacrifice, and

institution. But the unnamed disciple would assign to Him, not the

Hall, but the best and chiefest, 'the upper chamber,' or Aliyah, at

the same time the most honourable and the most retired place, where

from the outside stairs entrance and departure might be had without

passing through the house. And 'the upper room' was 'large,'

'furnished and ready.'[5617]5617 From Jewish authorities we know, that

the average dining-apartment was computed at fifteen feet

square;[5618]5618 the expression 'furnished,' no doubt, refers to the

arrangement of coches all round the Table, except at its end, since it

was a canon, that the very poorest must partake of that Supper in a

reclining attitude, to indicate rest, safety, and liberty;[5619]5619

while the term 'ready' seems to point to the ready provision of all

that was required for the Feast. In that case, all that the disciples

would have to 'make ready' would be 'the Paschal Lamb,' and perhaps

that first Chagigah, or festive Sacrifice, which, if the Paschal Lamb

itself would not suffice for Supper, was added to it. And here it must

be remembered, that it was of religion to fast till the Paschal Supper

- as the Jerusalem Talmud explains,[5620]5620 in order the better to

relish the Supper.

Perhaps it is not wise to attempt lifting the veil which rests on the

unnamed 'such an one,' whose was the privilege of being the last Host

of the Lord and the first Host of His Church, gathered within the new

bond of the fellowship of His Body and Blood. And yet we can scarcely

abstain from speculating. To us at least it seems most likely, that it

was the house of Mark's father (then still alive) - a large one, as we

gather from Acts xii. 13. For, the most obvious explanation of the

introduction by St. Mark alone of such an incident as that about the

young man who was accompanying Christ as He was led away captive, and

who, on fleeing from those that would have laid hold on him, left in

their hands the inner garment which he had loosely cast about him, as,

roused from sleep, he had rushed into Gethsemane, is, that he was none

other than St. Mark himself. If so, we can understand it all: how the

traitor may have first brought the Temple-guards, who had come to

seize Christ, to the house of Mark's father, where the Supper had been

held, and that, finding Him gone, they had followed to Gethsemane, for

'Judas knew the place, for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with His

disciples'[5621]5621 - and how Mark, startled from his sleep by the

appearance of the armed men, would hastily cast about him his loose

tunic and run after them; then, after the flight of the disciples,

accompany Christ, but escape intended arrest by leaving his tunic in

the hands of his would-be captors.

If the view formerly expressed is correct, that the owner of the house

had provided all that was needed for the Supper, Peter and John would

find there the Wine for the four Cups, the cakes of unleavened Bread,

and probably also 'the bitter herbs.' Of the latter five kinds are

mentioned,[5622]5622 which were to be dipped once in salt water, or

vinegar, and another time in a mixture called Charoseth (a compound

made of nuts, raisins, apples almonds, &c.[5623]5623) - although this

Charoseth was not obligatory. The wine was the ordinary one of the

country, only red; it was mixed with water, generally in the

proportion of one part to two of water.[5624]5624 The quantity for

each of the four Cups is stated by one authority as five-sixteenths of

a log, which may be roughly computed at half a tumbler - of course

mixed with water.[5625]5625 The Paschal Cup is described (according to

the rubrical measure, which of course would not always be observed) as

two fingers long by two fingers broad, and its height as a finger,

half a finger, and one-third of a finger. All things being, as we

presume, ready in the furnished upper room, it would only remain for

Peter and John to see to the Paschal Lamb, and anything else required

for the Supper, possibly also to what was to be offered as Chagigah,

or festive sacrifice, and afterwards eaten at the Supper. If the

latter were to be brought, the disciples would, of course, have to

attend earlier in the Temple. The cost of the Lamb, which had to be

provided, was very small. So low a sum as about threepence of our

money is mentioned for such a sacrifice.[5626]5626 But this must refer

to a hypothetical case rather than to the ordinary cost, and we prefer

the more reasonable computation, from one Sela[5627]5627 to three

Selaim,[5628]5628 i.e. from 2s. 6d. to 7s. 6d. of our money.

If we mistake not, these purchases had, however, already been made on

the previous afternoon by Judas. It is not likely that they would have

been left to the last; nor that He Who had so lately condemned the

traffic in the Courts of the Temple would have sent His two disciples

thither to purchase the Paschal Lamb, which would have been necessary

to secure an animal that had passed Levitical inspection, since on the

Passover-day there would have been no time to subject it to such

scrutiny. On the other hand, if Judas had made this purchase, we

perceive not only on what pretext he may have gone to Jerusalem on the

previous afternoon, but also how, on his way from the Sheep-market to

the Temple, to have his lamb inspected, he may have learned that the

Chief-Priests and Sanhedrists were just then in session in the Palace

of the High-Priest close by.[5629]5629

On the supposition just made, the task of Peter and John would,

indeed, have been simple. They left the house of Mark with wondering

but saddened hearts. Once more had they had evidence, how the Master's

Divine glance searched the futher in all its details. They had met the

servant with the pitcher of water; they had delivered their message to

the master of the house; and they had seen the large Upper Room

furnished and ready. But this prescience of Christ afforded only

further evidence, that what He had told of His impending Crucifixion

would also come true. And now it would be time for the ordinary

Evening-Service and Sacrifice. Ordinarily this began about 2.30 p.m. -

the daily Evening-Sacrifice being actually offered up about an hour

later; but on this occasion, on account of the Feast, the Service was

an hour earlier.[5630]5630 As at about half-past one of our time the

two Apostles ascended the Temple-Mount, following a dense, motley

crowd of joyous, chatting pilgrims, they must have felt terribly

lonely among them. In all that crowd how few to sympathise with them;

how many enemies! The Temple-Courts were thronged to the utmost by

worshippers from all countries and from all parts of the land. The

Priests' Court was filled with white-robed Priests and Levites - for

on that day all the twenty-four Courses were on duty, and all their

services would be called for, although only the Course for that week

would that afternoon engage in the ordinary service, which preceded

that of the Feast. Almost mechanically would they witness the various

parts of the well-remembered ceremonial. There must have been a

peculiar meaning to them, a mournful significance, in the language of

Ps. lxxxi., as the Levites chanted it that afternoon in three

sections, broken three times by the threefold blast from the silver

trumpets of the Priests.

Before the incense was burnt for the Evening Sacrifice, or yet the

lamps in the Golden Candlestick were trimmed for the night, the

Paschal-Lambs were slain. The worshippers were admitted in three

divisions within the Court of the Priests. When the first company had

entered, the massive Nicanor Gates - which led from the Court of the

Women to that of Israel - and the other side-gates into the Court of

the Priests, were closed. A threefold blast from the Priests' trumpets

intimated that the Lambs were being slain. This each Israelite did for

himself. We can scarcely be mistaken in supposing that Peter and John

would be in the first of the three companies into which the offerers

were divided; for they must have been anxious to be gone, and to meet

the Master and their brethren in that 'Upper Room.' Peter and

John[5631]5631 had slain the Lamb. In two rows the officiating Priest

stood, up to the great Altar of Burnt-offering. As one caught up the

blood from the dying Lamb in a golden bowl. he handed it to his

colleague, receiving in return an empty bowl; and so the blood was

passed on to the Great Altar, where it was jerked in one jet at the

base of the Altar.[5632]5632 While this was going on, the

Hallel[5633]5633 was being chanted by the Levites. We remember that

only the first line of every Psalm was repeated by the worshippers;

while to every other line they responded by a Halleluyah, till Ps.

cxviii. was reached, when, besides the first, these three lines were

also repeated: -

Save now, I beseech Thee, Lord;

O Lord, I beseech Thee, send now prosperity.

Blessed be He that cometh in the Name of the Lord.

As Peter and John repeated them on that afternoon, the words must have

sounded most deeply significant. But their minds must have also

reverted to that triumphal Entry into the City a few days before, when

Israel had greeted with these words the Advent of their King. And now

- was it not, as if it had only been an anticipation of the Hymn, when

the blood of the Paschal Lamb was being shed?

Little more remained to be done. The sacrifice was laid on staves

which rested on the shoulders of Peter and John, flayed, cleansed, and

the parts which were to be burnt on the Altar removed and prepared for

burning. The second company of offerers could not have proceeded far

in the service, when the Apostles, bearing their Lamb, were wending

their way back to the home of Mark, there to make final preparations

for the 'Supper.' The Lamb would be roasted on a pomegranate spit that

passed right through it from mouth to vent, special care being taken

that, in roasting, the Lamb did not touch the oven. Everything else,

also, would be made ready: the Chagigah for supper (if such was used);

the unleavened cakes, the bitter herbs, the dish with vinegar, and

that with Charoseth would be placed on a table which could be carried

in and moved at will; finally, the festive lamps would be prepared.

'It was probably as the sun was beginning to decline in the horizon

that Jesus and the other ten disciples descended once more over the

Mount of Olives into the Holy City. Before them lay Jerusalem in her

festive attire. All around, pilgrims were hastening towards it. White

tents dotted the sward, gay with the bright flowers of early spring,

or peered out from the gardens or the darker foliage of the olive

plantations. From the gorgeous Temple buildings, dazzling in their

snow-white marble and gold, on which the slanting rays of the sun were

reflected, rose the smoke of the Altar of Burnt-offering. These courts

were now crowded with eager worshippers, offering for the last time,

in the real sense, their Paschal Lambs. The streets must have been

thronged with strangers, and the flat roofs covered with eager gazers,

who either feasted their eyes with a first sight of the sacred City

for which they had so often longed, or else once more rejoiced in view

of the well-known localities. It was the last day-view which the Lord

could take, free and unhindered, of the Holy City till His

Resurrection. Once more, in the approaching night of His Betrayal,

would He look upon it in the pale light of the full moon. He was going

forward to accomplish His Death in Jerusalem; to fulfil type and

prophecy, and to offer Himself up as the true Passover Lamb - "the

Lamb of God, Which taketh away the sin of the world." They who

followed Him were busy with many thoughts. They knew that terrible

events awaited them, and they had only shortly before been told that

these glorious Temple-buildings, to which, with a national pride not

unnatural, they had directed the attention of their Master, were to

become desolate, not one stone being left upon the other. Among them,

revolving his dark plans, and goaded on by the great Enemy, moved the

betrayer. And now they were within the City. Its Temple, its royal

bridge, its splendid palaces, its busy marts, its streets filled with

festive pilgrims, were well known to them, as they made their way to

the house where the guest-chamber had been prepared. Meanwhile, the

crowd came down from the Temple-Mount, each bearing on his shoulders

the sacrificial Lamb, to make ready for the Paschal Supper.'[5634]5634

CHAPTER X.

THE PASCHAL SUPPER - THE INSTITUTION OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

(St. Matt. xxvi. 17-19; St. Mark xiv. 12-16; St. Luke xxii. 7-13; St.

John xiii. 1; St. Matt. xxvi. 20; St. Mark xiv. 17; St. Luke xxii.

14-16; St. Luke xxii. 24-30St. Luke xxii. 17, 18; St. John xiii. 2-20;

St. Matt. xxvi. 21-24; St. Mark xiv.18-21; St. Luke xxii. 21-23; St.

John xiii. 21-26; St. Matt. xxvi. 25; St. John xiii. 26-38; St. Matt.

xxvi. 26-29; St. Mark xiv. 22-25; St. Luke xxii. 19, 20.)

THE period designated as 'between the two evenings,'[5635]5635 when

the Paschal Lamb was to be slain, was past. There can be no question

that, in the time of Christ, it was understood to refer to the

interval between the commencement of the sun's decline and what was

reckoned as the hour of his final disappearance (about 6 P.M.). The

first three stars had become visible, and the threefold blast of the

Silver Trumpets from the Temple-Mount rang it out to Jerusalem and far

away, that the Pascha had once more commenced. In the festively-lit

'Upper Chamber' of St. Mark's house the Master and the Twelve were now

gathered. Was this place of Christ's last, also that of the Church's

first, entertainment; that, where the Holy Supper was instituted with

the Apostles, also that, where it was afterwards first partaken of by

the Church; the Chamber where He last tarried with them before His

Death, that in which He first appeared to them after His Resurrection;

that, also, in which the Holy Ghost was poured out, even as (if the

Last Supper was in the house of Mark) it undoubtedly was that in which

the Church was at first wont to gather for common prayer?[5636]5636 We

know not, and can only venture to suggest, deeply soul-stirring as

such thoughts and associations are.

So far as appears, or we have reason to infer, this Passover was the

only sacrifice ever offered by Jesus Himself. We remember indeed, the

first sacrifice of the Virgin-Mother at her Purification. But that was

hers. If Christ was in Jerusalem at any Passover before His Public

Ministry began, He would, of course, have been a guest at some table,

not the Head of a Company (which must consist of at least ten

persons). Hence, He would not have been the offerer of the Paschal

lamb. And of the three Passovers since His Public Ministry had begun,

at the first His Twelve Apostles had not been gathered,[5637]5637 so

that He could not have appeared as the Head of a Company; while at the

second He was not in Jerusalem but in the utmost parts of Galilee, in

the borderland of Tyre and Sidon, where, of course, no sacrifice could

be brought.[5638]5638 Thus, the first, the last, the only sacrifice

which Jesus offered was that in which, symbolically, He offered

Himself. Again, the only sacrifice which He brought is that connected

with the Institution of His Holy Supper; even as the only purification

to which He submitted was when, in His Baptism, He 'sanctified water

to the mystical washing away of sin.' But what additional meaning does

this give to the words which He spake to the Twelve as He sat down

with them to the Supper: 'With desire have I desired to eat this

Pascha with you before I suffer.'

And, in truth, as we think of it, we can understand not only why the

Lord could not have offered any other Sacrifice, but that it was most

fitting He should have offered this one Pascha, partaken of its

commemorative Supper, and connected His own New Institution with that

to which this Supper pointed. This joining of the Old with the New,

the one symbolic Sacrifice which He offered with the One Real

Sacrifice, the feast on the sacrifice with that other Feast upon the

One Sacrifice, seems to cast light on the words with which He followed

the expression of His longing to eat that one Pascha with them: 'I say

unto you, I will not eat any more[5639]5639 thereof,[5640]5640 until

it be fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.' And has it not been so, that

this His last Pascha is connected with that other Feast in which He is

ever present with His Church, not only as its Food but as its Host, as

both the Pascha and He Who dispenses it? With a Sacrament did Jesus

begin His Ministry: it was that of separation and consecration in

Baptism. With a second Sacrament did He close His Ministry: it was

that of gathering together and fellowship in the Lord's Supper. Both

were into His Death: yet not as something that had power over Him, but

as a Death that has been followed by the Resurrection. For, if in

Baptism we are buried with Him, we also rise with Him; and if in the

Holy Supper we remember His Death, it is as that of Him Who is risen

again - and if we show forth that Death, it is until He come again.

And so this Supper, also, points forward to the Great Supper at the

final consummation of His Kingdom.

Only one Sacrifice did the Lord offer. We are not thinking now of the

significant Jewish legend, which connected almost every great event

and deliverance in Israel with the Night of the Passover. But the

Pascha was, indeed, a Sacrifice, yet one distinct from all others. It

was not of the Law, for it was instituted before the Law had been

given or the Covenant ratified by blood; nay, in a sense it was the

cause and the foundation of all the Levitical Sacrifices and of the

Covenant itself. And it could not be classed with either one or the

other of the various kinds of sacrifices, but rather combined them

all, and yet differed from them all. Just as the Priesthood of Christ

was real, yet not after the order of Aaron, so was the Sacrifice of

Christ real, yet not after the order of Levitical sacrifices but after

that of the Passover. And as in the Paschal Supper all Israel were

gathered around the Paschal Lamb in commemoration of the past, in

celebration of the present, in anticipation of the future, and in

fellowship in the Lamb, so has the Church been ever since gathered

together around its better fulfilment in the Kingdom of God.

It is difficult to decide how much, not only of the present

ceremonial, but even of the Rubric for the Paschal Supper, as

contained in the oldest Jeweish Documents, may have been obligatory at

the time of Christ. Ceremonialism rapidly develops, too often in

proportion to the absence of spiritual life. Probably in the earlier

days, even as the ceremonies were simpler, so more latitude may have

been left in their observance, provided that the main points in the

ritual were kept in view. We may take it, that, as prescribed, all

would appear at the Paschal Supper in festive array. We also know,

that, as the Jewish Law directed, they reclined on pillows around a

low table, each resting on his left hand, so as to leave the right

free. But ancient Jewish usage casts a strange light on the painful

scene with which the Supper opened. Sadly humiliating as it reads, and

almost incredible as it seems, the Supper began with 'a contention

among them, which of them should be accounted to be greatest.' We can

have no doubt that its occasion was the order in which they should

occupy places at the table. We know that this was subject of

contention among the Pharisees, and that they claimed to be seated

according to their rank.[5641]5641 A similar feeling now appeared,

alas! in the circle of the disciples and at the Last Supper of the

Lord. Even if we had not further indications of it, we should

instinctively associate such a strife with the presence of Judas. St.

John seems to refer to it, at least indirectly, when he opens his

narrative with this notice: 'And during supper, the devil having

already cast it into his heart, that Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon,

shall betray Him.'[5642]5642 For, although the words form a general

introduction to what follows, and refer to the entrance of Satan into

the heart of Judas on the previous afternoon, when he sold his Master

to the Sanhedrists, they are not without special significance as place

in connection with the Supper. But we are not left to general

conjecture in regard to the influence of Judas in this strife. There

is, we believe, ample evidence that he not only claimed, but actually

obtained, the chief seat at the table next to the Lord. This, as

previously explained, was not, as is generally believed, at the right,

but at the left of Christ, not below, but above Him, on the couches or

pillows on which they reclined.

From the Gospel-narratives we infer, that St. John must have reclined

next to Jesus, on His Right Hand, since otherwise he could not have

leaned back on His Bosom. This, as we shall presently show, would be

at one end - the head of the table, or, to be more precise, at one end

of the couches. For, dismissing all conventional ideas, we must think

of it as a low Eastern table. In the Talmud,[5643]5643 the table of

the disciples of the sages is described as two parts covered with a

cloth, the other third being left bare for the dishes to stand on.

There is evidence that this part of the table was outside the circle

of those who were ranged around it. Occasionally a ring was fixed in

it, by which the table was suspended above the ground, so as to

preserve it from any possible Levitical defilement. During the Paschal

Supper, it was the custom to remove the table at one part of the

service; or, if this be deemed a later arrangement, the dishes at

least would be taken off and put on again. This would render it

necessary that the end of the table should protrude beyond the line of

guests who reclined around it. For, as already repeatedly stated, it

was the custom to recline at table, lying on the left side and leaning

on the left hand, the feet stretching back towards the ground, and

each guest occupying a separate divan or pillow. It would, therefore,

have been impossible to place or remove anything from the table from

behind the guests. Hence, as a matter of necessity, the free end of

the table, which was not covered with a cloth, would protrude beyond

the line of those who reclined around it. We can now form a picture of

the arrangement. Around a low Eastern table, oval or rather elongated,

two parts covered with a cloth, and standing or else suspended, the

single divans or pillows are ranged in the form of an elongated

horseshoe, leaving free one end of the table, somewhat as in the

accompanying woodcut. Here A represents the table, B B respectively

the ends of the two rows of single divans on which each guest reclines

on his left side, with his head (C) nearest the table, and his feet

(D) stretching back towards the ground.

[fig5a.jpg]

Figure 5a.

So far for the arrangement of the table. Jewish documents are equally

explicit as to that of the guests. It seems to have been quite an

established rule[5644]5644 that, in a company of more than two, say of

three, the chief personage or Head - in this instance, of course,

Christ - reclined on the middle divan. We know from the

Gospel-narrative that John occupied the place on His right, at that

end of the divans - as we may call it - at the head of the table. But

the chief place next to the Master would be that to His left, or above

Him. In the strife of the disciples, which should be accounted the

greatest, this had been claimed, and we believe it to have been

actually occupied, by Judas. This explains how, Christ whispered to

John by what sign to recognise the traitor,[5645]5645 none of the

other disciples heard it. It also explains, how Christ would first

hand to Judas the sop, which formed part of the Paschal ritual,

beginning with him as the chief guest at the table, without thereby

exciting special notice. Lastly, it accounts for the circumstance

that, when Judas, desirous of ascertaining whether his treachery was

known, dared to ask whether it was he, and received the affirmative

answer,[5646]5646 no one at table knew what had passed. But this could

not have been the case, unless Judas had occupied the place next to

Christ; in this case, necessarily that at His left, or the post of

chief honour. As regards Peter, we can quite understand how, when the

Lord with such loving words rebuked their self-seeking and taught them

of the greatness of Christian humility, he should, in his petuosity of

shame, have rushed to take the lowest place at the other end of the

table.[5647]5647 Finally, we can now understand how Peter could beckon

to John, who sat at the opposite end of the table, over against him,

and ask him across the table, who the traitor was.[5648]5648 The rest

of the disciples would occupy such places as were most convenient, or

suited their fellowship with one another.

The words which the Master spoke as He appeased their unseemly strife

must, indeed, have touched them to the quick. First, He showed them,

not so much in the language of even gentlest reproof as in that of

teaching, the difference between worldly honour and distinction in the

Church of Christ. In the world kingship lay in supremacy and lordship,

and the title of Benefactor accompanied the sway of power. But in the

Church the 'greater' would not exercise lordship, but become as the

less and the younger [the latter referring to the circumstance, that

age next to learning was regarded among the Jews as a claim to

distinction and the chief seats]; while, instead of him that had

authority being called Benefactor, the relationship would be reversed,

and he that served would be chief. Self-forgetful humility instead of

worldly glory, service instead of rule: such was to be the title to

greatness and to authority in the Church.[5649]5649 Having thus shown

them the character and title to that greatness in the Kingdom, which

was in prospect for them, He pointed them in this respect also to

Himself as their example. The reference here is, of course, not to the

act of symbolic foot-washing, which St. Luke does not relate -

although, as immediately following on the words of Christ, it would

illustrate them - but to the tenor of His whole Life and the object of

His Mission, as of One Who served, not was served. Lastly, He woke

them to the higher consciousness of their own calling. Assuredly, they

would not lose their reward; but not here, nor yet now. They had

shared, and would share His 'trials'[5650]5650 - His being set at

nought, despised, persecuted; but they would also share His glory. As

the Father had 'covenanted' to Him, so He 'covenanted' and bequeathed

to them a Kingdom, 'in order,' or 'so that,' in it they might have

festive fellowship of rest and of joy with Him. What to them must have

been 'temptations,' and in that respect also to Christ, they had

endured: instead of Messianic glory, such as they may at first have

thought of, they had witnessed only contradiction, denial, and shame -

and they had 'continued' with Him. But the Kingdom was also coming.

When His glory was manifested, their acknowledgement would also come.

Here Israel had rejected the King and His Messengers, but then would

that same Israel be judged by their word. A Royal dignity this,

indeed, but one of service; a full Royal acknowledgement, but one of

work. In that sense were Israel's Messianic hopes to be understood by

them. Whether or not something beyond this may also be implied, and,

in that day when He again gathers the outcasts of Israel, some special

Rule and Judgment may be given to His faithful Apostles, we venture

not to determine. Sufficient for us the words of Christ in their

primary meaning.[5651]5651

So speaking, the Lord commenced that Supper, which in itself was

symbol and pledge of what He had just said and promised. The Paschal

Supper began, as always,[5652]5652 by the Head of the Company taking

the first cup, and speaking over it 'the thanksgiving.' The form

presently in use consists really of two benedictions - the first over

the wine, the second for the return of this Feastday with all that it

implies, and for being preserved once more to witness it.[5653]5653

Turning to the Gospels, the words which follow the record of the

benediction on the part of Christ[5654]5654 seem to imply, that Jesus

had, at any rate, so far made use of the ordinary thanksgiving as to

speak both these benedictions. We know, indeed, that they were in use

before His time, since it was in dispute between the Schools of Hillel

and Shammai, whether that over the wine or that over the day should

take precedence. That over the wine was quite simple: 'Blessed art

Thou, Jehovah our God, Who hast created the fruit of the Vine!' The

formula was so often used in blessing the cup, and is so simple, that

we need not doubt that these were the very words spoken by our Lord.

It is otherwise as regards the benediction 'over the day,' which is

not only more composite, but contains words expressive of Israel's

national pride and self-righteousness, such as we cannot think would

have been uttered by our Lord. With this exception, however, they were

no doubt identical in contents with the present formula. This we infer

from what the Lord added, as He passed the cup round the circle of the

disciples.[5655]5655 No more, so He told them, would He speak the

benediction over the fruit of the vine - not again utter the thanks

'over the day' that they had been 'preserved alive, sustained, and

brought to this season.' Another Wine, and at another Feast, now

awaited Him - that in the future, when the Kingdom would come. It was

to be the last of the old Paschas; the first, or rather the symbol and

promise, of the new. And so, for the first and last time, did He speak

the twofold benediction at the beginning of the Supper.

The cup, in which, according to express Rabbinic testimony,[5656]5656

the wine had been mixed with water before it was 'blessed,' had passed

round. The next part of the ceremonial was for the Head of the Company

to rise and 'wash hands.' It is this part of the ritual of which St.

John[5657]5657 records the adaptation and transformation on the part

of Christ. The washing of the disciples' feet is evidently connected

with the ritual of 'handwashing.' Now this was done twice during the

Paschal Supper:[5658]5658 the first time by the Head of the Company

alone, immediately after the first cup; the second time by all

present, at a much later part of the service, immediately before the

actual meal (on the Lamb, &c.). If the footwashing had taken place on

the latter occasion, it is natural to suppose that, when the Lord

rose, all the disciples would have followed His example, and so the

washing of their feet would have been impossible. Again, the

footwashing, which was intended both as a lesson and as an example of

humility and service,[5659]5659 was evidently connected with the

dispute 'which of them should be accounted to be greatest.' If so, the

symbolical act of our Lord must have followed close on the strife of

the disciples, and on our Lord's teaching what in the Church

constituted rule and greatness. Hence the act must have been connected

with the first handwashing - that by the Head of the Company -

immediately after the first cup, and not with that at a later period,

when much else had intervened.

All else fits in with this. For clearness' sake, the account given by

St. John[5660]5660 may here be recapitulated. The opening words

concerning the love of Christ to His own unto the end form the general

introduction.[5661]5661 Then follows the account of what happened

'during Supper'[5662]5662 - the Supper itself being left undescribed -

beginning, by way of explanation of what is to be told about Judas,

with this: 'The Devil having already cast into his (Judas') heart,

that Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, shall betray Him.' General as

this notice is, it contains much that requires special attention.

Thankfully we feel, that the heart of man was not capable of

originating the Betrayal of Christ; humanity had fallen, but not so

low. It was the Devil who had 'cast' it into Judas' heart - with force

and overwhelming power.[5663]5663 Next, we mark the full description

of the name and parentage of the traitor. It reads like the wording of

a formal indictment. And, although it seems only an introductory

explanation, it also points to the contrast with the love of Christ

which persevered to the end,[5664]5664 even when hell itself opened

its mouth to swallow Him up; the contrast, also, between what Jesus

and what Judas were about to do, and between the wild storm of evil

that raged in the heart of the traitor and the calm majesty of love

and peace which reigned in that of the Saviour.

If what Satan had cast into the heart of Judas explains his conduct so

does the knowledge which Jesus possessed account for that He was about

to do.[5665]5665 [5666]5666 Many as are the thoughts suggested by the

words, 'Knowing that the Father had given all things into His Hands,

and that He came forth from God, and goeth unto God' - yet, from

evident connection, they must in the first instance be applied to the

Footwashing, of which they are, so to speak, the logical antecedent.

It was His greatest act of humiliation and service, and yet He never

lost in it for one moment aught of the majesty or consciousness of His

Divine dignity; for He did it with the full knowledge and assertion

that all things were in His Hands, and that He came forth from and was

going unto God - and He could do it, because He knew this. Here, not

side by side, but in combination, are the Humiliation and Exaltation

of the God-Man. And so, 'during Supper,' which had begun with the

first cup, 'He riseth from Supper.' The disciples would scarcely

marvel, except that He should conform to that practice of handwashing,

which, as He had often explained, was, as a ceremonial observance,

unavailing for those who were not inwardly clean, and needless and

unmeaning in them whose heart and life had been purified. But they

must have wondered as they saw Him put off His upper garment, gird

Himself with a towel, and pour water into a basin, like a slave who

was about to perform the meanest service.

From the position which, as we have shown, Peter occupied at the end

of the table, it was natural that the Lord should begin with him the

act of footwashing.[5667]5667 Besides, had He first turned to others,

Peter must either have remonstrated before, or else his later

expostulation would have been tardy, and an act either of

self-righteousness or of needless voluntary humility. As it was, the

surprise with which he and the others had witnessed the preparation of

the Lord burst into characteristic language when Jesus approached him

to wash his feet. 'Lord - Thou - of me washest the feet!' It was the

utterance of deepest reverence for the Master, and yet of utter

misunderstanding of the meaning of His action, perhaps even of His

Work. Jesus was now doing what before He had spoken. The act of

externalism and self-righteousness represented by the washing of

hands, and by which the Head of the Company was to be distinguished

from all others and consecrated, He changed into a footwashing, in

which the Lord and Master was to be distinguished, indeed, from the

others - but by the humblest service of love, and in which He showed

by His example what characterised greatness in the Kingdom, and that

service was evidence of rule. And, as mostly in every symbol, there

was the real also in this act of the Lord. For, by sympathetically

sharing in this act of love and service on the part of the Lord, they

who had been bathed - who had previously become clean in heart and

spirit - now received also that cleansing of the 'feet,' of active and

daily walk, which cometh from true heart-humility, in opposition to

pride, and consisteth in the service which love is willing to render

even to the uttermost.

But Peter had understood none of these things. He only felt the

incongruousness of their relative positions. And so the Lord, partly

also wishing thereby to lead his impetuosity to the absolute

submission of faith, and partly to indicate the deeper truth he was to

learn in the future, only told him, that though he knew it not now, he

would understand hereafter what the Lord was doing. Yes, hereafter -

when, after that night of terrible fall, he would learn by the Lake of

Galilee what it really meant to feed the lambs and to tend the sheep

of Christ; yes, hereafter - when no longer, as when he had been young,

he would gird himself and walk whither he would. But, even so, Peter

could not content himself with the prediction that in the future he

would understand and enter into what Christ was doing in washing their

feet. Never, he declared, could he allow it. The same feelings, which

had prompted him to attempt withdrawing the Lord from the path of

humiliation and suffering,[5668]5668 now asserted themselves again. It

was personal affection, indeed, but it was also unwillingness to

submit to the humiliation of the Cross. And so the Lord told him, that

if He washed him not, he had no part with Him. Not that the bare act

of washing gave him part in Christ, but that the refusal to submit to

it would have deprived him of it; and that, to share in this washing,

was, as it were, the way to have part in Christ's service of love, to

enter into it, and to share it.

Still, Peter did not understand. But as, on that morning by the Lake

of Galilee, it appeared that, when he had lost all else, he had

retained love, so did love to the Christ now give him the victory -

and, once more with characteristic impetuosity, he would have tendered

not only his feet to be washed, but his hands and head. Yet here,

also, was there misunderstanding. There was deep symbolical meaning,

not only in that Christ did it, but also in what He did. Submission to

His doing it meant symbolically share and part with Him - part in His

Work. What He did, meant His work and service of love; the constant

cleansing of one's walk and life in the love of Christ, and in the

service of that love. It was not a meaningless ceremony of humiliation

on the part of Christ, not yet one where submission to the utmost was

required; but the action was symbolic, and meant that the disciple,

who was already bathed and made clean in heart and spirit, required

only this - to wash his feet in spiritual consecration to the service

of love which Christ had here shown forth in symbolic act. And so His

Words referred not, as is so often supposed, to the forgiveness of our

daily sins - the introduction of which would have been wholly abrupt

and unconnected with the context - but, in contrast to all

self-seeking, to the daily consecration of our life to the service of

love after the example of Christ.

And still do all these words come to us in manifold and ever-varied

application. In the misunderstanding of our love to Him, we too often

imagine that Christ cannot will or do what seems to us incongruous on

His part, or rather, incongruous with what we think about Him. We know

it not now, but we shall understand it hereafter. And still we persist

in our resistance, till it comes to us that so we would even lose our

part in and with Him. Yet not much, not very much, does He ask, Who

giveth so much. He that has washed us wholly would only have us

cleanse our feet for the service of love, as He gave us the example.

They were clean, these disciples, but not all. For He knew that there

was among them he 'that was betraying Him.'[5669]5669 He knew it, but

not with the knowledge of an inevitable fate impending far less of an

absolute decree, but with that knowledge which would again and again

speak out the warning, if by any means he might be saved. What would

have come, if Judas had repented, is as idle a question as this: What

would have come if Israel, as a nation, had repented and accepted

Christ? For, from our human standpoint, we can only view the human

aspect of things - that earthwards; and here every action is not

isolated, but ever the outcome of a previous development and history,

so that a man always freely acts, yet always in consequence of an

inward necessity.

The solemn service of Christ now went on in the silence of reverent

awe.[5670]5670 None dared ask Him nor resist. It was ended, and He had

resumed His upper garment, and again taken His place at the Table. It

was His now to follow the symbolic deed by illustrative words, and to

explain the practical application of what had just been done. Let it

not be misunderstood. They were wont to call Him by the two highest

names of Teacher and Lord, and these designations were rightly His.

For the first time He fully accepted and owned the highest homage. How

much more, then, must His Service of love, Who was their Teacher and

Lord, serve as example[5671]5671 of what was due[5672]5672 by each to

his fellow-disciple and fellow-servant! He, Who really was Lord and

Master, had rendered this lowest service to them as an example that,

as He had done, so should they do. No principle better known, almost

proverbial in Israel, than that a servant was not to claim greater

honour than his master, nor yet he that was sent than he who had sent

him. They knew this, and now also the meaning of the symbolic act of

footwashing; and if they acted it out, then theirs would be the

promised 'Beatitude.'[5673]5673

This reference to what were familiar expressions among the Jews,

especially noteworthy in St. John's Gospel, leads us to supplement a

few illustrative notes from the same source. The Greek word for 'the

towel,' with which our Lord girded Himself, occurs also in Rabbinic

writings, to denote the towel used in washing and at baths (Luntith

and Aluntith). Such girding was the common mark of a slave, by whom

the service of footwashing was ordinarily performed. And, in a very

interesting passage, the Midrash[5674]5674 contrasts what, in this

respect, is the way of man with what God had done for Israel. For, He

had been described by the prophet as performing for them the service

of washing,[5675]5675 and others usually rendered by slaves.[5676]5676

Again, the combination of these two designations, 'Rabbi and Lord,' or

'Rabbi, Father, and Lord,' was among those most common on the part of

disciples.[5677]5677 The idea, that if a man knows (for example, the

Law) and does not do it, it were better for him not to have been

created,[5678]5678 is not unfrequently expressed. But the most

interesting reference is in regard to the relation between the sender

and the sent, and a servant and his master. In regard to the former,

it is proverbially said, that while he that is sent stands on the same

footing as he who sent him,[5679]5679 yet he must expect less

honour.[5680]5680 And as regards Christ's statement that 'the servant

is not greater than his Master,' there is a passage in which we read

this, in connection with the sufferings of the Messiah: 'It is enough

for the servant that he be like his Master.'[5681]5681

But to return. The footwashing on the part of Christ, in which Judas

had shared, together with the explanatory words that followed, almost

required, in truthfulness, this limitation: 'I speak not of you all.'

For it would be a night of terrible moral sifting to them all. A

solemn warning was needed by all the disciples. But, besides, the

treachery of one of their own number might have led them to doubt

whether Christ had really Divine knowledge. On the other hand, this

clear prediction of it would not only confirm their faith in Him, but

show that there was some deeper meaning in the presence of a Judas

among them.[5682]5682 We come here upon these words of deepest

mysteriousness: 'I know those I chose; but that the Scripture may be

fulfilled, He that eateth My Bread lifteth up his heel against

Me!'[5683]5683 It were almost impossible to believe, even if not

forbidden by the context, that this knowledge of which Christ spoke,

referred to an eternal foreknowledge; still more, that it meant Judas

had been chosen with such foreknowledge in order that this terrible

Scripture might be fulfilled in him. Such foreknowledge and

foreordination would be to sin, and it would involve thoughts such as

only the harshness of our human logic in its fatal system-making could

induce anyone to entertain. Rather must we understand it as meaning

that Jesus had, from the first, known the inmost thoughts of those He

had chosen to be His Apostles; but that by this treachery of one of

their number, the terrible prediction of the worst enmity, that of

ingratitude, true in all ages of the Church, would receive its

complete fulfilment.[5684]5684 The word 'that' - 'that the Scripture

may be fulfilled,' does not mean 'in order that,' or 'for the purpose

of;' it never means this in that connection;[5685]5685 and it would be

altogether irrational to suppose that an event happened in order that

a special prediction might be fulfilled. Rather does it indicate the

higher internal connection in the succession of events, when an event

had taken place in the free determination of its agents, by which, all

unknown to them and unthought of by others, that unexpectedly came to

pass which had been Divinely foretold. And herein appears the Divine

character of prophecy, which is always at the same time announcement

and forewarning, that is, has besides its predictive a moral element:

that, while man is left to act freely, each development tends to the

goal Divinely foreseen and foreordained. Thus the word 'that' marks

not the connection between causation and effect, but between the

Divine antecedent and the human subsequent.

There is, indeed, behind this a much deeper question, to which brief

reference has already formerly been made. Did Christ know from the

beginning that Judas would betray Him, and yet, so knowing, did He

choose him to be one of the Twelve? Here we can only answer by

indicating this as a canon in studying the Life on earth of the

God-Man, that it was part of His Self-exinanition - of that emptying

Himself, and taking upon Him the form of a Servant[5686]5686 -

voluntarily to forego His Divine knowledge in the choice of His Human

actions. So only could He, as perfect Man, have perfectly obeyed the

Divine Law. For, if the Divine had determined Him in the choice of His

Actions, there could have been no merit attaching to His Obedience,

nor could He be said to have, as perfect Man, taken our place, and to

have obeyed the Law in our stead and as our Representative, nor yet be

our Ensample. But if His Divine knowledge did not guide Him in the

choice of His actions, we can see, and have already indicated, reasons

why the discipleship and service of Judas should have been accepted,

if it had been only as that of a Judæan, a man in many respects well

fitted for such an office, and the representative of one of the

various directions which tended towards the reception of the Messiah.

We are not in circumstances to judge whether or not Christ spoke all

these things continuously, after He had sat down, having washed the

disciples' feet. More probably it was at different parts of the meal.

This would also account for the seeming abruptness of this concluding

sentence:[5687]5687 'He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth

Me.' And yet the internal connection of thought seems clear. The

apostasy and loss of one of the Apostles was known to Christ. Would it

finally dissolve the bond that bound together the College of Apostles,

and so invalidate their Divine Mission (the Apostolate) and its

authority? The words of Christ conveyed an assurance which would be

most comforting in the future, that any such break would not be

lasting, only transitory, and that in this respect also 'the

foundation of God standeth.'

In the meantime the Paschal Supper was proceeding. We mark this

important note of time in the words of St. Matthew: 'as they were

eating,'[5688]5688 or, as St. Mark expresses it, 'as they reclined and

were eating.'[5689]5689 According to the Rubric, after the 'washing'

the dishes were immediately to be brought on the table. Then the Head

of the Company would dip some of the bitter herbs into the salt-water

or vinegar, speak a blessing, and partake of them, then hand them to

each in the company. Next, he would break one of the unleavened cakes

(according to the present ritual the middle of the three), of which

half was put aside for after supper. This is called the Aphiqomon, or

after-dish, and as we believe that 'the bread' of the Holy Eucharist

was the Aphiqomon, some particulars may here be of interest. The dish

in which the broken cake lies (not the Aphiqomon), is elevated, and

these words are spoken: 'This is the bread of misery which our fathers

ate in the land of Egypt. All that are hungry, come and eat; all that

are needy, come, keep the Pascha.' In the more modern ritual the words

are added: 'This year here, next year in the land of Israel; this year

bondsmen, next year free!' On this the second cup is filled, and the

youngest in the company is instructed to make formal inquiry as to the

meaning of all the observances of that night,[5690]5690 when the

Liturgy proceeds to give full answers as regards the festival, its

occasion, and ritual. The Talmud adds that the table is to be

previously removed, so as to excite the greater curiosity.[5691]5691

We do not suppose that even the earlier ritual represents the exact

observances at the time of Christ, or that, even if it does so, they

were exactly followed at that Paschal Table of the Lord. But so much

stress is laid in Jewish writings on the duty of fully rehearsing at

the Paschal Supper the circumstances of the first Passover and the

deliverance connected with it, that we can scarcely doubt that what

the Mishnah declares as so essential formed part of the services of

that night. And as we think of our Lord's comment on the Passover and

Israel's deliverance, the words spoken when the unleavened cake was

broken come back to us, and with deeper meaning attaching to them.

After this the cup is elevated, and then the service proceeds somewhat

lengthily, the cup being raised a second time and certain prayers

spoken. This part of the service concludes with the two first Psalms

in the series called 'the Hallel,'[5692]5692 when the cup is raised a

third time, a prayer spoken, and the cup drunk. This ends the first

part of the service. And now the Paschal meal begins by all washing

their hands - a part of the ritual which we scarcely think Christ

observed. It was, we believe, during this lengthened exposition and

service that the 'trouble in spirit' of which St. John

speaks[5693]5693 passed over the soul of the God-Man. Almost

presumptuous as it seems to inquire into its immediate cause, we can

scarcely doubt that it concerned not so much Himself as them. His Soul

could not, indeed, but have been troubled, as, with full consciousness

of all that it would be to Him - infinitely more than merely human

suffering - He looked down into the abyss which was about to open at

His Feet. But He saw more than even this. He saw Judas about to take

the last fatal step, and His Soul yearned in pity over him. The very

sop which He would so soon hand to him, although a sign of recognition

to John, was a last appeal to all that was human in Judas. And,

besides all this, Jesus also saw, how, all unknown to them, the

terrible tempest of fierce temptation would that night sweep over

them; how it would lay low and almost uproot one of them, and scatter

all. It was the beginning of the hour of Christ's utmost loneliness,

of which the climax was reached in Gethsemane. And in the trouble of

His Spirit did He solemnly 'testify' to them of the near Betrayal. We

wonder not, that they all became exceeding sorrowful, and each asked,

'Lord, is it I?' This question on the part of the eleven disciples,

who were conscious of innocence of any purpose of betrayal, and

conscious also of deep love to the Master, affords one of the clearest

glimpses into the inner history of that Night of Terror, in which, so

to speak, Israel became Egypt. We can now better understand their

heavy sleep in Gethsemane, their forsaking Him and fleeing, even

Peter's denial. Everything must have seemed to these men to give way;

all to be enveloped in outer darkness, when each man could ask whether

he was to be the Betrayer.

The answer of Christ left the special person undetermined, while it

again repeated the awful prediction - shall we not add, the most

solemn warning - that it was one of those who took part in the Supper.

It is at this point that St. John resumes the thread of the

narrative.[5694]5694 As he describes it, the disciples were looking

one on another, doubting of whom He spake. In this agonising suspense

Peter beckoned from across the table to John, whose head, instead of

leaning on his hand, rested, in the absolute surrender of love and

intimacy born of sorrow, on the bosom of the Master.[5695]5695 Peter

would have John ask of whom Jesus spake.[5696]5696 And to the

whispered question of John, 'leaning back as he was on Jesus' breast,'

the Lord gave the sign, that it was he to whom He would give 'the sop'

when He had dipped it. Even this perhaps was not clear to John, since

each one in turn received 'the sop.'

At present, the Supper itself begins by eating, first, a piece of the

unleavened cake, then of the bitter herbs dipped in Charoseth, and

lastly two small pieces of the unleavened cake, between which a piece

of bitter radish has been placed. But we have direct testimony, that,

about the time of Christ,[5697]5697 'the sop'[5698]5698 which was

handed round consisted of these things wrapped together: flesh of the

Paschal Lamb, a piece of unleavened bread, and bitter herbs.[5699]5699

This, we believe, was 'the sop,' which Jesus, having dipped it for him

in the dish, handed first to Judas, as occupying the first and chief

place at Table. But before He did so, probably while He dipped it in

the dish, Judas, who could not but fear that his purpose might be

known, reclining at Christ's left hand, whispered into the Master's

ear, 'Is it I, Rabbi?' It must have been whispered, for no one at the

Table could have heard either the question of Judas or the affirmative

answer of Christ.[5700]5700 It was the last outgoing of the pitying

love of Christ after the traitor. Coming after the terrible warning

and woe on the Betrayer,[5701]5701 it must be regarded as the final

warning and also the final attempt at rescue on the part of the

Saviour. It was with full knowledge of all, even of this that his

treachery was known, though he may have attributed the information not

to Divine insight but to some secret human communication, that Judas

went on his way to destruction. We are too apt to attribute crimes to

madness; but surely there is normal, as well as mental mania; and it

must have been in a paroxysm of that, when all feeling was turned to

stone, and mental self-delusion was combined with moral perversion,

that Judas 'took'[5702]5702 from the Hand of Jesus 'the sop.' It was

to descend alive into the grave - and with a heavy sound the

gravestone fell and closed over the mouth of the pit. That moment

Satan entered again into his heart. But the deed was virtually done;

and Jesus, longing for the quiet fellowship of His own with all that

was to follow, bade him do quickly that he did.

But even so there are questions connected with the human motives that

actuated Judas, to which, however, we can only give the answer of some

suggestions. Did Judas regard Christ's denunciation of 'woe' on the

Betrayer not as a prediction, but as intended to be deterrent -

perhaps in language Orientally exaggerated - or if he regarded it as a

prediction, did he not believe in it? Again, when after the plain

intimation of Christ and His Words to do quickly what he was about to

do, Judas still went to the betrayal, could he have had an idea -

rather, sought to deceive himself, that Jesus felt that He could not

escape His enemies, and that He rather wished it to be all over? Or

had all his former feelings towards Jesus turned, although

temporarily, into actual hatred which every Word and Warning of Christ

only intensified? But above all and in all we have, first and

foremost, to think of the peculiarly Judaic character of his first

adherence to Christ; of the gradual and at last final and fatal

disenchantment of his hopes; of his utter moral, consequent upon his

spiritual, failure; of the change of all that had in it the

possibility of good into the actuality of evil; and, on the other

hand, of the direct agency of Satan in the heart of Judas, which his

moral and spiritual ship-wreck rendered possible.

From the meal scarcely begun Judas rushed into the dark night. Even

this has its symbolic significance. None there knew why this strange

haste, unless from obedience to something that the Master had bidden

him.[5703]5703 Even John could scarely have understood the sign which

Christ had given of the traitor. Some of them thought, he had been

directed by the words of Christ to purchase what was needful for the

feast: others, that he was bidden go and give something to the poor.

Gratuitous objection has been raised, as if this indicated that,

according to the Fourth Gospel, this meal had not taken place on the

Paschal night, since, after the commencement of the Feast (on the 15th

Nisan), it would be unlawful to make purchases. But this certainly was

not the case. Sufficient here to state, that the provision and

preparation of the needful food, and indeed of all that was needful

for the Feast, was allowed on the 15th Nisan.[5704]5704 And this must

have been specially necessary when, as in this instance, the first

festive day, or 15th Nisan, was to be followed by a Sabbath, on which

no such work was permitted. On the other hand, the mention of these

two suggestions by the disciples seems almost necessarily to involve,

that the writer of the Fourth Gospel had placed this meal in the

Paschal Night. Had it been on the evening before, no one could have

imagined that Judas had gone out during the night to buy provisions,

when there was the whole next day for it, nor would it have been

likely that a man should on any ordinary day go at such an hour to

seek out the poor. But in the Paschal Night, when the great

Temple-gates were opened at midnight to begin early preparations for

the offering of the Chagigah, or festive sacrifice, which was not

voluntary but of due, and the remainder of which was afterwards eaten

at a festive meal, such preparations would be quite natural. And

equally so, that the poor, who gathered around the Temple, might then

seek to obtain the help of the charitable.

The departure of the betrayer seemed to clear the atmosphere. He was

gone to do his work; but let it not be thought that it was the

necessity of that betrayal which was the cause of Christ's suffering

of soul. He offered Himself willingly - and though it was brought

about through the treachery of Judas, yet it was Jesus Himself Who

freely brought Himself a Sacrifice, in fulfilment of the work which

the Father had given Him. And all the more did He realise and express

this on the departure of Judas. So long as he was there, pitying love

still sought to keep him from the fatal step. But when the traitor was

at last gone, the other side of His own work clearly emerged into

Christ's view. And this voluntary sacrifical aspect is further clearly

indicated by His selection of the terms 'Son of Man' and 'God' instead

of 'Son' and 'Father.'[5705]5705 'Now is glorified the Son of Man, and

God is glorified in Him.[5706]5706 And God shall glorify Him in

Himself, and straightway shall He glorify Him.' If the first of these

sentences expressed the meaning of what was about to take place, as

exhibiting the utmost glory of the Son of Man in the triumph of the

obedience of His Voluntary Sacrfice, the second sentence pointed out

its acknowledgment by God: the exaltation which followed the

humiliation, the reward[5707]5707 as the necessary sequel of the work,

the Crown after the Cross.

Thus far for one aspect of what was about to be enacted. As for the

other - that which concerned the disciples: only a little while would

He still be with them. Then would come the time of sad and sore

perplexity - when they would seek Him, but could not come whither He

had gone - during the terrible hours between His Crucifixion and His

manifested Resurrection. With reference to that period especially, but

in general to the whole time of His Separation from the Church on

earth, the great commandment, the bond which alone would hold them

together, was that of love one to another, and such love as that which

He had shown towards them. And this - shame on us, as we write it! -

was to be the mark to all men of their discipleship.[5708]5708 As

recorded by St. John, the words of the Lord were succeeded by a

question of Peter, indicating perplexity as to the primary and direct

meaning of Christ's going away. On this followed Christ's reply about

the impossibility of Peter's now sharing his Lord's way of Passion,

and, in answer to the disciple's impetuous assurance of his readiness

to follow the Master not only into peril, but to lay down his Life for

Him, the Lord's indication of Peter's present unpreparedness and the

prediction of His impending denial. It may have been, that all this

occurred in the Supper-Chamber and at the time indicated by St. John.

But it is also recorded by the Synoptists as on the way to Gethsemane,

and in, what we may term, a more natural connection. Its consideration

will therefore be best reserved till we reach that stage of the

history.

We now approach the most solemn part of that night: The Institution of

the Lord's Supper. It would manifestly be beyond the object, as

assuredly it would necessarily stretch beyond the limits, of the

present work, to discuss the many questions and controversies which,

alas! have gathered around the Words of the Institution. On the other

hand, it would not be truthful wholly to pass them by. On certain

points, indeed, we need have no hesitation. The Institution of the

Lord's Supper is recorded by the Synoptists, although without

reference to those parts of the Paschal Supper and its Services with

which one or another of its acts must be connected. In fact, while the

historical nexus with the Paschal Supper is evident, it almost seems

as if the Evangelists had intended, by their studied silence in regard

to the Jewish Feast, to indicate that with this Celebration and the

new Institution the Jewish Passover had for ever ceased. On the other

hand, the Fourth Gospel does not record the new Institution - it may

have been, because it was so fully recorded by the others; or for

reasons connected with the structure of that Gospel; or it may be

accounted for on other grounds.[5709]5709 But whatever way we may

account for it, the silence of the Fourth Gospel must be a sore

difficulty to those who regard it as an Ephesian product of

symbolico-sacramentarian tendency, dating from the second century.

The absence of a record by St. John is compensated by the narrative of

St Paul in 1 Cor. xi. 23-26, to which must be added as supplementary

the reference in 1 Cor. x. 16 to 'the Cup of Blessing which we bless'

as 'fellowship of the Blood of Christ, and the Bread which we break'

as 'fellowship of the Body of Christ.' We have thus four accounts,

which may be divided into two groups: St Matthew and St. Mark, and St.

Luke and St. Paul. None of these give us the very words of Christ,

since these were spoken in Aramæan. In the renderings which we have of

them one series may be described as the more rugged and literal, the

other as the more free and paraphrastic. The differences between them

are, of course, exceedingly minute; but they exist. As regards the

text which underlies the rendering in our A.V., the difference

suggested are not of any practical importance,[5710]5710 with the

exception of two points. First, the copula 'is' ['This is My Body,'

'This is My Blood'] was certainly not spoken by the Lord in the

Aramaic, just as it does not occur in the Jewish formula in the

breaking of bread at the beginning of the Paschal Supper. Secondly,

the words: 'Body which is given,' or, in 1 Cor. xi. 24, 'broken,' and

'Blood which is shed,' should be more correctly rendered: 'is being

given,' 'broken,' 'shed.'

If we now ask ourselves at what part of the Paschal Supper the new

Institution was made, we cannot doubt that it was before the Supper

was completely ended.[5711]5711 We have seen, that Judas had left the

Table at the beginning of the Supper. The meal continued to its end,

amidst such conversation as has already been noted. According to the

Jewish ritual, the third Cup was filled at the close of the Supper.

This was called, as by St. Paul,[5712]5712 'the Cup of Blessing,'

partly, because a special 'blessing' was pronounced over it. It is

described as one of the ten essential rites in the Paschal Supper.

Next, 'grace after meat' was spoken. But on this we need not dwell,

nor yet on 'the washing of hands' that followed. The latter would not

be observed by Jesus as a religious ceremony; while, in regard to the

former, the composite character of this part of the Paschal Liturgy

affords internal evidence that it could not have been in use at the

time of Christ. But we can have little doubt, that the Institution of

the Cup was in connection with this third 'Cup of Blessing.'[5713]5713

If we are asked, what part of the Paschal Service corresponds to the

'Breaking of Bread,' we answer, that this being really the last

Pascha, and the cessation of it, our Lord anticipated the later rite,

introduced when, with the destruction of the Temple, the Paschal as

all other Sacrifices ceased. While the Paschal Lamb was still offered,

it was the Law that, after partaking of its flesh, nothing else should

be eaten. But since the Paschal Lamb had ceased, it is the custom

after the meal to break and partake as Aphikomon, or after-dish, of

that half of the unleavened cake, which, as will be remembered, had

been broken and put aside at the beginning of the Supper. The Paschal

Sacrifice having now really ceased, and consciously so to all the

disciples of Christ, He anticipated this, and connected with the

breaking of the Unleavened Cake at the close of the Meal the

institution of the breaking of Bread in the Holy Eucharist.

What did the Institution really mean, and what does it mean to us? We

cannot believe that it was intended as merely a sign for remembrance

of His Death. Such remembrance is often equally vivid in ordinary acts

of faith or prayer; and it seems difficult, if no more than this had

been intended, to account for the Institution of a special Sacrament,

and that with such solemnity, and as the second great rite of the

Church - that for its nourishment. Again, if it were a mere token of

remembrance, why the Cup as well as the Bread? Nor can we believe,

that the copula 'is' - which, indeed, did not occur in the words

spoken by Christ Himself - can be equivalent to 'signifies.' As little

can it refer to any change of substance, be it in what is called

Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation. If we may venture an

explanation, it would be that 'this,' received in the Holy Eucharist,

conveys to the soul as regards the Body and Blood of the Lord, the

same effect as the Bread and the Wine to the body - receiving of the

Bread and the Cup in the Holy Communion is, really, though

spiritually, to the Soul what the outward elements are to the Body:

that they are both the symbol and the vehicle of true, inward,

spiritual feeding on the Very Body and Blood of Christ. So is this Cup

which we bless fellowship of His Blood, and the Bread we break of His

Body - fellowship with Him Who died for us, and in His dying;

fellowship also in Him with one another, who are joined together in

this, that for us this Body was given, and for the remission of our

sins this precious Blood was shed.[5714]5714

Most mysterious words these, yet most blessed mystery this of feeding

on Christ spiritually and in faith. Most mysterious - yet 'he who

takes from us our mystery takes from us our Sacrament.'[5715]5715 And

ever since has this blessed Institution lain as the golden

morning-light far out even in the Church's darkest night - not only

the seal of His Presence and its pledge, but also the promise of the

bright Day at His Coming. 'For as often as we eat this Bread and drink

this Cup, we do show forth the Death of the Lord' - for the life of

the world, to be assuredly yet manifested - 'till He come.' 'Even so,

Lord Jesus, come quickly!'

CHAPTER XI.

THE LAST DISCOURSES OF CHRIST - THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION.[5716]5716

(St. John xiv.; xv.; xvi.; xvii.)

THE new Institution of the Lord's Supper did not finally close what

passed at that Paschal Table. According to the Jewish Ritual, the Cup

is filled a fourth time, and the remaining part of the

Hallel[5717]5717 repeated. Then follow, besides Ps. cxxxvi., a number

of prayers and hymns, of which the comparatively late origin is not

doubtful. The same remark applies even more strongly to what follows

after the fourth Cup. But, so far as we can judge, the Institution of

the Holy Supper was followed by the Discourse recorded in St. John

xiv. Then the concluding Psalms of the Hallel were sung,[5718]5718

after which the Master left the 'Upper Chamber.' The Discourse of

Christ recorded in St. John xvi., and His prayer,[5719]5719 were

certainly uttered after they had risen from the Supper, and before

they crossed the brook Kidron.[5720]5720 In all probability they were,

however, spoken before the Savior left the house. We can scarcely

imagine such a Discourse, and still less such a Prayer, to have been

uttered while traversing the narrow streets of Jerusalem on the way to

Kidron.

1. In any case there cannot be doubt, that the first

Discourse[5721]5721 was spoken while still at the Supper-Table. It

connects itself closely with that statement which had caused them so

much sorrow and perplexity, that, whither He was going, they could not

come.[5722]5722 If so, the Discourse itself may be arranged under

these four particulars: explanatory and corrective;[5723]5723

explanatory and teaching;[5724]5724 hortatory and

promissory;[5725]5725 promissory and consolatory.[5726]5726 Thus there

is constantand connected progress, the two great elements in the

Discourse being: teaching and comfort.

At the outset we ought, perhaps, to remember the very common Jewish

idea, that those in glory occupied different abodes, corresponding to

their ranks.[5727]5727 If the words of Christ, about the place whither

they could not follow Him, had awakened any such thoughts, the

explanation which He now gave must effectually have dispelled them.

Let not their hearts, then, be troubled at the prospect. As they

believed in God, so let them also have trust in Him.[5728]5728 It was

His Father's House of which they were thinking, and although there

were 'many mansions,' or rather 'stations,' in it - and the choice of

this word may teach us something - yet they were all in that one

House. Could they not trust Him in this? Surely, if it had been

otherwise, He would have told them, and not left them to be bitterly

disappointed in the end. Indeed, the object of His going was the

opposite of what they feared: it was to prepare by His Death and

Resurrection a place for them. Nor let them think that His going away

would imply permanent separation, because He had said they could not

follow Him thither. Rather did His going, not away, but to prepare a

place for them, imply His Coming again, primarily as regarded

individuals at death, and secondarily as regarded the Church - that He

might receive them unto Himself, there to be with Him. Not final

separation, then, but ultimate gathering to Himself, did His present

going away mean. 'And whither I go, ye know the way.'[5729]5729

Jesus had referred to His going to the Father's House, and implied

that they knew the way which would bring them thither also. But His

Words had only the more perplexed, at least some of them. If, when

speaking of their not being able to go whither He went, He had not

referred to a separation between them in that land far away, whither

was He going? And, in their ignorance of this, how could they find

their way thither? If any Jewish ideas of the disappearance and the

final manifestation of the Messiah lurked beneath the question of

Thomas, the answer of the Lord placed the matter in the clearest

light. He had spoken of the Father's House of many 'stations,' but

only one road led thither. They must all know it: it was that of

personal apprehension of Christ in the life, the mind, and the heart.

The way to the Father was Christ; the full manifestation of all

spiritual truth, and the spring of the true inner life were equally in

Him. Except through Him, no man could consciously come to the Father.

Thomas had put his twofold question thus: What was the goal? and, what

was the way to it?[5730]5730 In His answer Christ significantly

reversed this order, and told them first what was the way - Himself;

and then what was the goal. If they had spiritually known Him as the

way, they would also have known the goal, the Father, and now, by

having the way clearly pointed out, they must also know the goal, God;

nay, He was, so to speak, visibly before them - and, gazing on Him,

they saw the shining track up to heaven, the Jacob's ladder at the top

of which was the Father.[5731]5731

But once more appeared in the words of Philip that carnal

literalising, which would take the words of Christ in only an external

sense.[5732]5732 Sayings like these help us to perceive the absolute

need of another Teacher, the Holy Spirit. Philip understood the words

of Christ as if He held out the possibility of an actual sight of the

Father; and this, as they imagined, would for ever have put an end to

all their doubts and fears. We also, too often, would fain have such

solution of our doubts, if not by actual vision, yet by direct

communication from on high. In His reply Jesus once more and

emphatically returned to this truth, that the vision, which was that

of faith alone, was spiritual, and in no way external; and that this

manifestation had been, and was fully, though spiritually and to

faith, in Him. Or did Philip not believe that the Father was really

manifested in Christ, because he did not actually behold Him? Those

words which had drawn them and made them feel that heaven was so near,

they were not His own. but the message which He had brought them from

the Father; those works which He had done, they were the manifestation

of the Father's 'dwelling' in Him. Let them then believe this vital

union between the Father and Him - and, if their faith could not

absolutely rise to that height, let it at least rest on the lower

level of the evidence of His works. And so would He still lead us

upwards, from the experience of what He does to the knowledge of what

He is. Yea, and if they were ever tempted to doubt His works, faith

might have evidence of them in personal experience. Primarily, no

doubt, the words[5733]5733 about the greater works which they who

believed in Him would do, because He went to the Father, refer to the

Apostolic preaching and working in its greater results after the

outpouring of the Holy Spirit. To this also must primarily refer the

promise of unlimited answer to prayer in His Name.[5734]5734 But in a

secondary, yet most true and blessed, sense, both these promises have,

ever since the Ascension of Christ, also applied both to the Church

and to all individual Christians.

A twofold promise, so wide as this, required, it must be felt, not

indeed limitation, but qualification - let us say, definition - so far

as concerns the indication of its necessary conditions. Unlimited

power of working by faith and of praying in faith is qualified by

obedience to His Commandments, such as is the outcome of personal love

to Him.[5735]5735 And for such faith, which compasseth all things in

the obedience of love to Christ, and can obtain all by the prayer of

faith in His Name, there will be a need of Divine Presence ever with

them.[5736]5736 While He had been with them, they had had one

Paraclete,[5737]5737 or 'Advocate,' Who had pleaded with them the

cause of God, explained and advocated the truth, and guarded and

guided them. Now that His outward Presence was to be withdrawn from

earth, and He was to be their Paraclete or Advocate in Heaven with the

Father,[5738]5738 He would, as His first act of advocacy, pray the

Father, Who would send them another Paraclete, or Advocate, who would

continue with them for ever. To the guidance and pleadings of that

Advocate they could implicitly trust themselves, for He was 'the

Spirit of Truth.' The world, indeed, would not listen to His

pleadings, nor accept Him as their Guide, for the only evidence by

which they judged was that of outward sight and material results. But

theirs would be other Empirics: and experience not outward, but inward

and spiritual. They would know the reality of His Existence and the

truth of His pleadings by the continual Presence with them as a body

of this Paraclete, and by His dwelling in them individually.

Here (as Bengel justly remarks) begins the essential difference

between believers and the world. The Son was sent into the world; not

so the Holy Spirit. Again, the world receives not the Holy Spirit,

because it knows Him not; the disciples know Him, because they possess

Him. Hence 'to have known' and 'to have' are so conjoined, that not to

have known is the cause of not having, and to have is the cause of

knowing.[5739]5739 In view of this promised Advent of the other

Advocate, Christ could tell the disciples that He would not leave them

'orphans' in this world. Nay, in this Advocate Christ Himself came to

them. True, the world, which only saw and knew what fell within the

range of its sensuous and outward vision (ver. 17), would not behold

Him, but they would behold Him, because He lived, and they also would

live - and hence there was fellowship of spiritual life between

them.[5740]5740 On that day of the Advent of His Holy Spirit would

they have full knowledge, because experience, of the Christ's Return

to the Father, and of their own being in Christ, and of His being in

them. And, as regarded this threefold relationship, this must be ever

kept in view: to be in Christ meant to love Him, and this was: to have

and to keep His commandments; Christ's being in the Father implied,

that they who were in Christ or loved Him would be loved also of His

Father; and, lastly, Christ's being in them implied, that He would

love them and manifest Himself to them.[5741]5741

One outstanding novel fact here arrested the attention of the

disciples. It was contrary to all their Jewish ideas about the future

manifestation of the Messiah, and it led to the question of one of

their number, Judas - not Iscariot: 'Lord, what has happened, that to

us Thou wilt manifest Thyself, and not to the world?' Again they

thought of an outward, while He spoke of a spiritual and inward

manifestation. It was of this coming of the Son and the Father for the

purpose of making 'station' with them[5742]5742 that He spoke, of

which the condition was love to Christ, manifested in the keeping of

His Word, and which secured the love of the Father also. On the other

hand, not to keep His Word was not to love Him, with all that it

involved, not only as regarded the Son, but also the Father, since the

Word which they heard was the Father's.[5743]5743

Thus far then for this inward manifestation, springing from

life-fellowship with Christ, rich in the unbounded spiritual power of

faith, and fragrant with the obedience of love. All this He could say

to them now in the Father's Name - as the first Representative,

Pleader, and 'Advocate,' or Paraclete. But what, when He was no longer

present with them? For that He had provided 'another Paraclete,'

Advocate, or Pleader. This 'Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, Whom the

Father will send in My Name, that same will teach you all things, and

bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.' It is quite

evident, that the interpretation of the term Paraclete as 'the

Comforter' will not meet the description here given of His twofold

function as teaching all, and recalling all, that Christ Himself had

said. Nor will the other interpretation of 'Advocate' meet the

requirements, if we regard the Advocate as one who pleads for us. But

if we regard the Paraclete or Advocate as the Representative of

Christ, and pleading, as it were, for Him, the cause of Christ, all

seems harmonious. Christ came in the Name of the Father, as the first

Paraclete, as His Representative; the Holy Spirit comes in the Name of

Christ, as the second Paraclete, the Representative of Christ, Who is

in the Father. As such the second Paraclete is sent by the Father in

Name of the first Paraclete, and He would both complete in them, and

recall to them, His Cause.

And so at the end of this Discourse the Lord returned again, and now

with fuller meaning, to its beginning. Then He had said: 'Let not your

heart be troubled; ye believe in God, believe also in Me.' Now, after

the fuller communication of His purpose, and of their relation to Him,

He could convey to them the assurance of peace, even His Own peace, as

His gift in the present, and His legacy for the future.[5744]5744 In

their hearing, the fact of His going away, which had filled them with

such sorrow and fear, had now been conjoined with that of His

Coming[5745]5745 to them. Yes, as He had explained it, His departure

to the Father was the necessary antecedent and condition of His Coming

to them in the permanent Presence of the other Paraclete, the Holy

Ghost. That Paraclete, however, would, in the economy of grace, be

sent by the Father alone. In the dispensation of grace, the final

source from whence all cometh, Who sendeth both the Son and the Holy

Ghost, is God the Father. The Son is sent by the Father, and the Holy

Ghost also, though proceeding from the Father and the Son, is sent by

the Father in Christ's Name. In the economy of grace, then, the Father

is greater than the Son. And the return of the Son to the Father marks

alike the completion of Christ's work, and its perfection, in the

Mission of the Holy Ghost, with all that His Advent implies.

Therefore, if, discarding thoughts of themselves, they had only given

room to feelings of true love to Him, instead of mourning they would

have rejoiced because He went to the Father, with all that this

implied, not only of rest and triumph to Him, but of the perfecting of

His Work - since this was the condition of that Mission of the Holy

Ghost by the Father, Who sent both the Son and the Holy Spirit. And in

this sense also should they have rejoiced, because, through the

presence of the Holy Ghost in them, as sent by the Father in His

'greater' work, they would, instead of the present selfish enjoyment

of Christ's Personal Presence, have the more power of showing their

love to Him in apprehending His Truth, obeying His Commandments, doing

His Works, and participating in His Life.[5746]5746 Not that Christ

expected them to understand the full meaning of all these words. But

afterwards, when it had all come to pass, they would

believe.[5747]5747

With the meaning and the issue of the great contest on which He was

about to enter thus clearly before Him, did He now go forth to meet

the last assault of the 'Prince of this World.'[5748]5748 But why that

fierce struggle, since in Christ 'he hath nothing?' To exhibit to 'the

world' the perfect love which He had to the Father; how even to the

utmost of self-exinanition, obedience, submission, and suffering He

was doing as the Father had given Him commandment, when He sent Him

for the redemption of the world. In the execution of this Mission He

would endure the last sifting assault and contest on the part of the

Enemy, and, enduring, conquer for us. And so might the world be won

from its Prince by the full manifestation of Christ, in His infinite

obedience and righteousness, doing the Will of the Father and the Work

which He had given Him, and in His infinite love doing the work of our

salvation.[5749]5749

2. The work of our salvation! To this aspect of the subject Christ now

addressed Himself, as He rose from the Supper-Table. If in the

Discourse recorded in the fourteenth chapter of St. John's Gospel the

Godward aspect of Christ's impending departure was explained, in that

of the fifteenth chapter the new relation is set forth which was to

subsist between Him and His Church. And this - although epigrammatic

sayings are so often fallacious - may be summarised in these three

words: Union, Communion, Disunion. The Union between Christ and His

Church is corporate, vital, and effective, alike as regards results

and blessings.[5750]5750 This Union issues in Communion - of Christ

with His disciples, of His disciples with Him, and of His disciples

among themselves. The principle of all these is love: the love of

Christ to the disciples, the love of the disciples to Christ, and the

love in Christ of the disciples to one another.[5751]5751 Lastly, this

Union and Communion has for its necessary counterpart Disunion,

separation from the world. The world repudiates them for their union

with Christ and their communion. But, for all that, there is something

that must keep them from going out of the world. They have a Mission

in it, initiated by, and carried on in the power of, the Holy Ghost -

that of uplifting the testimony of Christ.[5752]5752

As regards the relation of the Church to the Christ Who is about to

depart to the Father, and to come to them in the Holy Ghost as His

Representative, it is to be one of Union, corporate, vital, and

effective. In the nature of it, such a truth could only be set forth

by illustration. When Christ said: 'I am the Vine, the true one, and

My Father is the Husbandman;' or again, 'Ye are the branches' -

bearing in mind that, as He spake it in Aramaic, the copulas 'am,'

'is,' and 'are,' would be omitted - He did not mean that He signified

the Vine or was its sign, nor the Father that of the Husbandman, nor

yet the disciples that of the branches. What He meant was, that He,

the Father, and the disciples, stood in exactly the same relationship

as the Vine, the Husbandman, and the branches. That relationship was

of corporate union of the branches with the Vine for the production of

fruit to the Husbandman, Who for that purpose pruned the branches. Nor

can we forget in this connection, that, in the old Testament, and

partially in Jewish thought,[5753]5753 the Vine was the symbol of

Israel, not in their national but in their Church-capacity. Christ,

with His disciples as the branches, is 'the Vine, the true One' - the

reality of all types, the fulfilment of all promises. They are many

branches, yet a grand unity in that Vine; there is one Church of which

He is the Head, the Root, the Sustenance, the Life. And in that Vine

will the object of its planting of old be realised: to bring forth

fruit unto God.

Yet, though it be one Vine, the Church must bear fruit not only in her

corporate capacity, but individually in each of the branches. It seems

remarkable that we read of branches in Him that bear not fruit. This

must apparently refer to those who have by Baptism been inserted into

the Vine, but remain fruitless, since a merely outward profession of

Christ could scarcely be described as 'a branch in' Him. On the other

hand, every fruit-bearing branch the Husbandman 'cleanseth'[5754]5754

- not necessarily nor exclusively by pruning, but in whatever manner

may be requisite - so that it may produce the largest possible amount

of fruit. As for them, the process of cleansing had 'already' been

accomplished through, or because of [the meaning is much the same],

the Word which He had spoken unto them. If that condition of

fruit-bearing now existed in them in consequence of the impression of

His Word, it followed as a cognate condition that they must abide in

Him, and He would abide in them. Nay, this was a vital condition of

fruit-bearing, arising from the fundamental fact that He was the Vine

and they the branches. The proper, normal condition of every branch in

that Vine was to bear much fruit, of course, in proportion to its size

and vigour. But, both figuratively and really, the condition of this

was to abide in Him, since 'apart' from Him they could do nothing. It

was not like a force once set in motion that would afterwards continue

of itself. It was a life, and the condition of its permanence was

continued union with Christ, from Whom alone it could spring.

And now as regarded the two alternatives: he that abode not in Him was

the branch 'cast outside' and withering, which, when ready for it, men

would cast into the fire - with all of symbolic meaning as regards the

gatheres and the burning that the illustration implies. On the other

hand, if the corporate and vital union was effective, if they abode in

Him, and in consequence, His Words abode in them, then: 'Whatsoever ye

will ye shall ask, and it shall be done to you.' It is very noteworthy

that the unlimitedness of prayer is limited, or, rather, conditioned,

by our abiding in Christ and His Words in us,[5755]5755 just as in St.

John xiv. 12-14 it is conditioned by fellowship with Him, and in St.

John xv. 16 by permanent fruitfulness.[5756]5756 For, it were the most

dangerous fanaticism, and entirely opposed to the teaching of Christ,

to imagine that the promise of Christ implies such absolute power - as

if prayer were magic - that a person might ask for anything, no matter

what it was, in the assurance of obtaining his request.[5757]5757 In

all moral relations, duties and privileges are correlative ideas, and

in our relation to Christ conscious immanence in Him and of His Word

in us, union and communion with Him, and the obedience of love, are

the indispensable conditions of our privileges. The beliver may,

indeed, ask for anything, because he may always and absolutely go to

God; but the certainty of special answers to prayer is proportionate

to the degree of union and communion with Christ. And such unlimited

liberty of prayer is connected with our bearing much fruit, because

thereby the Father is glorified and our discipleship

evidenced.[5758]5758 [5759]5759

This union, being inward and moral, necesarily unfolds into communion,

of which the principle is love. 'Like as the Father loved Me, even so

loved I you. Abide in My love. If ye keep My commandments, ye shall

abide in the love that is Mine (_n t_ _g_p_ t_ _m_).' We mark the

continuity in the scale of love: the Father towards the Son, and the

Son towards us; and its kindredness of forthgoing. And now all that

the disciples had to do was to abide in it. This is connected, not

with sentiment nor even with faith, but with obedience.[5760]5760

Fresh supplies are drawn by faith, but continuance in the love of

Christ is the manifestation and the result of obedience. It was so

even with the Master Himself in His relation to the Father. And the

Lord immediately explained[5761]5761 what His object was in saying

this. In this, also, were they to have communion with Him: communion

in that joy which was His in consequence of His perfect obedience.

'These things have I spoken to you, in order that the joy that is Mine

(_ car_ _ _m_) may be[5762]5762 in you, and your joy may be fulfilled

[completed].'

But what of those commandments to which such importance attached?

Clean as they now were through the Words which He had spoken, one

great commandment stood forth as specially His Own, consecrated by His

Example and to be measured by His observance of it. From whatever

point we view it, whether as specially demanded by the pressing

necessities of the Church; or as, from its contrast to what Heathenism

exhibited, affording such striking evidence of the power of

Christianity;[5763]5763 or, on the other hand, as so congruous to all

the fundamental thoughts of the Kingdom: the love of the Father in

sending His Son for man, the work of the Son in seeking and saving the

lost at the price of His Own Life, and the new bond which in Christ

bound them all in the fellowship of a common calling, common mission,

and common interests and hopes - love of the brethren was the one

outstanding Farewell-Command of Christ.[5764]5764 And to keep His

commandments was to be His friend. And they were His friends. 'No

longer' did He call them servants, for the servant knew not what his

lord did. He had now given them a new name, and with good reason: 'You

have I called friends, because all things which I heard of My Father I

made known to you.' And yet deeper did He descend, in pointing them to

the example and measure of His love as the standard of theirs towards

one another. And with this teaching He combined what He had said

before, of bearing fruit and of the privilege of fellowship with

Himself. They were His friends; He had proved it by treating them as

such in now opening up before them the whole counsel of God. And that

friendship: 'Not you did choose Me, but I did choose you' - the object

of His 'choosing' [that to which they were 'appointed'] being, that,

as they went forth into the world, they should bear fruit, that their

fruit should be permanent, and that they should possess the full

privilege of that unlimited power to pray of which He had previously

spoken.[5765]5765 All these things were bound up with obedience to His

commands, of which the outstanding one was to 'love one

another.'[5766]5766

But this very choice on His part, and their union of love in Him and

to one another, also implied not only separation from, but repudiation

by, the world.[5767]5767 For this they must be prepared. It had come

to Him, and it would be evidence of their choice to discipleship. The

hatred of the world showed the essential difference and antagonism

between the life-principle of the world and theirs. For evil or for

good, they must expect the same treatment as their Master. Nay, was it

not their privilege to realise, that all this came upon them for His

sake? and should they not also remember, that the ultimate ground of

the world's hatred was ignorance of Him Who had sent Christ?[5768]5768

And yet, though this should banish all thoughts of personal

resentment, their guilt who rejected Him was truly terrible. Speaking

to, and in, Israel, there was no excuse for their sin - the most awful

that could be conceived; since, most truly: 'He that hateth Me, hateth

My Father also.' For, Christ was the Sent of God, and God manifest. It

was a terrible charge this to bring against God's ancient people

Israel. And yet there was, besides the evidence of His Words, that of

His Works.[5769]5769 If they could not apprehend the former, yet, in

regard to the latter, they could see by comparison with the works of

other men that they were unique.[5770]5770 They saw it, but only hated

Him and His Father, ascribing it all to the power and agency of

Beelzebul. And so the ancient prophecy had now been fulfilled: 'They

hated Me gratuitously.'[5771]5771 But all was not yet at an end:

neither His Work through the other Advocate, nor yet theirs in the

world. 'When the Advocate is come, Whom I will send to you from the

Father - the Spirit of the Truth - Who proceedeth from the Father

[goeth forth on His Mission as sent by the Father],[5772]5772 this

Same will bear witness about Me. And ye also bear witness,[5773]5773

because ye are with Me from the beginning.'

3. The last of the parting Discourses of Christ, in the sixteenth

chapter of St. John, was, indeed, interrupted by questions from the

disciples. But these, being germane to the subject, carry it only

forward. In general, the subjects treated in it are: the new relations

arising from the departure of Christ and the coming of the other

Advocate. Thus the last point needed would be supplied - chap. xiv.

giving the comfort and teaching in view of His departure; chap. xv.

describing the personal relations of the disciples towards Christ, one

another, and the world; and chap. xvi. fixing the new relations to be

established.

The chapter appropriately opens by reflecting on the predicted enmity

of the world.[5774]5774 Christ had so clearly foretold it, lest this

should prove a stumbling-block to them. Best, to know distinctly that

they would not only be put out of the Synagogue, but that everyone who

killed them would deem it 'to offer a religious service to God.' So,

no doubt, Saul of Tarsus once felt, and so did many others who, alas!

never became Christians. Indeed, according to Jewish Law, 'a zealot'

might have slain without formal trial those caught in flagrant

rebellion against God - or in what might be regarded as such, and the

Synagogue would have deemed the deed as meritorious as that of

Phinehas.[5775]5775 It was a sorrow, and yet also a comfort, to know

that this spirit of enmity arose from ignorance of the Father and

Christ. Although they had in a general way been prepared for it

before, yet He had not told it all so definitely and connectedly from

the beginning, because He was still there.[5776]5776 But now that He

was going away, it was absolutely necessary to do so. For even the

mention of it had thrown them into such confusion of personal sorrow,

that the main point, whither Christ was going, had not even emerged

into their view.[5777]5777 [5778]5778 Personal feelings had quite

engrossed them, to the forgetfulness of their own higher interests. He

was going to the Father, and this was the condition, as well as the

antecedent of His sending the Paraclete.

But the Advent of the 'Advocate' would mark a new era, as regarded the

Church[5779]5779 and the world. It was their Mission to go forth into

the world and to preach Christ. That other Advocate, as the

Representative of Christ, would go into the world and convict on the

three cardinal points on which their preaching turned. These three

points on which all Missioning proceeds, are - Sin, Righteousness, and

Judgment. And on these would the New Advocate convict the world.

Bearing in mind that the term 'convict' is uniformly used in the

Gospels[5780]5780 for clearly establishing or carrying home

guilt,[5781]5781 we have here three separate facts presented to us. As

the Representative of Christ, the Holy Ghost will carry home to the

world, establish the fact of its guilt in regard to sin - on the

ground that the world believes not in Christ. Again, as the

Representative of Christ, He will carry home to the world the fact of

its guilt in regard to righteousness - on the ground that Christ has

ascended to the Father, and hence is removed from the sight of man.

Lastly, as the Representative of Christ, He will establish the fact of

the world's guilt, because of this: that its Prince, Satan, has

already been judged by Christ - a judgment established in His sitting

at the Right Hand of God, and which will be vindicated at His Second

Coming. Taking, then, the three great facts in the History of the

Christ: His First Coming to salvation, His Resurrection and Ascension,

and His Sitting at the Right Hand of God, of which His Second Coming

to Judgment is the final issue, this Advocate of Christ will in each

case convict the world of guilt; in regard to the first - concerning

sin, because it believes not on Him Whom God has sent; in regard to

the second - concerning righteousness, because Christ is at the

Father's Right Hand; and, in regard to the third - concerning

judgment, because that Prince whom the world still owns has already

been judged by Christ's Session at the Right Hand of God, and by His

Reign, which is to be completed in His Second Coming to Earth.

Such was the cause of Christ which the Holy Spirit as the Advocate

would plead to the world, working conviction as in a hostile guilty

party. Quite other was that cause of Christ which, as His Advocate, He

would plead with the disciples, and quite other in their case the

effect of His advocacy. We have, even on the present occasion, marked

how often the Lord was hindered, as well as grieved, by the

misunderstanding and unbelief of man. Now it was the self-imposed law

of His Mission, the outcome of His Victory in the Temptation in the

Wilderness, that He would not achieve His Mission in the exercise of

Divine Power, but by treading the ordinary path of humanity. This was

the limitation which He set to Himself - one aspect of His

Self-exinanition. But from this His constant sorrow must also have

flowed, in view of the unbelief of even those nearest to Him. It was,

therefore, not only expedient, but even necessary for them, since at

present they could not bear more, that Christ's Presence should be

withdrawn, and His Representative take His place, and open up His

Cause to them. And this was to be His special work to the Church. As

Advocate, not speaking from[5782]5782 Himself, but speaking whatsoever

He shall hear - as it were, according to His heavenly 'brief' - He

would guide them into all truth. And here His first 'declaration'

would be of 'the things that are coming.' A whole new order of things

was before the Apostles - the abolition of the Jewish, the

establishment of the Christian Dispensation, and the relation of the

New to the Old, together with many kindred questions. As Christ's

Representative, and speaking not from Himself, the Holy Spirit would

be with them, not suffer them to go astray into error or wrong, but be

their 'wayleader' into all truth. Further, as the Son glorified the

Father, so would the Spirit glorify the Son, and in analogous manner -

because He shall take of His and 'declare' it unto them. This would be

the second line, as it were, in the 'declarations' of the Advocate,

Representative of Christ. And this work of the Holy Spirit, sent by

the Father, in His declaration about Christ, was explained by the

circumstance of the union and communication between the Father and

Christ.[5783]5783 And so - to sum up, in one brief Farewell, all that

He had said to them - there would be 'a little while' in which they

would not 'behold' Him (o_k_ti qewre_t_ me), and again a little while

and they would 'see' Him (_yesq_ me), though in quite different

manner, as even the wording shows.[5784]5784 [5785]5785

If we had entertained any doubt of the truth of the Lord's previous

words, that in their absorbedness in the present the disciples had not

thought of the 'whither' to which Christ was going, and that it was

needful for them that He should depart and the other Advocate

come,[5786]5786 this conviction would be forced upon us by their

perplexed questioning among themselves as to the meaning of the

twofold 'little while,' and of all that He had said about, and

connected with, His going to the Father. They would fain have asked,

yet dared not. But He knew their thoughts, and answered them. That

first 'little while' comprised those terrible days of His Death and

Entombment, when they would weep and lament, but the world rejoice.

Yet their brief sorrow would be turned into joy. It was like the short

sorrow of childbearing - afterwards no more remembered in the joy that

a human being had been born into the world. Thus would it be when

their present sorrow would be changed into the Resurrection-joy - a

joy which no man could ever afterwards take from them. On that day of

joy would He have them dwell in thought during their present night of

sorrow. That would be, indeed, a day of brightness, in which there

would be no need of their making further inquiry of Him (_m_ o_k

_rwt_sete).[5787]5787 All would then be clear in the new light of the

Resurrection. A day this, when the promise would become true, and

whatsoever they asked the Father (a_t_sjte), He would give it them in

Christ's Name.[5788]5788 Hitherto they had not yet asked in His Name;

let them ask: they would receive,and so their joy be completed. Ah!

that day of brightness. Hitherto He had only been able to speak to

them, as it were, in parables and allegory, but then would He

'declare' to them in all plainness about the Father. And, as He would

be able to speak to them directly and plainly about the Father, so

would they then be able to speak directly to the Father - as the

Epistle to the Hebrews expresses it, come with 'plainness'[5789]5789

or 'directness' to the throne of grace. They would ask directly in the

Name of Christ; and no longer would it be needful, as at present,

first to come to Him that He may 'inquire' of the Father 'about' them

(_rwt_sw per_ _m_n). For, God loved them as lovers of Christ, and as

recognising that He had come forth from God. And so it was - He had

come forth from out the Father[5790]5790 when He came into the world,

and, now that He was leaving it, He was going to the Father.

The disciples imagined that they understood this at least. Christ had

read their thoughts, and there was no need for anyone to put express

questions.[5791]5791 He knew all things, and by this they believed -

it afforded them evidence - that He came forth from[5792]5792 God. But

how little did they know their own hearts! The hour had even come when

they would be scattered, every man to his own home, and leave Him

alone - yet, truly, He would not be alone, because the Father would be

with Him.[5793]5793 Yet, even so, His latest as His first

thought[5794]5794 was of them; and through the night of scattering and

of sorrow did He bid them look to the morning of joy. For, the battle

was not theirs, nor yet the victory doubtful: 'I [emphatically] have

overcome [it is accomplished] the world.'[5795]5795

We now enter most reverently what may be called the innermost

Sanctuary.[5796]5796 For the first time we are allowed to listen to

what was really 'the Lord's Prayer,'[5797]5797 and, as we hear, we

humbly worship. That Prayer was the great preparation for His Agony,

Cross, and Passion; and, also, the outlook on the Crown beyond. In its

three parts[5798]5798 it seems almost to look back on the teaching of

the three previous chapters,[5799]5799 and convert them into

prayer.[5800]5800 We see the great High-Priest first solemnly offering

up Himself, and then consecrating and interceding for His Church and

for her work.

The first part of that Prayer[5801]5801 is the consecration of Himself

by the Great High-Priest. The final hour had come. In praying that the

Father would glorify the Son, He was really not asking anything for

Himself, but that 'the Son' might[5802]5802 'glorify' the Father. For,

the glorifying of the Son - His support, and then His Resurrection,

was really the completion of the work which the Father had given Him

to do, as well as its evidence. It was really in accordance ('even

as') with the power or authority which the Father gave Him over 'all

flesh,'[5803]5803 when He put all things under His Feet as the Messiah

- the object of this Messianic Rule being, 'that the totality' (the

all, p_n) 'that Thou hast given Him, He should give to them eternal

life.' The climax in His Messianic appointment, the object of His Rule

over all flesh, was the Father's gift to Christ of the Church as a

totality and a unity; and in that Church Christ gives to each

individually eternal life. What follows[5804]5804 seems an

intercalated sentence, as shown even by the use of the particle 'and,'

with which the all-important definition of what is 'eternal life' is

introduced, and by the last words in the verse. But although

embodying, so to speak, as regards the form, the record which St. John

had made of Christ's Words, we must remember that, as regards the

substance, we have here Christ's own Prayer for that eternal life to

each of His own people. And what constitutes 'the eternal life?' Not

what we so often think, who confound with the thing its effects or

else its results. It refers not to the future, but to the present. It

is the realisation of what Christ had told them in these words: 'Ye

believe in God, believe also in Me.' It is the pure sunlight on the

soul, resulting in, or reflecting the knowledge of Jehovah; the

Personal, Living, True God, and of Him Whom He did send, Jesus Christ.

These two branches of knowledge must not so much be considered as

co-ordinate, but rather as inseparable. Returning from this

explanation of 'the eternal life' which they who are bathed in the

Light possess even now and here, the Great High-Priest first offered

up to the Father that part of His work which was on earth and which He

had completed. And then, both as the consummation and the sequel of

it, He claimed what was at the end of His Mission: His return to that

fellowship of essential glory, which He possessed together with the

Father before the world was.[5805]5805

The gift of His consecration could not have been laid on more glorious

Altar. Such Cross must have been followed by such Crown.[5806]5806 And

now again His first thought was of them for whose sake He had

consecrated Himself. These He now solemnly presented to the

Father.[5807]5807 He introduced them as those (the individuals) whom

the Father had specially given to him out of the world. As such they

were really the Father's, and given over the Christ - and He now

presented them as having kept the Word of the Father. Now they knew

that all things whatsoever the Father had given the Son were of the

Father. This was the outcome, then, of all His teaching, and the sum

of all their learning - perfect confidence in the Person of Christ, as

in His Life, Teaching, and Work sent not only of God, but of the

Father. Neither less nor yet more did their 'knowledge' represent. All

else that sprang out of it they had yet to learn. But it was enough,

for it implied everything; chiefly these three things - that they

received the words which He gave them as from the Father; that they

knew truly that Christ had come out from the Father; and that they

believed that the Father had sent Him. And, indeed, reception of

Christ's Word, knowledge of His Essential Nature, and faith in His

Mission: such seem the three essential characteristics of those who

are Christ's.

And now He brought them in prayer before the Father.[5808]5808 He was

interceding, not for the 'world' that was His by right of His

Messiahship, but for them whom the Father had specially given Him.

They were the Father's in the special sense of covenant-mercy, and all

that in that sense was the Father's was the Son's, and all that was

the Son's was the Father's. Therefore, although all the world was the

Son's, He prayed not now for it; and although all in earth and heaven

were in the Father's Hand, He sought not now His blessing on them, but

on those whom, while He was in the world, He had shielded and guided.

They were to be left behind in a world of sin, evil, temptation, and

sorrow, and He was going to the Father. And this was His prayer: 'Holy

Father, keep them in Thy Name which Thou hast given Me, that so (in

order that) they may be one (a unity, _n), as We are.' The peculiar

address, 'Holy Father,' shows that the Saviour once more referred to

the keeping in holiness, and what is of equal importance, that 'the

unity' of the Church sought for was to be primarily one of spiritual

character, and not a merely outward combination. Unity in holiness and

of nature, as was that of the Father and Son, such was the great

object sought, although such union would, if properly carried out,

also issue in outward unity. But while moral union rather than outward

unity was in His view, our present 'unhappy divisions,' arising so

often from wilfulness and unreadiness to bear slight differences among

ourselves - each other's burdens - are so entirely contrary not only

to the Christian, but even to the Jewish, spirit, that we can only

trace them to the heathen element in the Church.

While He was 'with them,' He 'kept' them in the Father's Name. Them

whom the Father had given Him, by the effective drawing of His grace

within them, He guarded (_f_laxa) and none from among them was lost,

except the son of perdition - and this, according to prophecy. But ere

He went to the Father, He prayed thus for them, that in this realised

unity of holiness the joy that was His[5809]5809 (t_n car_n t_n _m_n),

might be 'completed' in them.[5810]5810 And there was the more need of

this, since they were left behind with nought but His Word in a world

that hated them, because, as Christ, so they also were not of it

['from' it, _k]. Nor yet did Christ ask with a view to their being

taken out of the world, but with this 'that' [in order that] the

Father should 'keep them [preserve, tjr_s_v] from the Evil

One.'[5811]5811 And this the more emphatically, because, even as He

was not, so were they not 'out of the world,' which lay in the Evil

One. And the preservative which He sought for them was not outward but

inward, the same in kind as while He had been with them,[5812]5812

only coming now directly from the Father. It was sanctification 'in

the truth,'[5813]5813 with this significant addition: 'The word that

is Thine (_ l_gov _ s_v) is truth.'[5814]5814

In its last part this intercessory Prayer of the Great High-Priest

bore on the work of the disciples and its fruits. As the Father had

sent the Son, so did the Son send the disciples into the world, in the

same manner, and on the same Mission. And for their sakes He now

solemnly offered Himself, 'consecrated' or 'sanctified' Himself, that

they might 'in truth'[5815]5815 - truly - be consecrated. And in view

of this their work, to which they were consecrated, did Christ pray

not for them alone, but also for those who, through their word, would

believe in Him, 'in order,' or 'that so,' 'all may be one' - form a

unity. Christ, as sent by the Father, gathered out the original

'unity;' they, as sent by Him, and consecrated by His consecration,

were to gather others, but all were to form one great unity, through

the common spiritual communication. 'As Thou in Me, and I also in

Thee, so that [in order that] they also may be in Us, so that [in

order that] the world may believe that Thou didst send Me.' 'And the

glory that Thou hast given Me' - referring to His Mission in the

world, and His setting apart and authorisation for it - 'I have given

to them, so that [in order that] [in this respect also] they may be

one, even as We are One [a unity]. [5816]5816 I in them, and Thou in

Me, so that they may be perfected into One' - the ideal unity and real

character of the Church, this - 'so that the world may know that Thou

didst send Me, and lovedst them as Thou lovedst Me.'

After this unspeakably sublime consecration of His Church, and

communication to her of His glory as well as of His Work, we cannot

marvel at what follows and concludes 'the Lord's Prayer.'[5817]5817 We

remember the unity of the Church - a unity in Him, and as that between

the Father and the Son - as we listen to this: 'That which Thou hast

given Me, I will that, where I am, they also may be with Me - so that

they may gaze [behold] on the glory that is Mine, which Thou hast

given Me [be sharers in the Messianic glory]: because Thou lovedst Me

before the foundation of the world.'

And we all would fain place ourselves in the shadow of this final

consecration of Himself and of His Church by the Great High-Priest,

which is alike final appeal, claim, and prayer: 'O Righteous Father,

the world knew Thee not, but I know Thee, and these know that Thou

sentest Me. And I made known unto them Thy Name, and will make it

known, so that [in order that] the love wherewith Thou lovedst Me may

be in them, and I in them.' This is the charter of the Church: her

possession and her joy; her faith, her hope also, and love; and in

this she standeth, prayeth, and worketh.

CHAPTER XII.

GETHSEMANE

(St. Matt. xxvi. 30-56; St. Mark xiv. 26-52; St. Luke xxii. 31-53; St.

John xviii. 1-11.)

We turn once more to follow the steps of Christ, now among the last He

trod upon earth. The 'hymn,' with which the Paschal Supper ended, had

been sung. Probably we are to understand this of the second portion of

the Hallel,[5818]5818 sung some time after the third Cup, or else of

Psalm cxxxvi., which, in the present Ritual, stands near the end of

the service. The last Discourses had been spoken, the last Prayer,

that of Consecration, had been offered, and Jesus prepared to go forth

out of the City, to the Mount of Olives. The streets could scarcely be

said to be deserted, for, from many a house shone the festive lamp,

and many a company may still have been gathered; and everywhere was

the bustle of preparation for going up to the Temple, the gates of

which were thrown open at midnight.

Passing out by the gate north of the Temple, we descend into a lonely

part of the valley of black Kidron, at that season swelled into a

winter torrent. Crossing it, we turn somewhat to the left, where the

road leads towards Olivet. Not many steps farther (beyond, and on the

other side of the present Church of the Sepulchre of the Virgin) we

turn aside from the road to the right, and reach what tradition has

since earliest times - and probably correctly - pointed out as

'Gethsemane,' the 'Oil-press.' It was a small property enclosed

(cwr_on), 'a garden' in the Eastern sense, where probably, amidst a

variety of fruit trees and flowering shrubs, was a lowly, quiet

summer-retreat, connected with, or near by, the 'Olive-press.' The

present Gethsemane is only some seventy steps square, and though its

old gnarled olives cannot be those (if such there were) of the time of

Jesus, since all trees in that valley - those also which stretched

their shadows over Jesus - were hewn down in the Roman siege, they may

have sprung from the old roots, or from the odd kernels. But we love

to think of this 'Garden' as the place where Jesus 'often' - not

merely on this occassion, but perhaps on previous visits to Jerusalem

- gathered with His disciples. It was a quiet resting-place, for

retirement, prayer, perhaps sleep, and a trysting-place also where not

only the Twelve, but others also, may have been wont to meet the

Master. And as such it was known to Judas, and thither he led the

armed band, when they found the Upper Chamber no longer occupied by

Jesus and His disciples. Whether it had been intended that He should

spend part of the night there, before returning to the Temple, and

whose that enclosed garden was - the other Eden, in which the Second

Adam, the Lord from heaven, bore the penalty of the first, and in

obeying gained life - we know not, and perhaps ought not to inquire.

It may have belonged to Mark's father. But if otherwise, Jesus had

loving disciples even in Jerusalem, and, we rejoice to think, not only

a home at Bethany, and an Upper Chamber furnished in the City, but a

quiet retreat and trysting-place for His own under the bosom of

Olivet, in the shadow of the garden of 'the Oil-press.'

The sickly light of the moon was falling full on them as they were

crossing Kidron. It was here, we imagine, after they had left the City

behind them, that the Lord addressed Himself first to the disciples

generally. We can scarcely call it either prediction or warning.

Rather, as we think of that last Supper, of Christ passing through the

streets of the City for the last time into that Garden, and especially

of what was now immediately before Him, does what He spake seem

natural, even necessary. To them - yes, to them all - He would that

night be even a stumbling-block. And so had it been foretold of

old,[5819]5819 that the Shepherd would be smitten, and the sheep

scattered. Did this prophecy of His suffering, in its grand outlines,

fill the mind of the Saviour as He went forth on His Passion? Such Old

Testament thoughts were at any rate present with Him, when, not

unconsciously nor of necessity, but as the Lamb of God, He went to the

slaughter. A peculiar significance also attaches to His prediction

that, after He was risen, He would go before them into

Galilee.[5820]5820 For, with their scattering upon His Death, it seems

to us, the Apostolic circle or College, as such, was for a time broken

up. They continued, indeed, to meet together as individual disciples,

but the Apostolic bond was temporarily dissolved. This explains many

things: the absence of Thomas on the first, and his peculiar position

on the second Sunday; the uncertainty of the disciples, as evidenced

by the words of those on the way to Emmaus; as well as the seemingly

strange movements of the Apostles - all which are quite changed when

the Apostolic bond is restored. Similarly, we mark, that only seven of

them seem to have been together by the Lake of Galilee,[5821]5821 and

that only afterwards the Eleven met Him on the mountain to which He

had directed them.[5822]5822 It was here that the the Apostolic circle

or College was once more re-formed, and the Apostolic commission

renewed,[5823]5823 and thence they returned to Jerusalem, once more

sent forth from Galilee, to wait the final events of His Ascension,

and the Coming of the Holy Ghost.

But in that night they understood none of these things. While all were

staggering under the blow of their predicted scattering, the Lord

seems to have turned to Peter individually. What he said, and how He

put it, equally demand our attention: 'Simon, Simon'[5824]5824 - using

His old name when referring to the old man in him - 'Satan has

obtained [out-asked, _x_t_sato] you, for the purpose of sifting like

as wheat. But I have made supplication for thee, that thy faith fail

not.' The words admit us into two mysteries of heaven. This night

seems to have been 'the power of darkness,' when, left of God, Christ

had to meet by himself the whole assault of hell, and to conquer in

His own strength as Man's Substitute and Representative. It is a great

mystery: but quite consistent with itself. We do not, as others, here

see any analogy to the permission given to Satan in the opening

chapter of the Book of Job, always supposing that this embodies a

real, not an allegorical story. But in that night the fierce wind of

hell was allowed to sweep unbroken over the Saviour, and even to

expend its fury upon those that stood behind in His Shelter. Satan had

'out-asked,' obtained it - yet not to destroy, nor to cast down, but

'to sift,' like as wheat[5825]5825 is shaken in a sieve to cast out of

it what is not grain. Hitherto, and no farther, had Satan obtained it.

In that night of Christ's Agony and loneliness, of the utmost conflict

between Christ and Satan, this seems almost a necessary element.

This, then, was the first mystery that had passed. And this sifting

would affect Peter more than the others. Judas, who loved not Jesus at

all, has already fallen; Peter, who loved Him - perhaps not most

intensely, but, if the expression be allowed, most extensely - stood

next to Judas in danger. In truth, though most widely apart in their

direction, the springs of their inner life rose in close proximity.

There was the same readiness to kindle into enthusiasm, the same

desire to have public opinion with him, the same shrinking from the

Cross, the same moral inability or unwillingness to stand alone, in

the one as in the other. Peter had abundant courage to sally out, but

not to stand out. Viewed in its primal elements (not in its

development), Peter's character was, among the disciples, the likest

to that of Judas. If this shows what Judas might have become, it also

explains how Peter was most in danger that night; and, indeed, the

husks of him were cast out of the sieve in his denial of the Christ.

But what distinguished Peter from Judas was his 'faith' of spirit,

soul, and heart - of spirit, when he apprehended the spiritual element

in Christ;[5826]5826 of soul, when he confessed Him as the

Christ;[5827]5827 and of heart, when he could ask Him to sound the

depths of his inner being, to find there real, personal love to

Jesus.[5828]5828

The second mystery of that night was Christ's supplication for Peter.

We dare not say, as the High-Priest - and we know not when and where

it was offered. But the expression is very strong,as of one who has

need of a thing.[5829]5829 And that for which He made such

supplication was, that Peter's faith should not fail. This, and not

that something new might be given him, or the trial removed from

Peter. We mark, how Divine grace presupposes, not supersedes, human

liberty. And this also explains why Jesus had so prayed for Peter, not

for Judas. In the former case there was faith, which only required to

be strengthened against failure - an eventuality which, without the

intercession of Christ, was possible. To these words of His, Christ

added this significant commission: 'And thou, when thou hast turned

again, confirm thy brethren.'[5830]5830 And how fully he did this,

both in the Apostolic circle and in the Church, history has

chronicled. Thus, although such may come in the regular moral order of

things, Satan has not even power to 'sift' without leave of God; and

thus does the Father watch in such terrible sifting over them for whom

Christ has prayed. This is the first fulfilment of Christ's Prayer,

that the Father would 'keep them from the Evil One.'[5831]5831 Not by

any process from without, but by the preservation of their faith. And

thus also may we learn, to our great and unspeakable comfort, that not

every sin - not even conscious and wilful sin - implies the failure of

our faith, very closely though it lead to it; still less, our final

rejection. On the contrary, as the fall of Simon was the outcome of

the natural elements in him, so would it lead to their being brought

to light and removed, thus fitting him the better for confirming his

brethren. And so would light come out of darkness. From our human

standpoint we might call such teaching needful: in the Divine

arrangement it is only the Divine sequent upon the human antecedent.

We can understand the vehement earnestness and sincerity with which

Peter protested against of any failure on his part. We mostly deem

those sins farthest which are nearest to us; else, much of the power

of their temptation would be gone, and temptation changed into

conflict. The things which we least anticipate are our falls. In all

honesty - and not necessarily with self elevation over the others - he

said, that even if all should be offended in Christ, he never could

be, but was ready to go with Him into prison and death. And when, to

enforce the warning, Christ predicted that before the repeated crowing

of the cock[5832]5832 ushered in the morning,[5833]5833 Peter would

thrice deny that he knew Him, Peter not only persisted in his

asseverations, but was joined in them by the rest. Yet - and this

seems the meaning and object of the words of Christ which follow -

they were not aware terribly changed the former relations had become,

and what they would have to suffer in consequence.[5834]5834 When

formerly He had sent forth, both without provision and defence, had

they lacked anything? No! But now no helping hand would be extended to

them; nay, what seemingly they would need even more than anything else

would be 'a sword' - defence against attacks, for at the close of His

history He was reckoned with transgressors.[5835]5835 The Master a

crucified Malefactor - what could His followers expect? But once more

they understood Him in a grossly realistic manner. These Galileans,

after the custom of their countrymen,[5836]5836 had provided

themselves with short swords, which they concealed under their upper

garment. It was natural for men of their disposition, so imperfectly

understanding their Master's teaching, to have taken what might seem

to them only a needful precaution in coming to Jerusalem. At least two

of them - among them Peter - now produced swords.[5837]5837 But this

was not the time of reason with them, and our Lord simply put it

aside. Events would only too soon teach them.

They had now reached the entrance of Gethsemane. It may have been that

it led through the building with the 'oil-press,' and that the eight

Apostles, who were not to come nearer to the 'Bush burning, but not

consumed,' were left there. Or they may have been taken within the

entrance of the Garden, and left there, while, pointing forward with a

gesture of the Hand, He went 'yonder' and prayed[5838]5838 According

to St. Luke, He added the parting warning to pray that they might not

enter into temptation.

Eight did He leave there. The other three - Peter, James and John -

companions before of His glory, both when He raised the daughter of

Jairus[5839]5839 and on the Mount of Transfiguration[5840]5840 - He

took with Him farther. If in that last contest His Human Soul craved

for the presence of those who stood nearest Him and loved Him best, or

if He would have them baptized with His Baptism, and drink of His Cup,

these were the three of all others to be chosen. And now of a sudden

the cold flood broke over Him. Within these few moments He had passed

from the calm of assured victory into the anguish of the contest.

Increasingly, with every step forward, He became 'sorrowful,' full of

sorrow, 'sore amazed,' and 'desolate.'[5841]5841 He told them of the

deep sorrow of His Soul (yuc_) even unto death, and bade them tarry

there to watch with Him. Himself went forward to enter the contest

with prayer. Only the first attitude of the wrestling Saviour saw

they, only the first words in that Hour of Agony did they hear. For,

as in our present state not uncommonly in the deepest emotions of the

soul, and as had been the case on the Mount of Transfiguration,

irresistible sleep crept over their frame. But what, we may reverently

ask, was the cause of this sorrow unto death of the Lord Jesus Christ?

Not fear, either of bodily or mental suffering: but Death. Man's

nature, created of God immortal, shrinks (by the law of its nature)

from the dissolution of the bond that binds body to soul. Yet to

fallen man Death is not by any means fully Death, for he is born with

the taste of it in his soul. Not so Christ. It was the Unfallen Man

dying; it was He, Who had no experience of it, tasting Death, and that

not for Himself but for every man, emptying the cup to its bitter

dregs. It was the Christ undergoing Death by man and for man; the

Incarnate God, the God-Man, submitting Himself vicariously to the

deepest humilition, and paying the utmost penalty: Death - all Death.

No one as He could know what Death was (not dying, which men dread,

but Christ dreaded not); no one could taste its bitterness as He. His

going into Death was His final conflict with Satan for man, and on his

behalf. By submitting to it He took away the power of Death; He

disarmed Death by burying his shaft in His own Heart. And beyond this

lies the deep, unutterable mystery of Christ bearing the penalty due

to our sin, bearing our death, bearing the penalty of the broken Law,

the accumulated guilt of humanity, and the holy wrath of the Righteous

Judge upon them. And in view of this mystery the heaviness of sleep

seems to steal over our apprehension.

Alone, as in His first conflict with the Evil One in the Temptation in

the wilderness, must the Saviour enter on the last contest. With what

agony of soul He took upon Him now and there the sins of the world,

and in taking expiated them, we may learn from this account of what

passed, when, 'with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to

save Him from death,' He 'offered up prayers and

supplications.'[5842]5842 And - we anticipate it already - with these

results: that He was heard; that He learned obedience by the things

which He suffered; that He was made perfect; and that He became: to us

the Author of Eternal Salvation, and before God, a High-Priest after

the order of Melchizedek. Alone - and yet even this being 'parted from

them' (_pesp_sqj),[5843]5843 implied sorrow.[5844]5844 [5845]5845 And

now, 'on His knees,' prostrate on the ground, prostrate on His Face,

began His Agony. His very address bears witness to it. It is the only

time, so far as recorded in the Gospels, when He addressed God with

the personal pronoun: 'My Father.'[5846]5846 [5847]5847 The object of

the prayer was, that, 'if it were possible, the hour might pass away

from Him.'[5848]5848 The subject of the prayer (as recorded by the

three Gospels) was, that the Cup itself might pass away, yet always

with the limitation, that not His Will but the Father's might be done.

The petition of Christ, therefore, was subject not only to the Will of

the Father, but to His own Will that the Father's Will might be

done.[5849]5849 We are here in full view of the deepest mystery of our

faith: the two Natures in One Person. Both Natures spake here, and the

'if it be possible' of St. Matthew and St. Mark is in St. Luke 'if

Thou be willing.' In any case, the 'possibility' is not physical - for

with God all things are possible - but moral: that of inward fitness.

Was there, then, any thought or view of 'a possibility,' that Christ's

work could be accomplished without that hour and Cup? Or did it only

mark the utmost limit of His endurance and submission? We dare not

answer; we only reverently follow what is recorded.

It was in this extreme Agony of Soul almost unto death, that the Angel

appeared (as in the Temptation in the wilderness) to 'strengthen' and

support His Body and Soul. And so the conflict went on, with

increasing earnestness of prayer, all that terrible hour.[5850]5850

For, the appearance of the Angel must have intimated to Him, that the

Cup could not pass away.[5851]5851 And at the close of that hour - as

we infer from the fact that the disciples must still have seen on His

Brow the marks of the Bloody Sweat[5852]5852 - His Sweat, mingled with

Blood,[5853]5853 fell in great drops on the ground. And when the

Saviour with this mark of His Agony on His Brow[5854]5854 returned to

the three, He found that deep sleep held them. While He lay in prayer,

they lay in sleep; and yet where soul-agony leads not to the one, it

often induces the other. His words, primarily addressed to 'Simon,'

roused them, yet not sufficiently to fully carry to their hearts

either the loving reproach, the admonition to 'Watch and pray' in view

of the coming temptation, or the most seasonable warning about the

weakness of the flesh, even where the spirit was willing, ready and

ardent (pr_qumon).

The conflict had been virtually, though not finally, decided, when the

Saviour went back to the three sleeping disciples. He now returned to

complete it, though both the attitude in which He prayed (no longer

prostrate) and the wording of His Prayer - only slightly altered as it

was - indicate how near it was to perfect victory. And once more, on

His return to them, He found that sleep had weighted their eyes, and

they scarce knew what answer to make to Him. Yet a third time He left

them to pray as before. And now He returned victorious. After three

assualts had the Tempter left Him in the wilderness; after the

threefold conflict in the Garden he was vanquished. Christ came forth

triumphant. No longer did He bid His disciples watch. They might, nay

they should, sleep and take rest, ere the near terrible events of His

Betrayal - for, the hour had come when the Son of Man was to be

betrayed into the hands of sinners.

A very brief period of rest this,[5855]5855 soon broken by the call of

Jesus to rise and go to where the other eight had been left, at the

entrance of the Garden - to go forward and meet the band which was

coming under the guidance of the Betrayer. And while He was speaking,

the heavy tramp of many men and the light of lanterns and torches

indicated the approach of Judas and his band. During the hours that

had passed all had been prepared. When, according to arrangement, he

appeared at the High-Priestly Palace, or more probably at that of

Annas, who seems to have had the direction of affairs, the Jewish

leaders first communicated with the Roman garrison. By their own

admission they possessed no longer (for forty years before the

destruction of Jerusalem) the power of pronouncing capital

sentence.[5856]5856 It is difficult to understand how, in view of this

fact (so fully confirmed in the New Testament), it could have been

imagined (as so generally) that the Sanhedrin had, in regular session,

sought formally to pronounce on Jesus what, admittedly, they had not

the power to execute. Nor, indeed, did they, when appealing to Pilate,

plead that they had pronounced sentence of death, but only that they

had a law by which Jesus should die.[5857]5857 It was otherwise as

regarded civil causes, or even minor offences. The Sanhedrin, not

possessing the power of the sword, had, of course, neither soldiery,

nor regularly armed band at command. The 'Temple-guard' under their

officers served merely for purposes of police, and, indeed, were

neither regularly armed nor trained.[5858]5858 Nor would the Romans

have tolerated a regular armed Jewish force in Jerusalem.

We can now understand the progress of events. In the fortress of

Antonia, close to the Temple and connected with it by two

stairs,[5859]5859 lay the Roman garrison. But during the Feast the

Temple itself was guarded by an armed Cohort, consisting of from 400

to 600 men,[5860]5860 so as to prevent or quell any tumult among the

numerous pilgrims.[5861]5861 It would be to the captain of this

'Cohort' that the Chief Priests and leaders of the Pharisees would, in

the first place, apply for an armed guard to effect the arrest of

Jesus, on the ground that it might lead to some popular tumult. This,

without necessarily having to state the charge that was to be brought

against Him, which might have led to other complications. Although St.

John speaks of 'the band' by a word (spe_ra) which always designates a

'Cohort' - in this case 'the Cohort,' the definite article marking it

as that of the Temple - yet there is no reason for believing that the

whole Cohort was sent. Still, its commander would scarcely have sent a

strong detachment out of the Temple, and on what might lead to a riot,

without having first referred to the Procurator, Pontius Pilate. And

if further evidence were required, it would be in the fact that the

band was led not by a Centurion, but by a Chiliarch,[5862]5862 which,

as there were no intermediate grades in the Roman army, must represent

one of the six tribunes attached to each legion. This also explains

not only the apparent preparedness of Pilate to sit in judgment early

next morning, but also how Pilate's wife may have been disposed for

those dreams about Jesus which so affrighted her.

This Roman detachment, armed with swords and 'staves' - with the

latter of which Pilate on other occasions also directed his soldiers

to attack them who raised a tumult[5863]5863 - was accompanied by

servants from the High-Priest's Palace, and other Jewish officers, to

direct the arrest of Jesus. They bore torches and lamps placed on the

top of poles, so as to prevent any possible concealment.[5864]5864

Whether or not this was the 'great multitude' mentioned by St. Matthew

and St. Mark, or the band was swelled by volunteers or curious

onlookers, is a matter of no importance. Having received this band,

Judas proceeded on his errand. As we believe, their first move was to

the house where the Supper had been celebrated. Learning that Jesus

had left it with His disciples, perhaps two or three hours before,

Judas next directed the band to the spot he knew so well: to

Gethsemane. A signal by which to recognise Jesus seemed almost

necessary with so large a band, and where escape or resistance might

be apprehended. It was - terrible to say - none other than a kiss. As

soon as he had so marked Him, the guard were to seize, and lead Him

safely away.

Combining the notices in the four Gospels, we thus picture to

ourselves the succession of events. As the band reached the Garden,

Judas went somewhat in advance of them,[5865]5865 and reached Jesus

just as He had roused the three and was preparing to go and meet His

captors. He saluted Him, 'Hail, Rabbi,' so as to be heard by the rest,

and not only kissed but covered Him with kisses, kissed Him

repeatedly, loudly, effusively (katefiljsen). The Saviour submitted to

the indignity, not stopping, but only saying as He passed on: 'Friend,

that for which thou art here;'[5866]5866 [5867]5867 and then, perhaps

in answer to his questioning gesture: 'Judas, with a kiss deliverest

thou up the Son of Man?'[5868]5868 If Judas had wished, by thus going

in advance of the band and saluting the Master with a kiss, even now

to act the hypocrite and deceive Jesus and the disciples, as if he had

not come with the armed men, perhaps only to warn Him of their

approach, what the Lord said must have reached his inmost being.

Indeed, it was the first mortal shaft in the soul of Judas. The only

time we again see him, till he goes on what ends in his

self-destruction, is as he stands, as it were sheltering himself, with

the armed men.[5869]5869

It is at this point, as we suppose, that the notices from St. John's

Gospel[5870]5870 come in. Leaving the traitor, and ignoring the signal

which he had given them, Jesus advanced to the band, and asked them:

'Whom seek ye?' To the brief spoken, perhaps somewhat contemptuous,

'Jesus the Nazarene,' He replied with infinite calmness and majesty:

'I am He.' The immediate effect of these words was, we shall not say

magical, but Divine. They had no doubt been prepared for quite other:

either compromise, fear, or resistance. But the appearance and majesty

of that calm Christ - heaven in His look and peace on His lips - was

too overpowering in its effects on that untutored heathen soldiery,

who perhaps cherished in their hearts secret misgivings of the work

they had in hand. The foremost of them went backward, and they fell to

the ground. But Christ's hour had come. And once more He now asked

them the same question as before, and, on repeating their former

answer, He said: 'I told you that I am He; if therefore ye seek Me,

let these go their way,' - the Evangelist seeing in this watchful care

over His own the initial fulfilment of the words which the Lord had

previously spoken concerning their safe preservation,[5871]5871 not

only in the sense of their outward preservation, but in that of their

being guarded from such temptations as, in their then state, they

could not have endured.

The words of Christ about those that were with Him seem to have

recalled the leaders of the guard to full consciousness - perhaps

awakened in them fears of a possible rising at the incitement of His

adherents. Accordingly, it is here that we insert the notice of St.

Matthew,[5872]5872 and of St. Mark,[5873]5873 that they laid hands on

Jesus and took Him. Then it was that Peter,[5874]5874 seeing what was

coming, drew the sword which he carried, and putting the question to

Jesus, but without awaiting His answer, struck at Malchus,[5875]5875

the servant[5876]5876 of the High-Priest - perhaps the Jewish leader

of the band - cutting off his ear. But Jesus immediately restrained

all such violence, and rebuked all self-vindication by outward

violence (the taking of the sword that had not been received) - nay,

with it all merely outward zeal, pointing to the fact how easily He

might, as against this 'cohort,' have commanded Angelic

legions.[5877]5877 [5878]5878 He had in wrestling Agony received from

His Father that Cup to drink,[5879]5879 [5880]5880 and the Scriptures

must in that wise be fulfilled. And so saying, He touched the ear of

Malchus, and healed him.[5881]5881

But this faint appearance of resistance was enough for the guard.

Their leaders now bound Jesus.[5882]5882 It was to this last, most

underserved and uncalled-for indignity that Jesus replied by asking

them, why they had come against Him as against a robber - one of those

wild, murderous Sicarii. Had He not been all that week daily in the

Temple, teaching? Why not then seize Him? But this 'hour' of theirs

that had come, and 'the power of darkness' - this also had been

foretold in Scripture!

And as the ranks of the armed men now closed around the bound Christ,

none dared to stay with Him, lest they also should be bound as

resisting authority. So they all forsook Him and fled. But there was

one there who joined not in the flight, but remained, a deeply

interested onlooker. When the soldiers had come to seek Jesus in the

Upper Chamber of his home, Mark, roused from sleep, had hastily cast

about him the loose linen garment or wrapper[5883]5883 that lay by his

bedside, and followed the armed band to see what would come of it. He

now lingered in the rear, and followed as they led away Jesus, never

imagining that they would attempt to lay hold on him, since he had not

been with the disciples nor yet in the Garden. But they,[5884]5884

perhaps the Jewish servants of the High-Priest, had noticed him. They

attempted to lay hold on him, when, disengaging himself from their

grasp, he left his upper garment in their hands, and fled.

So ended the first scene in the terrible drama of that night.

CHAPTER XIII.

THURSDAY NIGHT - BEFORE ANNAS AND CAIAPHAS - PETER AND JESUS.

(St. John xviii. 12-14; St. Matt. xxvi. 57, 58; St. Mark xiv. 53, 54;

St. Luke xxii. 54, 55; St. John xviii. 24, 15-18; St. John xviii.

19-23; St. Matt. xxvi. 69, 70; St. Mark xiv. 66-68; St. Luke xxii. 56,

57; St. John xviii. 17, 18; St. Matt. xxvi. 71, 72; St. Mark xiv. 69,

70; St. Luke xxii. 58; St. John xviii. 25; St. Matt. xxvi. 59-68; St.

Mark xiv. 55-65; St. Luke xxii. 67-71, 63-65; St. Matt. xxvi. 73-75;

St. Mark xiv. 70-72; St. Luke xxii. 59-62; St. John xviii. 26, 27.)

IT was not a long way that they led the bound Christ. Probably through

the same gate by which He had gone forth with His disciples after the

Paschal Supper, up to where, on the slope between the Upper City and

the Tyropoeon, stood the well-known Palace of Annas. There were no

idle saunterers in the streets of Jerusalem at that late hour, and the

tramp of the Roman guard must have been too often heard to startle

sleepers, or to lead to the inquiry why that glare of lamps and

torches, and Who was the Prisoner, guarded on that holy night by both

Roman soldiers and servants of the High-Priest.

If every incident in that night were not of such supreme interest, we

might dismiss the question as almost idle, why they brought Jesus to

the house of Annas, since he was not at that time the actual

High-Priest. That office now devolved on Caiaphas, his son-in-law,

who, as the Evangelist significantly reminds us,[5885]5885 had been

the first to enunciate in plain words what seemed to him the political

necessity for the judicial murder of Christ.[5886]5886 There had been

no pretence on his part of religious motives or zeal for God; he had

cynically put it in a way to override the scruples of those old

Sanhedrists by raising their fears. What was the use of discussing

about forms of Law or about that Man? it must in any case be done;

even the friends of Jesus in the Council, as well as the punctilious

observers of Law, must regard His Death as the less of two evils. He

spoke as the bold, unscrupulous, determined man that he was; Sadducee

in heart rather than by conviction; a worthy son-in-law of Annas.

No figure is better known in contemporary Jewish history than that of

Annas; no person deemed more fortunate or successful, but none also

more generally execrated than the late High-Priest. He had held the

Pontificate for only six or seven years; but it was filled by not

fewer than five of his sons, by his son-in-law Caiaphas, and by a

grandson. And in those days it was, at least for one of Annas'

disposition, much better to have been than to be High-Priest. He

enjoyed all the dignity of the office, and all its influence also,

since he was able to promote to it those most closely connected with

him. And, while they acted publicly, he really directed affairs,

without either the responsibility or the restraints which the office

imposed. His influence with the Romans he owned to the religious views

which he professed. to his open partisanship of the foreigner, and to

his enormous wealth. The Sadducean Annas was an eminently safe

Churchman, not troubled with any special convictions nor with Jewish

fanaticism, a pleasant and a useful man also who was able to furnish

his friends in the Prætorium with large sums of money. We have seen

what immense revenues the family of Annas must have derived from the

Temple-booths, and how nefarious and unpopular was the traffic. The

names of those bold, licentious, unscrupulous, degenerate sons of

Aaron were spoken with whispered curses.[5887]5887 Without referring

to Christ's interference with that Temple-traffic, which, if His

authority had prevailed, would, of course, have been fatal to it, we

can understand how antithetic in every respect a Messiah, and such a

Messiah as Jesus, must have been to Annas. He was as resolutely bent

on His Death as his son-in-law, though with his characteristic cunning

and coolness, not in the hasty, bluff manner of Caiaphas. It was

probably from a desire that Annas might have the conduct of the

business, or from the active, leading part which Annas took in the

matter; perhaps for even more prosaic and practical reasons, such as

that the Palace of Annas was nearer to the place of Jesus' capture,

and that it was desirable to dismiss the Roman soldiery as quickly as

possible - that Christ was first brought to Annas, and not to the

actual High-Priest.

In any case, the arrangement was most congruous, whether as regards

the character of Annas, or the official position of Caiaphas. The

Roman soldiers had evidently orders to bring Jesus to the late

High-Priest. This appears from their proceeding directly to him, and

from this, that apparently they returned to quarters immediately on

delivering up their prisoner.[5888]5888 And we cannot ascribe this to

any official position of Annas in the Sanhedrin, first, because the

text implies that it had not been due to this cause,[5889]5889 and,

secondly, because, as will presently appear, the proceedings against

Christ were not those of the ordinary and regular meetings of the

Sanhedrin.

No account is given of what passed before Annas. Even the fact of

Christ's being first brought to him is only mentioned in the Fourth

Gospel. As the disciples had all forsaken Him and fled, we can

understand that they were in ignorance of what actually passed, till

they had again rallied, at least so far, that Peter and 'another

disciple,' evidently John, 'followed Him into the Palace of the

High-priest' - that is, into the Palace of Caiaphas, not of Annas. For

as, according to the three Synoptic Gospels, the Palace of the

High-Priest Caiaphas was the scene of Peter's denial, the account of

it in the Fourth Gospel[5890]5890 [5891]5891 must refer to the same

locality, and not to the Palace of Annas, while the suggestion that

Annas and Caiaphas occupied the same dwelling is not only very

unlikely in itself, but seems incompatible with the obvious meaning of

the notice,[5892]5892 'Now Annas sent Him bound unto Caiaphas the

High-Priest.' But if Peter's denial, as recorded by St. John, is the

same as that described by the Synoptists, and took place in the house

of Caiaphas, then the account of the examination by the

High-Priest,[5893]5893 which follows the notice about Peter, must also

refer to that by Caiaphas, not Annas.[5894]5894 We thus know

absolutely nothing of what passed in the house of Annas - if, indeed,

anything passed - except that Annas sent Jesus bound to

Caiaphas.[5895]5895

Of what occurred in the Palace of Caiaphas we have two accounts. That

of St. John[5896]5896 seems to refer to a more private interview

between the High-Priest and Christ, at which, apparently, only some

personal attendants of Caiaphas were present, from one of whom the

Apostle may have derived his information.[5897]5897 The second account

is that of the Synoptists, and refers to the examination of Jesus at

dawn of day[5898]5898 by the leading Sanhedrists, who had been hastily

summoned for the purpose.

It sounds almost like presumption to say, that in His first interview

with Caiaphas Jesus bore Himself with the majesty of the Son of God,

Who knew all that was before Him, and passed through it as on the way

to the accomplishment of His Mission. The questions of Caiaphas bore

on two points: the disciples of Jesus, and His teaching - the former

to incriminate Christ's followers, the latter to incriminate the

Master. To the first inquiry it was only natural that He should not

have condescended to return an answer. The reply to the second was

characterised by that 'openness' which He claimed for all that He had

said.[5899]5899 [5900]5900 If there was to be not unprejudiced, but

even fair inquiry, let Caiaphas not try to extort confessions to which

he had no legal right, nor to ensnare Him when the purpose was

evidently murderous. If he really wanted information, there could be

no difficulty in procuring witnesses to speak to His doctrine: all

Jewry knew it. His was no secret doctrine ('in secret I spake

nothing'). He always spoke 'in Synagogue and in the Temple, whither

all the Jews gather together.'[5901]5901 If the inquiry were a fair

one, let the judge act judicially, and ask not Him, but those who had

heard Him.

It must be admitted, that the answer sounds not like that of one

accused, who seeks either to make apology, or even greatly cares to

defend himself. And there was in it that tone of superiority which

even injured human innocence would have a right to assume before a

nefarious judge, who sought to ensnare a victim, not to elicit the

truth. It was this which emboldened one of those servile attendants,

with the brutality of an Eastern in such circumstances, to inflict on

the Lord that terrible blow. Let us hope that it was a heathen, not a

Jew, who so lifted his hand. We are almost thankful that the text

leaves it in doubt, whether it was with the palm of the hand, or the

lesser indignity - with a rod. Humanity itself seems to reel and

stagger under this blow. In pursuance of His Human submission, the

Divine Sufferer, without murmuring or complaining, or without

asserting His Divine Power, only answered in such tone of patient

expostulation as must have convicted the man of his wrong, or at least

have left him speechless. May it have been that these words and the

look of Christ had gone to his heart, and that the now

strangely-silenced malefactor became the confessing narrator of this

scene to the Apostle John?

2. That Apostle was, at any rate, no stranger in the Palace of

Caiaphas. We have already seen that, after the first panic of Christ's

sudden capture and their own flight, two of them at least, Peter and

John, seem speedily to have rallied. Combining the notices of the

Synoptists[5902]5902 with the fuller details, in this respect, of the

Fourth Gospel,[5903]5903 we derive the impression that Peter, so far

true to his word, had been the first to stop in his flight and to

follow 'afar off.' If he reached the Palace of Annas in time, he

certainly did not enter it, bnt probably waited outside during the

brief space which preceded the transference of Jesus to Caiaphas. He

had now been joined by John, and the two followed the melancholy

procession which escorted Jesus to the High-Priest. John seems to have

entered 'the court' along with the guard,[5904]5904 while Peter

remained outside till his fellow-Apostle, who apparently was well

known in the High-Priest's house, had spoken to the maid who kept the

door - the male servants being probably all gathered in the

court[5905]5905 - and so procured his admission.

Remembering that the High-Priest's Palace was built on the slope of

the hill, and that there was an outer court, from which a door led

into the inner court, we can, in some measure, realise the scene. As

previously stated, Peter had followed as far as that inner door, while

John had entered with the guard. When he missed his fellow-disciple,

who was left outside this inner door, John 'went out,' and, having

probably told the waiting-maid that this was a friend of his, procured

his admission. While John now hurried up to be in the Palace, and as

near Christ as he might, Peter advanced into the middle of the court,

where, in the chill spring night, a coal fire had been lighted. The

glow of the charcoal, around which occasionally a blue flame played,

threw a peculiar sheen on the bearded faces of the men as they crowded

around it, and talked of the events of that night, describing, with

Eastern volubility, to those who had not been there what had passed in

the Garden, and exchanging, as is the manner of such serving-men and

officials, opinions and exaggerated denunciations concerning Him Who

had been captured with such unexpected ease, and was now their

master's safe Prisoner. As the red light glowed and flickered, it

threw the long shadows of these men across the inner court, up the

walls towards the gallery that ran round, up there, where the lamps

and lights within, or as they moved along apartments and corridors,

revealed other faces: there, where, in an inner audience-chamber, the

Prisoner was confronted by His enemy, accuser, and judge.

What a contrast it all seemed between the Purification of the Temple

only a few days before, when the same Jesus had overturned the

trafficking tables of the High-Priest, and as He now stood, a bound

Prisoner before him, at the mercy of every menial who might carry

favour by wantonly insulting Him? It was a chill night when Peter,

down 'beneath,'[5906]5906 looked up to the lighted windows. There,

among the serving-men in the court, he was in every sense

'without.'[5907]5907 He approached the group around the fire. He would

hear what they had to say; besides, it was not safe to stand apart; he

might be recognised as one of those who had only escaped capture in

the Garden by hasty flight. And then it was chill - and not only to

the body, the chill had struck to his soul. Was he right in having

come there at all? Commentators have discussed it as involving neglect

of Christ's warning. As if the love of any one who was, and felt, as

Peter, could have credited the possibility of what he had been warned

of; and, if he had credited it, would, in the first moments of

returning flood after the panic of his flight, have remembered that

warning, or with cool calculation acted up to the full measure of it!

To have fled to his home and shut the door behind him, by way of

rendering it impossible to deny that he knew Christ, would not have

been Peter nor any true disciple. Nay, it would itself have been a

worse and more cowardly denial than that of which he was actually

guilty. Peter followed afar off, thinking of nothing else but his

imprisoned Master, and that he would see the end, whatever it might

be. But now it was chill, very chill, to body and soul, and Peter

remembered it all; not, indeed, the warning, but that of which he had

been warned. What good could his confession do? perhaps much possible

harm; and why was he there?

Peter was very restless, and yet he must seem very quiet. He 'sat

down' among the servants,[5908]5908 then he stood up among

them.[5909]5909 It was this restlessness of attempted indifference

which attracted the attention of the maid who had at the first

admitted him. As in the uncertain light she scanned the features of

the mysterious stranger, she boldly charged him,[5910]5910 though

still in a questioning tone, with being one of the disciples of the

Man Who stood incriminated up there before the High-Priest. And in the

chattering of his soul's fever, into which the chill had struck, Peter

vehemently denied all knowledge of Him to Whom the woman referred,

nay, of the very meaning of what she said. He had said too much not to

bring soon another charge upon himself. We need not inquire which of

the slightly varying reports in the Gospels represents the actual

words of the woman or the actual answer of Peter. Perhaps neither;

perhaps all - certainly, she said all this, and, certainly, he

answered all that, though neither of them would confine their words to

the short sentences reported by each of the Evangelists.

What had he to do there? And why should he incriminate himself, or

perhaps Christ, by a needless confession to those who had neither the

moral nor the legal right to exact it? That was all he now remembered

and thought; nothing about any denial of Christ. And so, as they were

still chatting together, perhaps bandying words, Peter withdrew. We

cannot judge how long time had passed, but this we gather, that the

words of the woman had either not made any impression on those around

the fire, or that the bold denial of Peter had satisfied them.

Presently, we find Peter walking away down 'the porch,'[5911]5911

which ran round and opened into 'the outer court.'[5912]5912 He was

not thinking of anything else now than how chilly it felt, and how

right he had been in not being entrapped by that woman. And so he

heeded it not, while his footfall sounded along the marble-paved

porch, that just at this moment 'a cock crew.' But there was no sleep

that night in the High-Priest's Palace. As he walked down the porch

towards the outer court, first one maid met him; and then, as he

returned from the outer court, he once more encountered his old

accuser, the door-portress; and as he crossed the inner court to

mingle again with the group around the fire, where he had formerly

found safety, he was first accosted by one man, and then they all

around the fire turned upon him, and each and all had the same thing

to say, the same charge, that he was also one of the disciples of

Jesus of Nazareth. But Peter's resolve was taken; he was quite sure it

was right; and to each separately, and to all together, he gave the

same denial, more brief now, for he was collected and determined, but

more emphatic - even with an oath.[5913]5913 And once more he silenced

suspicion for a time. Or, perhaps, attention was now otherwise

directed.

3. For, already, hasty footsteps were heard along the porches and

corridors, and the maid who that night opened the gate at the

High-Priest's Palace was busy at her post. They were the leading

Priests, Elders, and Sanhedrists,[5914]5914 who had been hastily

summoned to the High-Priest's Palace, and who were hurrying up just as

the first faint streaks of gray light were lying on the sky. The

private examination by Caiaphas we place (as in the Gospel of St.

John) between the first and second denial of Peter; the first arrival

of Sanhedrists immediately after his second denial. The private

inquiry of Caiaphas had elicited nothing; and, indeed, it was only

preliminary. The leading Sanhedrists must have been warned that the

capture of Jesus would be attempted that night, and to hold themselves

in readiness when summoned to the High-Priest. This is not only quite

in accordance with all the previous and after circumstances in the

narrative, but nothing short of a procedure of such supreme importance

would have warranted the presence for such a purpose of these

religious leaders on that holy Passover-night.

But whatever view be taken, thus much at least is certain, that it was

no formal, regular meeting of the Sanhedrin. We put aside, as à priori

reasoning, such considerations as that protesting voices would have

been raised, not only from among the friends of Jesus, but from others

whom (with all their Jewish hatred of Christ) we cannot but regard as

incapable of such gross violation of justice and law. But all Jewish

order and law would have been grossly infringed in almost every

particular, if this had been a formal meeting of the

Sanhedrin.[5915]5915 We know what their forms were, although many of

them (as so much in Rabbinic accounts) may represent rather the ideal

than the real - what the Rabbis imagined should be, rather than what

was; or else what may date from later times. According to Rabbinic

testimony, there were three tribunals. In towns numbering less than

120 (or, according to one authority, 230[5916]5916) male inhabitants,

there was only the lowest tribunal, that consisting of three

Judges.[5917]5917 Their jurisdiction was limited, and notably did not

extend to capital causes.[5918]5918 The authority of the tribunal of

next instance - that of twenty-three[5919]5919 - was also limited,

although capital causes lay within its competence. The highest

tribunal was that of seventy-one, or the Great Sanhedrin, which met

first in one of the Temple-Chambers, the so-called Lishkath haGazith -

or Chamber of Hewn Stones - and at the time of which we write in 'the

booths of the sons of Annas.'[5920]5920 The Judges of all these Courts

were equally set apart by ordination (Semikhah), originally that of

the laying on of hands. Ordination was conferred by three, of whom one

at least must have been himself ordained, and able to trace up his

ordination through Joshua to Moses.[5921]5921 This, of course, on the

theory that there had been a regular succession of ordained Teachers,

not only up to Ezra, but beyond him to Joshua and Moses. The members

of the tribunals of twenty-three were appointed by the Great

Sanhedrin.[5922]5922 The members of the tribunals of three were

likewise appointed by the Great Sanhedrin, which entrusted to men,

specially accredited and worthy, the duty of travelling through the

towns of Palestine and appointing and ordaining in them the men best

fitted for the office.[5923]5923 The qualifications mentioned for the

office remind us of those which St. Paul indicates as requisite for

the Christian eldership.[5924]5924

Some inferences seem here of importance, as throwing light on early

Apostolic arrangements - believing, as we do, that the outward form of

the Church was in great measure derived from the Synagogue. First, we

notice that there was regular ordination, and, at first at least, by

the laying on of hands. Further, this ordination was not requisite

either for delivering addresses or conducting the liturgy in the

Synagogue, but for authoritative teaching, and especially for judicial

functions, to which would correspond in the Christian Church the power

of the Keys - the administration of discipline and of the Sacraments

as admitting into, and continuing in the fellowship of the Church.

Next, ordination could only be conferred by those who had themselves

been rightly ordained, and who could, therefore, through those

previously ordained, trace their ordination upwards. Again, each of

these 'Colleges of Presbyters' had its Chief or President. Lastly, men

entrusted with supreme (Apostolic) authority were sent to the various

towns 'to appoint elders in every city.'[5925]5925

The appointment to the highest tribunal, or Great Sanhedrin, was made

by that tribunal itself, either by promoting a member of the inferior

tribunals or one from the foremost of the three rows, in which 'the

disciples' or students sat facing the Judges. The latter sat in a

semicircle, under the presidency of the Nasi ('prince') and the

vice-presidency of the Ab-beth-din ('father of the Court of

Law').[5926]5926 At least twenty-three members were required to form a

quorum.[5927]5927 We have such minute details of the whole

arrangements and proceedings of this Court as greatly confirms our

impression of the chiefly ideal character of some of the Rabbinic

notices. Facing the semicircle of Judges, we are told, there were two

shorthand writers, to note down, respectively, the speeches in favour

and against the accused. Each of the students knew, and sat in his own

place. In capital causes the arguments in defence of and afterwards

those incriminating the accused, were stated. If one had spoken in

favour, he might not again speak against the panel. Students might

speak for, not against him. He might be pronounced 'not guilty' on the

same day on which the case was tried; but a sentence of 'guilty' might

only be pronounced on the day following that of the trial. It seems,

however, at least doubtful, whether in case of profanation of the

Divine Name (Chillul haShem), judgment was not immediately

executed.[5928]5928 Lastly, the voting began with the youngest, so

that juniors might not be influenced by the seniors; and a bare

majority was not sufficient for condemnation.

These are only some of the regulations laid down in Rabbinic writings.

It is of greater importance to enquire, how far they were carried out

under the iron rule of Herod and that of the Roman Procurators. Here

we are in great measure left to conjecture. We can well believe that

neither Herod nor the Procurators would wish to abolish the Sanhedrin,

but would leave to them the administration of justice, especially in

all that might in any way be connected with purely religious

questions. Equally we can understand, that both would deprive them of

the power of the sword and of decision on all matters of political or

supreme importance. Herod would reserve to himself the final disposal

in all cases, if he saw fit to interfere, and so would the

Procurators, who especially would not have tolerated any attempt at

jurisdiction over a Roman citizen. In short, the Sanhedrin would be

accorded full jurisdiction in inferior and in religious matters, with

the greatest show, but with the least amount, of real rule or of

supreme authority. Lastly, as both Herod and the Procurators treated

the High-Priest, who was their own creature, as the real head and

representative of the Jews; and as it would be their policy to curtail

the power of the independent and fanatical Rabbis, we can understand

how, in great criminal causes or in important investigations, the

High-Priest would always preside - the presidency of the Nasi being

reserved for legal and ritual questions and discussions. And with this

the notices alike in the New Testament and in Josephus accord.

Even this brief summary about the Sanhedrin would be needless, if it

were a question of applying its rules of procedure to the arraignment

of Jesus. For, alike Jewish and Christian evidence establish the fact,

that Jesus was not formally tried and condemned by the Sanhedrin. It

is admitted on all hands, that forty years before the destruction of

the Temple the Sanhedrin ceased to pronounce capital sentences. This

alone would be sufficient. But, besides, the trial and sentence of

Jesus in the Palace of Caiaphas would (as already stated) have

outraged every principle of Jewish criminal law and procedure. Such

causes could only be tried, and capital sentence pronounced, in the

regular meeting-place of the Sanhedrin,[5929]5929 [5930]5930 not, as

here, in the High-Priest's Palace; no process, least of all such an

one, might be begun in the night, not even in the afternoon,[5931]5931

[5932]5932 although if the discussion had gone on all day, sentence

might be pronounced at night.[5933]5933 Again, no process could take

place on Sabbaths or Feastdays,[5934]5934 or even on the eves of

them,[5935]5935 [5936]5936 although this would not have nullified

proceedings, and it might be argued on the other side, that a process

against one who had seduced the people should preferably by carried

on, and sentence executed, at the great public Feasts,[5937]5937 for

the warning of all. Lastly, in capital causes there was a very

elaborate system of warning and cautioning witnesses,[5938]5938 while

it may safely be affirmed, that at a regular trial Jewish Judges,

however prejudiced, would not have acted as the Sanhedrists and

Caiaphas did on this occasion.

But as we examine it more closely, we perceive that the

Gospel-narratives do not speak of a formal trial and sentence by the

Sanhedrin. Such references as to 'the Sanhedrin' ('council'), or to

'all the Sanhedrin,' must be taken in the wider sense, which will

presently be explained. On the other hand, the four Gospels equally

indicate that the whole proceedings of that night were carried on in

the Palace of Caiaphas, and that during that night no formal sentence

of death was pronounced. St. John, indeed, does not report the

proceedings at all; St. Matthew[5939]5939 only records the question of

Caiaphas and the answer of the Sanhedrists; and even the language of

St. Mark does not convey the idea of a formal sentence.[5940]5940 And

when in the morning, in consequence of a fresh consultation, also in

the Palace of Caiaphas, they led Jesus to the Prætorium, it was not as

a prisoner condemned to death of whom they asked the

execution,[5941]5941 but as one against whom they laid certain

accusations worthy of death,[5942]5942 while, when Pilate bade them

judge Jesus according to Jewish Law, they replied, not: that they had

done so already, but, that they had no competence to try capital

causes.[5943]5943

4. But although Christ was not tried and sentenced in a formal meeting

of the Sanhedrin, there can, alas! be no question that His

Condemnation and Death were the work, if not of the Sanhedrin - yet of

the Sanhedrists, of the whole body of them ('all the council'), in the

sense of expressing what was the judgment and purpose of all the

Supreme Council and Leaders of Israel, with only very few exceptions.

We bear in mind, that the resolution to sacrifice Christ had for some

time been taken. Terrible as the proceedings of that night were, they

even seem a sort of concession - as if the Sanhedrists would fain have

found some legal and moral justification for what they had determined

to do. They first sought 'witness,' or as St. Matthew rightly

designates it, 'false witness' against Christ.[5944]5944 Since this

was throughout a private investigation, this witness could only have

been sought from their own creatures. Hatred, fanaticism, and

unscruplous Eastern exaggeration would readily misrepresent and

distort certain sayings of Christ, or falsely impute others to Him.

But it was altogather too hasty and excited an assemblage, and the

witnesses contradicted themselves so grossly, or their testimony so

notoriously broke down, that for very shame such trumped-up charges

had to be abandoned. And to this result the majestic calm of Christ's

silence must have greatly contributed. On directly false and

contradictory testimony it must be best not to cross-examine at all,

not to interpose, but to leave the false witness to destroy itself.

Abandoning this line of testimony, the Priests next brought forward

probably some of their own order, who on the first Purgation of the

Temple had been present when Jesus, in answer to the challenge for 'a

sign' in evidence of His authority, had given them that mysterious

'sign' of the destruction and upraising of the Temple of His

Body.[5945]5945 [5946]5946 They had quite misunderstood it at the

time, and its reproduction now as the ground of a criminal charge

against Jesus must have been directly due to Caiaphas and Annas. We

remember, that this had been the first time that Jesus had come into

collision, not only with the Temple authorities, but with the avarice

of 'the family of Annas.' We can imagine how the incensed High-Priest

would have challenged the conduct of the Temple-officials, and how, in

reply, he would have been told what they had attempted, and how Jesus

had met them. Perhaps it was the only real inquiry which a man like

Caiaphas would care to institute about what Jesus said. And here, in

its grossly distorted form, and with more than Eastern exaggeration of

partisanship it was actually brought forward as a criminal charge!

Dexterously manipulated, the testimony of these witnesses might lead

up to two charges. It would show that Christ was a dangerous seducer

of the people, Whose claims might have led those who believed them to

lay violent hands on the Temple, while the supposed assertion, that He

would[5947]5947 or was able[5948]5948 to build the Temple again within

three days, might be made to imply Divine or magical

pretensions.[5949]5949 A certain class of writers have ridiculed this

part of the Sanhedrist plot against Jesus. It is, indeed, true, that,

viewed as a Jewish charge, it might have been difficult, if not

impossible, to construe a capital crime out of such charges, although,

to say the least, a strong popular prejudice might thus have been

raised against Jesus - and this, no doubt, was one of the objects

which Caiaphas had in view. But it has been strangely forgotten that

the purpose of the High-Priest was not to formulate a capital charge

in Jewish Law, since the assembled Sanhedrists had no intention so to

try Jesus, but to formulate a charge which would tell before the Roman

Procurator. And here none other could be so effective as that of being

a fanatical seducer of the ignorant populace, who might lead them on

to wild tumultuous acts. Two similar instances, in which the Romans

quenched Jewish fanaticism in the blood of the pretenders and their

deluded followers, will readily recur to the mind.[5950]5950 In any

case, Caiaphas would naturally seek to ground his accusation of Jesus

before Pilate on anything rather than His claims to Messiahship and

the inheritance of David. It would be a cruel irony if a Jewish

High-Priest had to expose the loftiest and holiest hope of Israel to

the mockery of a Pilate; and it might prove a dangerous proceeding,

whether as regarded the Roman Governor or the feelings of the Jewish

people.

But this charge of being a seducer of the people also broke down,

through the disagreement of the two witnesses whom the Mosaic Law

required,[5951]5951 and who, according to Rabbinic ordinance, had to

be separately questioned.[5952]5952 But the divergence of their

testimony does not exactly appear in the differences in the accounts

of St. Matthew and of St. Mark. If it be deemed necessary to harmonise

these two narratives, it would be better to regard both as relating

the testimony of these two witnesses. What St. Mark reported may have

been followed by what St. Matthew records, or vice versâ, the one

being, so to speak, the basis of the other. But all this time Jesus

preserved the same majestic silence as before, nor could the

impatience of Caiaphas, who sprang from his seat to confront, and, if

possible, browbeat his Prisoner, extract from Him any reply.

Only one thing now remained. Jesus knew it well, and so did Caiaphas.

It was to put the question, which Jesus could not refuse to answer,

and which, once answered, must lead either to His acknowledgement or

to His condemnation. In the brief historical summary which St. Luke

furnishes, there is an inversion of the sequence of events, by which

it might seem as if what he records had taken place at the meeting of

the Sanhedrists[5953]5953 on the next morning. But a careful

consideration of what passed there obliges us to regard the report of

St. Luke as referring to the night-meeting described by St. Matthew

and St. Mark. The motive for St. Luke's inversion of the sequence of

events may have been,[5954]5954 that he wished to group in a

continuous narrative Peter's threefold denial, the third of which

occurred after the night-sitting of the Sanhedrin, at which the final

adjuration of Caiaphas elicited the reply which St. Luke records, as

well as the other two Evangelists. Be this as it may, we owe to St.

Luke another trait in the drama of that night. As we suppose, the

simple question was first addressed to Jesus, whether He was the

Messiah? to which He replied by referring to the needlessness of such

an enquiry, since they had predetermined not to credit His claims,

nay, had only a few days before in the Temple refused[5955]5955 to

discuss them.[5956]5956 It was upon this that the High-Priest, in the

most solemn manner, adjured the True One by the Living God, Whose Son

He was, to say it, whether He were the Messiah and Divine - the two

being so joined together, not in Jewish belief, but to express the

claims of Jesus. No doubt or hesitation could here exist. Solemn,

emphatic, calm, majestic, as before had been His silence, was now His

speech. And His assertion of what He was, was conjoined with that of

what God would show Him to be, in His Resurrection and Sitting at the

Right Hand of the Father, and of what they also would see, when He

would come in those clouds of heaven that would break over their city

and polity in the final storm of judgment.

They all heard it - and, as the Law directed when blasphemy was

spoken, the High Priest rent both his outer and inner garment, with a

rent that might never be repaired.[5957]5957 But the object was

attained. Christ would neither explain, modify, nor retract His

claims. They had all heard it; what use was there of witnesses, He had

spoken Giddupha,[5958]5958 'blaspheming.' Then, turning to those

assembled, he put to them the usual question which preceded[5959]5959

the formal sentence of death. As given in the Rabbinical original, it

is:[5960]5960 'What think ye gentlemen? And they answered, if for

life, "For life!" and if for death, "For death."'[5961]5961 But the

formal sentence of death, which, if it had been a regular meeting of

the Sanhedrin, must now have been spoken by the President,[5962]5962

was not pronounced.[5963]5963

There is a curious Jewish conceit, that on the Day of Atonement the

golden band on the High Priest's mitre, with the graven words,

'Holiness unto Jehovah,' atoned for those who had

blasphemed.[5964]5964 It stands out in terrible contrast to the figure

of Caiaphas on that awful night. Or did the unseen mitre on the True

and Eternal High-Priest's Brow, marking the consecration of His

Humiliation to Jehovah, plead for them who in that night were gathered

there, the blind leaders of the blind? Yet amidst so many most solemn

thoughts, some press prominently forward. On that night of terror,

when all the enmity of man and the power of hell were unchained, even

the falsehood of malevolence could not lay any crime to His charge,

nor yet any accusation be brought against him other than the

misrepresentation of His symbolic Words. What testimony to Him this

solitary false and ill-according witness! Again: 'They all condemned

Him to be worthy of death.' Judaism itself would not now re-echo this

sentence of the Sanhedrists. And yet is it not after all true - that

He was either the Christ, the Son of God, or a blasphemer? This Man,

alone so calm and majestic among those impassioned false judges and

false witnesses; majestic in His silence, majestic in His speech;

unmoved by threats to speak, undaunted by threats when He spoke; Who

saw it all - the end from the beginning; the Judge among His judges,

the Witness before His witnesses: which was He - the Christ or a

blaspheming impostor? Let history decide; let the heart and conscience

of mankind give answer. If He had been what israel said, He deserved

the death of the Cross; if He is what the Christmas-bells of the

Church, and the chimes of the Resurrection-morning ring out, then do

we rightly worship Him as the Son of the Living God, the Christ, the

Saviour of men.

5. It was after this meeting of the Sanhedrists had broken up, that,

as we learn from the Gospel of St. Luke, the revolting insults and

injuries were perpetrated on Him by the guards and servants of

Caiaphas. All now rose in combined rebellion against the Perfect Man:

the abject servility of the East, which delighted in insults on One

Whom it could never have vanquished, and had not even dared to attack;

that innate vulgarity, which loves to trample on fallen greatness, and

to deck out in its own manner a triumph where no victory has been won;

the brutality of the worse than animal in man (since in him it is not

under the guidance of Divine instinct), and which, when unchained,

seems to intensify in coarseness and ferocity;[5965]5965 and the

profanity and devilry which are wont to apply the wretched witticisms

of what is misnomered common sense and the blows of tyrannical

usurpation of power to all that is higher and better, to what these

men cannot grasp and dare not look up to, and before the shadows of

which, when cast by superstition, they cower and tremble in abject

fear! And yet these insults, taunts, and blows which fell upon that

lonely Sufferer, not defenceless, but undefending, not vanquished, but

uncontending, not helpless, but majestic in voluntary self-submission

for the highest purpose of love - have not only exhibited the curse of

humanity, but also removed it by letting it descend on Him, the

Perfect Man, the Christ, the Son of God. And ever since has every

noble-hearted sufferer been able on the strangely clouded day to look

up, and follow what, as it touches earth, is the black misty shadow,

to where, illumined by light from behind, it passes into the golden

light - a mantle of darkness as it enwraps us, merging in light up

there where its folds seem held together by the Hand from heaven.

This is our Sufferer - the Christ or a blasphemer; and in that

alternative which of us would not choose the part of the Accused

rather than of His judges? So far as recorded, not a word escaped His

Lips; not a complaint, nor murmur; nor utterance of indignant rebuke,

nor sharp cry of deeply sensitive, pained nature. He was drinking,

slowly, with the consciousness of willing self-surrender, the Cup

which His Father had given Him. And still His Father - and this also

specially in His Messianic relationship to man.

We have seen that, when Caiaphas and the Sanhedrists quitted the

audience-chamber, Jesus was left to the unrestrained licence of the

attendants. Even the Jewish Law had it, that no 'prolonged death'

(Mithah Arikhta) might be inflicted, and that he who was condemned to

death was not to be previously scourged.[5966]5966 At last they were

weary of insult and smiting, and the Sufferer was left alone, perhaps

in the covered gallery, or at one of the windows that overlooked the

court below. About one hour had passed[5967]5967 since Peter's second

denial had, so to speak, been interrupted by the arrival of the

Sanhedrists. Since then the excitement of the mock-trial, with

witnesses coming and going, and, no doubt, in Eastern fashion

repeating what had passed to those gathered in the court around the

fire; then the departure of the Sanhedrists, and again the insults and

blows inflicted on the Sufferer, had diverted attention from Peter.

Now it turned once more upon him; and, in the circumstances, naturally

more intensely than before. The chattering of Peter, whom conscience

and consciousness made nervously garrulous, betrayed him. This one

also was with Jesus the Nazarene; truly, he was of them - for he was

also a Galilean! So spake the bystanders; while, according to St.

John, a fellow-servant and kinsman of that Malchus, whose ear Peter,

in his zeal, had cut off in Gethsemane, asserted that he actually

recognised him. To one and all these declarations Peter returned only

a more vehement denial, accompanying it this time with oaths to God

and imprecations on himself.

The echo of his words had scarcely died out - their diastole had

scarcely returned them with gurgling noise upon his conscience - when

loud and shrill the second cock-crowing was heard. There was that in

its harsh persistence of sound that also wakened his memory. He now

remembered the words of warning prediction which the Lord had spoken.

He looked up; and as he looked, he saw, how up there, just at that

moment; the Lord turned round[5968]5968 and looked upon him - yes, in

all that assembly, upon Peter! His eyes spake His Words; nay, much

more; they searched down to the innermost depths of Peter's heart, and

broke them open. They had pierced through all self-delusion, false

shame, and fear: they had reached the man, the disciple, the lover of

Jesus. Forth they burst, the waters of conviction, of true shame, of

heart-sorrow, of the agonies of self-condemnation; and, bitterly

weeping, he rushed from under those suns that had melted the ice of

death and burnt into his heart - out from that cursed place of

betrayal by Israel, by its High Priest - and even by the

representative Disciple.

Out he rushed into the night. Yet a night lit up by the stars of

promise - chiefest among them this, that the Christ up there - the

conquering Sufferer - had prayed for him. God grant us in the night of

our conscious self-condemnation the same star-light of His Promises,

the same assurance of the intercession of the Christ, that so, as

Luther puts it, the particularness of the account of Peter's denial,

as compared with the briefness of that of Christ's Passion, may carry

to our hearts this lesson: 'The fruit and use of the sufferings of

Christ is this, that in them we have the forgiveness of our sins.'

CHAPTER XIV.

THE MORNING OF GOOD FRIDAY.

(St. Matt. xxvii. 1, 2, 11-14; St. Mark xv. i-5; St. Luke xxiii. 1-5;

St. John xviii. 28-38; St. Luke xxiii. 6-12; St. Matt. xxvii. 3-10;

St. Matt. xxvii. 15-18; St. Mark St. Matt. xxvii. 20-31;; St. Mark xv.

11-20; St. Luke xxiii. 18-25; St. John St. Matt. xxvii. 20-31; St.

Mark xv. 11-20; St. Luke xxiii. 18-25; St. John xix.1-16.)

The pale grey light had passed into that of early morning, when the

Sanhedrists once more assembled in the Palace of Caiaphas.[5969]5969 A

comparison with the terms in which they who had formed the gathering

of the previous night are described will convey the impression, that

the number of those present was now increased, and that they who now

came belonged to the wisest and most influential of the Council. It is

not unreasonable to suppose, that some who would not take part in

deliberations which were virtually a judicial murder might, once the

resolution was taken, feel in Jewish casuitry absolved from guilt in

advising how the informal sentence might best be carried into effect.

It was this, and not the question of Christ's guilt, which formed the

subject of deliberation on that early morning. The result of it was to

'bind' Jesus and hand Him over as a malefactor to Pilate, with the

resolve, if possible, not to frame any definite charge;[5970]5970 but,

if this became necessary, to lay all the emphasis on the purely

political, not the religious aspect of the claims of Jesus.[5971]5971

[5972]5972

To us it may seem strange, that they who, in the lowest view of it,

had committed so grossly unrighteous, and were now coming on so cruel

and bloody a deed, should have been prevented by religious scruples

from entering the 'Prætorium.' And yet the student of Jewish casuistry

will understand it; nay, alas, history and even common observation

furnish only too many parallel instances of unscrupulous scrupulosity

and unrighteous conscientiousness. Alike conscience and religiousness

are only moral tendencies natural to man; whither they tend, must be

decided by considerations outside of them: by enlightenment and

truth.[5973]5973 The 'Prætorium,' to which the Jewish leaders, or at

least those of them who represented the leaders - for neither Annas

nor Caiaphas seems to have been personally present - brought the bound

Christ, was (as always in the provinces) the quarters occupied by the

Roman Governor. In Cæsarea this was the Palace of Herod, and there St.

Paul was afterwards a prisoner. But in Jerusalem there were two such

quarters: the fortress Antonia, and the magnificent Palace of Herod at

the north-western angle of the Upper City. Although it is impossible

to speak with certainty, the balance of probability is entirely in

favour of the view that, when Pilate was in Jerusalem with his wife,

he occupied the truly royal abode of Herod, and not the fortified

barracks of Antonia.[5974]5974 From the slope at the eastern angle,

opposite the Temple-Mount, where the Palace of Caiaphas stood, up the

narrow streets of the Upper City, the melancholy procession wound to

the portals of the grand Palace of Herod. It is recorded, that they

who brought Him would not themselves enter the portals of the Palace,

'that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover.'

Few expressions have given rise to more earnest controversy than this.

On two things at least we can speak with certainty. Entrance into a

heathen house did Levitically render impure for that day - that is,

till the evening.[5975]5975 The fact of such defilement is clearly

attested both in the New Testament[5976]5976 and in the Mishnah,

though its reasons might be various.[5977]5977 A person who had so

become Levitically unclean was technically called Tebhul Yom ('bathed

of the day'). The other point is, that, to have so become 'impure' for

the day, would not have disqualified for eating the Paschal Lamb,

since the meal was partaken of after the evening, and when a new day

had begun. In fact, it is distinctly laid down[5978]5978 that the

'bathed of the day,' that is, he who had been impure for the day and

had bathed in the evening, did partake of the Paschal Supper, and an

instance is related,[5979]5979 when some soldiers who had guarded the

gates of Jerusalem 'immersed,' and ate the Paschal Lamb. It follows

that those Sanhedrists could not have abstained from entering the

Palace of Pilate because by so doing they would have been disqualified

for the Paschal Supper.

The point is of importance, because many writers have interpreted the

expression 'the Passover' as referring to the Paschal Supper, and have

argued that, according to the Fourth Gospel, our Lord did not on the

previous evening partake of the Paschal Lamb, or else that in this

respect the account of the Fourth Gospel does not accord with that of

the Synoptists. But as, for the reason just stated, it is impossible

to refer the expression 'Passover' to the Paschal Supper, we have only

to inquire whether the term is not also applied to other offerings.

And here both the Old Testament[5980]5980 and Jewish

writings[5981]5981 show, that the term Pesach, or 'Passover,' was

applied not only to the Paschal Lamb, but to all the Passover

sacrifices, especailly to what was called the Chagigah, or festive

offering (from Chag, or Chagag, to bring the festive sacrifice usual

at each of the three Great Feasts). According to the express rule

(Chag. i. 3) the Chagigah was brought on the first festive Paschal

Day.[5982]5982 It was offered immediately after the morning-service,

and eaten on that day - probably some time before the evening, when,

as we shall by-and-by see, another ceremony claimed public attention.

We can therefore quite understand that, not on the eve of the Passover

but on the first Paschal day, the Sanhedrists would avoid incurring a

defilement which, lasting till the evening, would not only have

involved them in the inconvenience of Levitical defilement on the

first festive day, but have actually prevented their offering on that

day the Passover, festive sacrifice, or Chagigah. For, we have these

two express rules: that a person could not in Levitical defilement

offer the Chagigah; and that the Chagigah could not be offered for a

person by some one else who took his place (Jer. Chag. 76 a, lines 16

to 14 from bottom). These considerations and canons seem decisive as

regards the views above expressed. There would have been no reason to

fear 'defilement' on the morning of the Paschal Scrafice; but entrance

into the Prætorium on the morning of the first Passover-day would have

rendered it impossible for them to offer the Chagigah, which is also

designated by the term Pesach.

It may have been about seven in the morning, probably even

earlier,[5983]5983 when Pilate went out to those who summoned him to

dispense justice. The question which he addressed to them seems to

have startled and disconcerted them. Their procedure had been private;

it was of the very essence of proceedings at Roman Law that they were

in public. Again, the procedure before the Sanhedrists had been in the

form of a criminal investigation, while it was of the essence of Roman

procedure to enter only on definite accusations.[5984]5984

Accordingly, the first question of Pilate was, what accusation they

brought against Jesus. The question would come upon them the more

unexpectedly, that Pilate must, on the previous evening, have given

his consent to the employment of the Roman guard which effected the

arrest of Jesus. Their answer displays humiliation, ill-humour, and an

atempt at evasion. If He had not been 'a malefactor,' they would not

have 'delivered'[5985]5985 Him up! On this vague charge Pilate, in

whom we mark throughout a strange reluctance to proceed - perhaps from

unwillingness to please the Jews, perhaps from a desire to wound their

feelings on the tenderest point, perhaps because restrained by a

Higher Hand - refused to proceed. He proposed that the Sanhedrists

should try Jesus according to the Jewish Law. This is another

important trait, as apparently implying that Pilate had been

previously aware both of the peculiar claims of Jesus, and that the

action of the Jewish authorities had been determined by

'envy.'[5986]5986 But, under ordinary circumstances, Pilate would not

have wished to hand over a person accused of so grave a charge as that

of setting up Messianic claims to the Jewish authorities, to try the

case as a merely religious question.[5987]5987 Taking this in

connection with the other fact, apparently inconsistent with it, that

on the previous evening the Governor had given a Roman guard for the

arrest of the prisoner, and with this other fact of the dream and

warning of Pilate's wife, a peculiar impression is conveyed to us. We

can understand it all, if, on the previous evening, after the Roman

guard had been granted, Pilate had spoken of it to his wife, whether

because he knew her to be, or because she might be interested in the

matter. Tradition has given her the name Procula;[5988]5988 while an

Apocryphal Gospel describes her as a convert to Judaism;[5989]5989

while the Greek Church has actually placed her in the Catalogue of

Saints. What if the truth lay between these statements, and Procula

had not only been a proselyte, like the wife of a previous Roman

Governor,[5990]5990 but known about Jesus and spoken of Him to Pilate

on that evening? This would best explain his relutance to condemn

Jesus, as well as her dream of Him.

As the Jewish authorities had to decline the Governor's offer to

proceed against Jesus before their own tribunal, on the avowed ground

that they had not power to pronounce capital sentence,[5991]5991 it

now behoved them to formulat a capital charge. This is recorded by St.

Luke alone.[5992]5992 It was, that Jesus had said, He Himself was

Christ a King. It will be noted, that in so saying they falsely

imputed to Jesus their own political expectations concerning the

Messiah. But even this is not all. They prefaced it by this, that He

perverted the nation and forbade to give tirbute to Cæsar. The latter

charge was so grossly unfounded, that we can only regard it as in

their mind a necessary inference from the premiss that He claimed to

be King. And, as telling most against Him, they put this first and

foremost, treating the inference as if it were a fact - a practice

this only too common in controversies, political, religious, or

private.

This charge of the Sanhedrists explains what, according to all the

Evangelists, passed within the Prætorium. We presume that Christ was

within, probably in charge of some guards. The words of the

Sanhedrists brought peculiar thoughts of Pilate. He now called Jesus

and asked Him: 'Thou art the King of the Jews?' There is that mixture

of contempt for all that was Jewish, and of that general cynicism

which could not believe in the existence of anything higher, we mark a

feeling of awe in regard to Christ, even though the feeling may partly

have been of superstition. Out of all that the Sanhedrists had said,

Pilate took only this, that Jesus claimed to be a King. Christ, Who

had not heard the charge of His accusers, now ignored it, in His

desire to stretch out salvation even to a Pilate. Not heeding the

implied irony, He first put it to Pilate, whether the question - be it

criminal charge or inquiry - was his own, or merely the repeitition of

what His Jewish accusers had told Pilate of Him. The Governor quickly

disowned any personal inquiry. How could he raise any such question?

he was not a Jew, and the subject had no general interest. Jesus' own

nation and its leader had handed Him over as a criminal: what had He

done?

The answer of Pilate left nothing else for Him Who, even in that

supreme hour, thought only of others, not of Himself. but to bring

before the Roman directly that truth for which his words had given the

opening. It was not, as Pilate had implied, a Jewish question: it was

one of absolute truth; it concerned all men. The Kingdom of Christ was

not of this world at all, either Jewish or Gentile. Had it been

otherwise, He would have led His followers to a contest for His claims

and aims, and not have become a prisoner of the Jews. One word only in

all this struck Pilate. 'So then a King art Thou!' He was incapable of

apprehending the higher thought and truth. We mark in his words the

same mixture of scoffing and misgiving. Pilate was now in no doubt as

to the nature of the Kingdom; his exclamation and question applied to

the Kingship. That fact Christ would now emphasise in the glory of His

Humiliation. He accepted what Pilate said; He adopted his words. But

He added to them an appeal, or rather an explanation of His claims,

such as a heathen, and a Pilate, could understand. His Kingdom was not

of this world, but of that other world which He had come to reveal,

and to open to all believers. Here was the truth! His Birth or

Incarnation, as the Sent of the Father, and His own voluntary Coming

into this world - for both are referred to in His words[5993]5993 -

had it for their object to testify of the truth concerning that other

world, of which was His Kingdom. This was no Jewish-Messianic Kingdom,

but one that appealed to all men. And all who had moral affinity to

'the truth' would listen to His testimony, and so come to own Him as

'King.'

But these words struck only a hollow void, as they fell on Pilate. It

was not merely cynicism, but utter despair of all that is higher - a

moral suicide - which appears in his question: 'What is truth?' He had

understood Christ, but it was not in him to respond to His appeal. He,

whose heart and life had so little kinship to 'the truth,' could not

sympathise with, though he dimly perceived, the grand aim of Jesus'

Life and Work. But even the question of Pilate seems an admission, an

implied homage to Christ. Assuredly, he would not have so opened his

inner being to one of the priestly accusers of Jesus.

That man was no rebel, no criminal! They who brought Him were moved by

the lowest passions. And so he told them, as he went out, that he

found no fault in Him. Then came from the assembled Sanhedrists a

perfect hailstorm of accusations. As we picture it to ourselves, all

this while the Christ stood near, perhaps behind Pilate, just within

the portals of the Prætorium. And to all this clamour of charges He

made no reply. It was as if the surging of the wild waves broke far

beneath against the base of the rock, which, untouched, reared its

head far aloft to the heavens. But as He stood in the calm silence of

Majesty, Pilate greatly wondered. Did this Man not even fear death;

was He so conscious of innocence, so infinitely superior to those

around and against Him, or had He so far conquered Death, that He

would not condescend to their words? And why then had He spoken to him

of His Kingdom and of that truth?

Fain would he have withdrawn from it all; not that he was moved for

absolute truth or by the personal innocence of the Sufferer, but that

there was that in the Christ which, perhaps for the first time in his

life, had made him reluctant to be unrighteous and unjust. And so,

when, amidst these confused cries, he caught the name Galilee as the

scene of Jesus' labours, he gladly seized on what offered the prospect

of devolving the responsibility on another. Jesus was a Galilean, and

therefore belonged to the jurisdiction of King Herod. To Herod,

therefore, who had come for the Feast to Jerusalem, and there occupied

the old Maccabean Palace, close to that of the High-Priest, Jesus was

now sent.[5994]5994 [5995]5995

To St. Luke alone we owe the account of what passed there, as, indeed,

of so many traits in this last scene of the terrible drama.[5996]5996

The opportunity now offered was welcome to Herod. It was a mark of

reconciliation (or might be viewed as such) between himself and the

Roman, and in a manner flattering to himself, since the first step had

been taken by the Governor, and that, by an almost ostentatious

acknowledgement of the rights of the Tetrarch, on which possibly their

former feud may have turned. Besides, Herod had long wished to see

Jesus, of Whom he had heard so many things.[5997]5997 In that hour

coarse curiosity, a hope of seeing some magic performances, was the

only feeling that moved the Tetrarch. But in vain did he ply Christ

with questions. He was as silent to him as formerly against the

virulent charges of the Sanhedrists. But a Christ Who would or could

do no signs, nor even kindle into the same denunciations as the

Baptist, was, to the coarse realism of Antipas, only a helpless figure

that might be insulted and scoffed at, as did the Tetrarch and his men

of war.[5998]5998 And so Jesus was once more sent back to the

Prætorium.

It is in the interval during which Jesus was before Herod, or probably

soon afterwards, that we place the last weird scene in the life of

Judas, recorded by St. Matthew.[5999]5999 We infer this from the

circumstance, that, on the return of Jesus from Herod, the Sanhedrists

do not seem to have been present, since Pilate had to call them

together,[6000]6000 presumably from the Temple. And here we recall

that the Temple was close to the Maccabean Palace. Lastly, the

impression left on our minds is, that henceforth the principal part

before Pilate was sustained by 'the people,' the Priests and Scribes

rather instigating them than conducting the case against Jesus. It may

therefore well have been, that, when the Sanhedrists went from the

Maccabean Palace into the Temple, as might be expected on that day,

only a part of them returned to the Prætorium on the summons of

Pilate.

But, however that may have been, sufficient had already passed to

convince Judas what the end would be. Indeed, it is difficult to

believe that he could have deceived himself on this point from the

first, however he had failed to realise the fact in its terrible

import till after his deed. The words which Jesus had spoken to him in

the Garden must have burnt into his soul. He was among the soldiery

that fell back at His look. Since then Jesus had been led bound to

Annas, to Caiaphas, to the Prætorium, to Herod. Even if Judas had not

been present at any of these occasions, and we do not suppose that his

conscience had allowed this, all Jerusalem must by that time have been

full of the report, probably in even exaggerated form. One thing he

saw: that Jesus was condemned. Judas did not 'repent' in the

Scriptural sense; but 'a change of mind and feeling' came over

him.[6001]6001 Even had Jesus been an ordinary man, and the relation

to Him of Judas been the ordinary one, we could understand his

feelings, especially considering his ardent temperament. The instant

before and after sin represents the difference of feeling as portrayed

in the history of the Fall of our first parents. With the commission

of sin, all the bewitching, intoxicating influence, which incited to

it, has passed away, and only the naked fact remains. All the glamour

has been dispelled; all the reality abideth. If we knew it, probably

scarcely one out of many criminals but would give all he has, nay,

life itself, if he could recall the deed done, or awake from it to

find it only an evil dream. But it cannot be; and the increasingly

terrible is, that it is done, and done for ever. Yet this is not

'repentance,' or, at least, God alone knows whether it is such; it may

be, and in the case of Judas it only was, 'change of mind and feeling'

towards Jesus. Whether this might have passed into repentance,

whether, if he had cast himself at the Feet of Jesus, as undoubtedly

he might have done, this would have been so, we need not here ask. The

mind and feelings of Judas, as regarded the deed he had done, and as

regarded Jesus, were now quite other; they became increasingly so with

ever-growing intensity. The road, the streets, the people's faces -

all seemed now to bear witness against him and for Jesus. He read it

everywhere; he felt it always; he imagined it, till his whole being

was on flame. What had been; what was; what would be! Heaven and earth

receded from him; there were voices in the air, and pangs in the soul

- and no escape, help, counsel, or hope anywhere.

It was despair, and his a desperate resolve. He must get rid of these

thirty pieces of silver, which, like thirty serpents, coiled round his

soul with terrible hissing of death. Then at least his deed would have

nothing of the selfish in it: only a terrible error, a mistake, to

which he had been incited by these Sanhedrists. Back to them with the

money, and let them have it again! And so forward he pressed amidst

the wondering crowd, which would give way before that haggard face

with the wild eyes, that crime had made old in those few hours, till

he came upon that knot of priests and Sanhedrists, perhaps at that

very moment speaking of it all. A most unwelcome sight and intrusion

on them, this necessary but odious figure in the drama - belonging to

its past, and who should rest in its obscurity. But he would be heard;

nay, his words would cast the burden on them to share it with him, as

with hoarse cry he broke into this: 'I have sinned - in that I have

betrayed - innocent blood!' They turned from him with impatience, in

contempt, as so often the seducer turns from the seduced - and, God

help such, with the same fiendish guilt of hell: 'What is that to us?

See thou to it!' And presently they were again deep in conversation or

consultation. For a moment he stared wildly before him, the very

thirty pieces of silver that had been weighed to him, and which he had

now brought back, and would fain have given them, still clutched in

his hand. For a moment only, and then he wildly rushed forward,

towards the Sanctuary itself,[6002]6002 probably to where the Court of

Israel bounded on that of the Priests, where generally the penitents

stood in waiting, while in the Priests' Court the sacrifice was

offered for them. He bent forward, and with all his might hurled from

him[6003]6003 those thirty pieces of silver, so that each resounded as

it fell on the marble pavement.

Out he rushed from the Temple, out of Jerusalem, 'into

solitude.'[6004]6004 Whither shall it be? Down into the horrible

solitude of the Valley of Hinnom, the 'Tophet' of old, with its

ghastly memories, the Gehenna of the future, with its ghostly

associations. But it was not solitude, for it seemed now peopled with

figures, faces, sounds. Across the Valley, and up the steep sides of

the mountain! We are now on 'the potter's field' of Jeremiah -

somewhat to the west above where the Kidron and Hinnom valleys merge.

It is cold, soft clayey soil, where the footsteps slip, or are held in

clammy bonds. Here jagged rocks rise perpendicularly: perhaps there

was some gnarled, bent, stunted tree.[6005]6005 Up there climbed to

the top of that rock. Now slowly and deliberately he unwound the long

girdle that held his garment. It was the girdle in which he had

carried those thirty pieces of silver. He was now quite calm and

collected. With that girdle he will hang himself[6006]6006 on that

tree close by, and when he has fastened it, he will throw himself off

from that jagged rock.

It is done; but as, unconscious, not yet dead perhaps, he swung

heavily on that branch, under the unwonted burden the girdle gave way,

or perhaps the knot, which his trembling hands had made, unloosed, and

he fell heavily forward among the jagged rocks beneath, and perished

in the manner of which St. Peter reminded his fellow-disciples in the

days before Pentecost.[6007]6007 [6008]6008 But in the Temple the

priests knew not what to do with these thirty pieces of money. Thier

unscrupulous scrupulosity came again upon them. It was not lawful to

take into the Temple-treasury, for the purchase of sacred things,

money that had been unlawfully gained. In such cases the Jewish Law

provided that the money was to be restored to the donor, and, if he

insisted on giving it, that he should be induced to spend it for

something for the public weal. This explains the apparent discrepancy

between the accounts in the Book of Acts and by St. Matthew. By a

fiction of law the money was still considered to be Judas', and to

have been applied by him[6009]6009 in the purchase of the well-known

'potter's field,' for the charitable purpose of burying in it

strangers.[6010]6010 But from henceforth the old name of 'potter's

field,' became popularly changed into that of 'field of blood' (Haqal

Dema). And yet it was the act of Israel through its leaders: 'they

took the thirty pieces of silver - the price of him that was valued,

whom they of the children of Israel did value, and gave them for the

potter's field!' It was all theirs, though they would have fain made

it all Judas': the valuing, the selling, and the purchasing. And 'the

potter's field' - the very spot on which Jeremiah had been Divinely

directed to prophesy against Jerusalem and against Israel:[6011]6011

how was it now all fulfilled in the light of the completed sin and

apostasy of the people, as prophetically described by Zechariah! This

Tophet of Jeremiah, now that they had valued and sold at thirty shekel

Israel's Messiah-Shepherd - truly a Tophet, and become a field of

blood! Surely, not an accidental coincidence this, that it should be

the place of Jeremy's announcement of judgment: not accidental, but

veritably a fulfilment of his prophecy! And so St. Matthew, targuming

this prophecy in form[6012]6012 as in its spirit, and in true Jewish

manner stringing to it the prophectic description furnished by

Zechariah, sets the event before us as the fulfilment of Jeremy's

prophecy.[6013]6013

We are once more outside the Prætorium, to which Pilate had summoned

from the Temple Sanhedrists and people. The crowd was momentarily

increasing from the town.[6014]6014 It was not only to see what was

about to happen, but to witness another spectacle, that of the release

of a prisoner. For it seems to have been the custom, that at the

Passover[6015]6015 the Roman Governor released to the Jewish populace

some notorious prisoner who lay condemned to death. A very significant

custom of release this, for which they now began to clamour. It may

have been, that to this also they were incited by the Sanhedrist who

mingled among them. For if the stream of popular sympathy might be

diverted to Bar-Abbas, the doom of Jesus would be the more securely

fixed. On the present occasion it might be the more easy to influence

the people, since Bar-Abbas belonged to that class, not uncommon at

the time, which, under the colourable pretence of political

aspirations, committed robbery and other crimes. But these movements

had deeply struck root in popular sympathy. A strange name and figure,

Bar-Abbas. That could scarcely have been his real name. It means 'Son

of the Father.'[6016]6016 Was he a political Anti-Christ? And why, if

there had not been some conjunction between them, should Pilate have

proposed the alternative of Jesus or Bar-Abbas, and not rather that of

one of the two malefactors who were actually crucified with Jesus?

But when the Governor, hoping to enlist some popular sympathy, put

this alternative to them - nay, urged it, on the ground that neither

he nor yet Herod had found any crime in Him, and would even have

appeased their thirst for vengeance by offering to submit Jesus to the

cruel punishment of scourging, it was in vain. It was now that Pilate

sat down on 'the judgment seat.' But ere he could proceed, came that

message from his wife about her dream, and the warning entreaty to

have nothing to do 'with that righteous man.' An omen such as a dream,

and an appeal connected with it, especially in the circumstances of

that trial, would powerfully impress a Roman. And for a few moments it

seemed as if the appeal to popular feeling on behalf of Jesus might

have been successful.[6017]6017 But once more the Sanhedrists

prevailed. Apparently, all who had been followers of Jesus had been

scattered. None of them seem to have been there; and if one or another

feeble voice might have been raised for Him, it was hushed in fear of

the Sanhedrists. It was Bar-Abbas for whom, incited by the priesthood,

the populace now clamoured with increasing vehemence. To the question

- half bitter, half mocking - what they wished him to do with Him Whom

their own leaders had in their accusation called 'King of the Jews,'

surged back, louder and louder, the terrible cry: 'Crucify him!' That

such a cry should have been raised, and raised by Jews, and before the

Roman, and against Jesus, are in themselves almost inconceivable

facts, to which the history of these eighteen centuries has made

terrible echo. In vain Pilate expostulated, reasoned, appealed.

Popular frenzy only grew as it was opposed.

All reasoning having failed, Pilate had recourse to one more

expedient, which, under ordinary circumstances, would have been

effective.[6018]6018 When a Judge, after having declared the innocence

of the accused, actually rises from the judgment-seat, and by a

symbolic act pronounces the execution of the accused a judicial

murder, from all participation in which he wishes solemnly to clear

himself, surely no jury would persist in demanding sentence of death.

But in the present instance there was even more. Although we find

allusions to some such custom among the heathen,[6019]6019 that which

here took place was an essentially Jewish rite, which must have

appealed the more forcibly to the Jews that it was done by Pilate.

And, not only the rite, but the very words were Jewish.[6020]6020 They

recall not merely the rite prescribed in Deut. xxi. 6, &c., to mark

the freedom from guilt of the elders of a city where untracked murder

had been committed, but the very words of such Old Testament

expressions as in 2 Sam. iii. 28, and Ps. xxvi. 6, lxxiii.

13,[6021]6021 and, in later times, in Sus. ver. 46. The Mishnah bears

witness that this rite was continued.[6022]6022 As administering

justice in Israel, Pilate must have been aware of this rite.[6023]6023

It does not affect the question, whether or not a judge could,

especially in the circumstances recorded, free himself from guilt.

Certainly, he could not; but such conduct on the part of a Pilate

appears so utterly unusual, as, indeed, his whole bearing towards

Christ, that we can only account for it by the deep impression which

Jesus had made upon him. All the more terrible would be the guilt of

Jewish resistance. There is something overawing in Pilate's, 'See ye

to it' - a reply to the Sanhedrists' 'See thou to it,' to Judas, and

in the same words. It almost seems, as if the scene of mutual

imputation of guilt in the Garden of Eden were being reenacted. The

Mishnah tells us, that, after the solemn washing of hands of the

elders and their disclaimer of guilt, priest responded with this

prayer: 'Forgive it to Thy people Israel, whom Thou hast redeemed, O

Lord, and lay not innocent blood upon Thy people Israel!' But here, in

answer to Pilate's words, came back that deep, hoarse cry: 'His Blood

be upon us,' and - God help us! - 'on our children!' Some thirty years

later, and on that very spot, was judgment pronounced against some of

the best in Jerusalem; and among the 3,600 victims of the Governor's

fury, of whom not a few were scourged and crucified right over against

the Prætorium, were many of the noblest of the citizens of

Jerusalem.[6024]6024 A few years more, and hundreds of crosses bore

Jewish mangled bodies within sight of Jerusalem. And still have these

wanderers seemed to bear, from century to century, and from land to

land, that burden of blood; and still does it seem to weigh 'on us and

our children.'

The Evangelists have passed as rapidly as possible over the last

scenes of indignity and horror, and we are too thankful to follow

their example. Bar-Abbas was at once released. Jesus was handed over

to the soldiery to be scourged and crucified, although final and

formal judgment had not yet been pronounced.[6025]6025 Indeed, Pilate

seems to have hoped that the horrors of the scourging might still move

the people to desist from the ferocious cry for the Cross.[6026]6026

For the same reason we may also hope, that the scourging was not

inflicted with the same ferocity as in the case of Christian martyrs,

when, with the object of eliciting the incrimination of others, or

else recantation, the scourge of leather thongs was loaded with lead,

or armed with spikes and bones, which lacerated back, and chest, and

face, till the victim sometimes fell down before the judge a bleeding

mass of torn flesh. But, however modified, and without repeating the

harrowing realism of a Cicero, scourging was the terrible introduction

to crucifixion - 'the intermediate death.' Stripped of His clothes,

His hands tied and back bent, the Victim would be bound to a column or

stake, in front of the Prætorium. The scourging ended, the soldiery

would hastily cast upon Him His upper garments, and lead Him back into

the Prætorium. Here they called the whole cohort together, and the

silent, faint Sufferer became the object of their ribald jesting. From

His bleeding Body they tore the clothes, and in mockery arrayed Him in

scarlet or purple.[6027]6027 For crown they wound together thorns, and

for sceptre they placed in His Hand a reed. Then alternately, in mock

proclamation they hailed Him King, or worshipped Him as God, and smote

Him or heaped on Him other indignities.[6028]6028

Such a spectacle might well have disarmed enmity, and for ever allayed

worldly fears. And so Pilate had hoped, when, at his bidding, Jesus

came forth from the Prætorium, arrayed as a mock-king, and the

Governor presented Him to the populace in words which the Church has

ever since treasured: 'Behold the Man!' But, so far from appeasing,

the sight only incited to fury the 'chief priests' and their

subordinates. This Man before them was the occasion, that on this

Paschal Day a heathen dared in Jerusalem itself insult their deepest

feeling, mock their most cherished Messianic hopes! 'Crucify!'

'Crucify!' resounded from all sides. Once more Pilate appealed to

them, when, unwittingly and unwillingly, it elicited this from the

people, that Jesus had claimed to be the Son of God.

If nothing else, what light it casts on the mode in which Jesus had

borne Himself amidst those tortures and insults, that this statement

of the Jews filled Pilate with fear, and led him to seek again

converse with Jesus within the Prætorium. The impression which had

been made at the first, and been deepened all along, had now passed

into the terror of superstition. His first question to Jesus was,

whence He was? And when, as was most fitting - since he could not have

understood it - Jesus returned no answer, the feelings of the Romans

became only the more intense. Would he not speak; did He not know that

he had absolute power 'to release or to crucify' Him?[6029]6029 Nay,

not absolute power - all power came from above; but the guilt in the

abuse of power was far greater on the part of apostate Israel and its

leaders, who knew whence power came, and to Whom they were responsible

for its exercise.

So spake not an impostor; so spake not an ordinary man - after such

sufferings and in such circumstances - to one who, whencesoever

derived, had the power of life or death over Him. And Pilate felt it -

the more keenly, for his cynicism and disbelief of all that was

higher. And the more earnestly did he now seek to release Him. But,

proportionately, the louder and fiercer was the cry of the Jews for

His Blood, till they threatened to implicate in the charge of

rebellion against Cæsar the Governor himself, if he persisted in

unwonted mercy.

Such danger a Pilate would never encounter. He sat down once more in

the judgment-seat, outside the Prætorium, in the place called

'Pavement,' and, from its outlook over the City, 'Gabbatha,'[6030]6030

'the rounded height.' So solemn is the transaction that the Evangelist

pauses to note once more the day - nay, the very hour, when the

process had commenced. It had been the Friday in

Passover-week,[6031]6031 and between six and seven of the

morning.[6032]6032 And at the close Pilate once more in mockery

presented to them Jesus: 'Behold your King!'[6033]6033 Once more they

called for His Crucifixion - and, when again challenged, the chief

priests burst into the cry, which preceded Pilate's final sentence, to

be presently executed: 'We have no king but Cæsar!'

With this cry Judaism was, in the person of its representatives,

guilty of denial of God, of blasphemy, of apostasy. It committed

suicide; and, ever since, has its dead body been carried in show from

land to land, and from century to century: to be dead, and to remain

dead, till He come a second time, Who is the Resurrection and the

Life!

CHAPTER XV.

'CRUCIFIED, DEAD, AND BURIED.'

(St. Matt. xxvii. 31-43: St. Mark xv. 20-32(a); St. Luke xxiii. 26-38;

St. John xix. 16-24; St. Matt. xxviii. 44; St. Mark xv. 32(b); St.

Luke xxiii. 39-43; St. John xix. 25-27; St. Matt. xxvii. 45-56; St.

Mark xv. 33-41; St. Luke xxiii. 44-49; St. John xix. 28-30; St. John

xix. 31-37; St. Matt. xxvii. 57-61; St. Mark xv. 42-47; St. Luke

xxiii. 50-56; St. John xix. 38-42; St. Matt. xxvii. 62-66.)

It matters little as regards their guilt, whether, pressing the

language of St. John,[6034]6034 we are to understand that Pilate

delivered Jesus to the Jews to be crucified, or, as we rather infer,

to his own soldiers. This was the common practice, and it accords both

with the Governor's former taunt to the Jews,[6035]6035 and with the

after-notice of the Synoptists. They, to whom He was 'delivered,' 'led

Him away to be crucified:' and they who so led Him forth 'compelled'

the Cyrenian Simon to bear the Cross. We can scarcely imagine, that

the Jews, still less the Sanhedrists, would have done this. But

whether formally or not, the terrible crime of slaying, with wicked

hands, their Messiah-King rests, alas, on Israel.

Once more was He unrobed and robed. The purple robe was torn from His

Wounded Body, the crown of thorns from His Bleeding Brow. Arrayed

again in His own, now blood-stained, garments, He was led forth to

execution. Only about two hours and a half had passed[6036]6036 since

the time that He had first stood before Pilate (about half-past

six),[6037]6037 when the melancholy procession reached Golgotha (at

nine o'clock a.m.). In Rome an interval, ordinarily of two days,

intervened between a sentence and its execution; but the rule does not

seem to have applied to the provinces,[6038]6038 if, indeed, in this

case the formal rules of Roman procedure were at all observed.

The terrible preparations were soon made: the hammer, the nails, the

Cross, the very food for the soldiers who were to watch under each

Cross.[6039]6039 Four soldiers would be detailed for each Cross, the

whole being under the command of a centurion. As always, the Cross was

borne to the execution by Him Who was to suffer on it - perhaps His

Arms bound to it with cords. But there is happily no evidence -

rather, every indication to the contrary - that, according to ancient

custom, the neck of the Sufferer was fastened within the patibulum,

two horizontal pieces of wood, fastened at the end, to which the hands

were bound. Ordinarily, the procession was headed by the

centurion,[6040]6040 or rather, preceded by one who proclaimed the

nature of the crime,[6041]6041 and carried a white, wooden board, on

which it was written. Commonly, also, it took the longest road to the

place of execution, and through the most crowded streets, so as to

attract most public attention. But we would suggest, that alike this

long circuit and the proclamation of the herald were, in the present

instance, dispensed with. They are not hinted at in the text, and seem

incongruous to the festive season, and the other circumstances of the

history.

Discarding all later legendary embellishments,[6042]6042 as only

disturbing, we shall try to realise the scene as described in the

Gospels. Under the leadership of the centurion, whether or not

attended by one who bore the board with the inscription, or only

surrounded by the four soldiers, of whom one might carry this tablet,

Jesus came forth bearing His Cross. He was followed by two malefactors

- 'robbers' - probably of the class then so numerous, that covered its

crimes by pretensions of political motives. These two, also, would

bear each his cross, and probably be attended each by four soldiers.

Crucifixion was not a Jewish mode of punishment, although the Maccabee

King Jannæus had so far forgotten the claims of both humanity and

religion as on one occasion to crucify not less than 800 persons in

Jerusalem itself.[6043]6043 But even Herod, with all cruelty, did not

resort to this mode of execution. Nor was it employed by the Romans

till after the time of Cæsar, when, with the fast increasing cruelty

of punishments, it became fearfully common in the provinces.

Especially does it seem to characterise the domination of Rome in

Judæa under every Governor. During the last siege of Jerusalem

hundreds of crosses daily arose, till there seemed not sufficient room

nor wood for them, and the soldiery diversified their horrible

amusement by new modes of crucifixion. So did the Jewish appeal to

Rome for the Crucifixion of Israel's King come back in hundredfold

echoes. But, better than such retribution, the Cross of the God-Man

hath put an end to the punishment of the cross, and instead, made the

Cross the symbol of humanity, civilisation, progress, peace, and love.

As mostly all abominations of the ancient world, whether in religion

or life, crucifixion was of Phoenician origin, although Rome adopted,

and improved on it. The modes of execution among the Jews were:

strangulation, beheading, burning, and stoning. In all ordinary

circumstances the Rabbis were most reluctant to pronounce sentence of

death. This appears even from the injunction that the Judges were to

fast on the day of such a sentence.[6044]6044 Indeed, two of the

leading Rabbis record it, that no such sentence would ever have been

pronounced in a Sanhedrin of which they had been members. The

indignity of hanging - and this only after the criminal had been

otherwise executed - was reserved for the crimes of idolatry and

blasphemy.[6045]6045 The place where criminals were stoned (Beth

haSeqilah) was on an elevation about eleven feet high, from whence the

criminal was thrown down by the first witness. If he had not died by

the fall, the second witness would throw a large stone on his heart as

he lay. If not yet lifeless, the whole people would stone

him.[6046]6046 At a distance of six feet from the place of execution

the criminal was undressed, only the covering absolutely necessary for

decency being left.[6047]6047 [6048]6048 In the case of Jesus we have

reason to think that, while the mode of punishment to which He was

subjected was un-Jewish, every concession would be made to Jewish

custom, and hence we thankfully believe that on the Cross He was

spared the indignity of exposure. Such would have been truly

un-Jewish.[6049]6049

Three kinds of Cross were in use: the so-called St. Andrew's Cross (x,

the Crux decussata), the Cross in the form of a T (Crux Commissa), and

the ordinary Latin Cross (+, Crux immissa). We believe that Jesus bore

the last of these. This would also most readily admit of affixing the

board with the threefold inscription, which we know His Cross bore.

Besides, the universal testimony of those who lived nearest the time

(Justin Martyr, Irenæus, and others), and who, alas! had only too much

occasion to learn what crucifixion meant, is in favour of this view.

This Cross, as St. John expressly states, Jesus Himself bore at the

outset. And so the procession moved on towards Golgotha. Not only the

location, but even the name of that which appeals so strongly to every

Christian heart, is matter of controversy. The name cannot have been

derived from the skulls which lay about, since such exposure would

have been unlawful, and hence must have been due to the skull-like

shape and appearance of the place. Accordingly, the name is commonly

explained as the Greek form of the Aramæan Gulgalta, or the Hebrew

Gulgoleth, which means a skull.

Such a description would fully correspond, not only to the

requirements of the narrative, but to the appearance of the place

which, so far as we can judge, represents Golgotha. We cannot here

explain the various reasons for which the traditional site must be

abandoned. Certain it is, that Golgotha was 'outside the

gate,'[6050]6050 and 'near the City.'[6051]6051 In all likelihood it

was the usual place of execution. Lastly, we know that it was situated

near gardens, where there were tombs, and close to the highway. The

three last conditions point to the north of Jerusalem. It must be

remembered that the third wall, which afterwards surrounded Jerusalem,

was not built till several years after the Crucifixion. The new suburb

of Bezetha extended at that time outside the second wall. Here the

great highway passed northwards; close by, were villas and gardens;

and here also rockhewn sepulchres have been discovered, which date

from that period. But this is not all. The present Damascus Gate in

the north of the city seems, in most ancient tradition, to have borne

the name of St. Stephen's Gate, because the Proto-Martyr was believed

to have passed through it to his stoning. Close by, then, must have

been the place of execution. And at least one Jewish tradition fixes

upon this very spot, close by what is known as the Grotto of Jeremiah,

as the ancient 'place of stoning' (Beth haSeqilah). And the

description of the locality answers all requirements. It is a weird,

dreary place, two or three minutes aside from the high road, with a

high, rounded, skull-like rocky plateau, and a sudden depression or

hollow beneath, as if the jaws of the skull had opened. Whether or not

the 'tomb of the Herodian period in the rocky knoll to the west of

Jeremiah's Grotto' was the most sacred spot upon earth - the

'Sepulchre in the Garden,' we dare not positively assert, though every

probability attaches to it.[6052]6052

Thither, then, did that melancholy procession wind, between eight and

nine o'clock on that Friday in Passover week. From the ancient Palace

of Herod it descended, and probably passed through the gate in the

first wall, and so into the busy quarter of Acra. As it proceeded, the

numbers who followed from the Temple, from the dense business-quarter

through which it moved, increased. Shops, bazaars, and markets were,

indeed, closed on the holy feast-day. But quite a crowd of people

would come out to line the streets and to follow; and, especially,

women, leaving their festive preparations, raised loud laments, not in

spiritual recognition of Christ's claims, but in pity and

sympathy.[6053]6053 [6054]6054 And who could have looked unmoved on

such a spectacle, unless fanatical hatred had burnt out of his bosom

all that was human? Since the Paschal Supper Jesus had not tasted

either food or drink. After the deep emotion of that Feast, with all

of holiest institution which it included; after the anticipated

betrayal of Judas, and after the farewell to His disciples, He had

passed into Gethsemane. There for hours, alone - since His nearest

disciples could not watch with Him even one hour - the deep waters had

rolled up to His soul. He had drunk of them, immersed, almost perished

in them. There had he agonised in mortal conflict, till the great

drops of blood forced themselves on His Brow. There had He been

delivered up, while they all had fled. To Annas, to Caiaphas, to

Pilate, to Herod, and again to Pilate; from indignity to indignity,

from torture to torture, had He been hurried all that livelong night,

all that morning. All throughout He had borne Himself with a Divine

Majesty, which had awakened alike the deeper feelings of Pilate and

the infuriated hatred of the Jews. But if His Divinity gave its true

meaning to His Humanity, that Humanity gave its true meaning to His

voluntary Sacrifice. So, far, then, from seeking to hide its

manifestations, the Evangelists, not indeed needlessly but

unhesitatingly, put them forward.[6055]6055 Unrefreshed by food or

sleep, after the terrible events of that night and morning, while His

pallid Face bore the blood-marks from the crown of thorns, His mangled

Body was unable to bear the weight of the Cross. No wonder the pity of

the women of Jerusalem was stirred. But ours is not pity, it is

worship at the sight. For, underlying His Human Weakness was the

Divine Strength which led Him to this voluntary self-surrender and

self-exinanition. It was the Divine strength of His pity and love

which issued in His Human weakness.

Up to that last Gate which led from the 'Suburb' towards the place of

execution did Jesus bear His Cross. Then, as we infer, His strength

gave way under it. A man was coming from the opposite direction, one

from that large colony of Jews which, as we know, had settled in

Cyrene.[6056]6056 He would be specially noticed; for, few would at

that hour, on the festive day, come 'out of the country,'[6057]6057

although such was not contrary to the Law. So much has been made of

this, that it ought to be distinctly known that travelling, which was

forbidden on Sabbaths, was not prohibited on feast-days.[6058]6058

Besides, the place whence he came - perhaps his home - might have been

within the ecclesiastical boundary of Jerusalem. At any rate, he seems

to have been well known, at least afterwards, in the Church - and his

sons Alexander and Rufus even better than he.[6059]6059 Thus much only

can we say with certainty; to identify them with persons of the same

name mentioned in other parts of the New Testament can only be matter

of speculation.[6060]6060 But we can scarcely repress the thought that

Simon the Cyrenian had not before that day been a disciple; had only

learned to follow Christ, when, on that day, as he came in by the

Gate, the soldiery laid hold on him, and against his will forced him

to bear the Cross after Christ. Yet another indication of the need of

such help comes to us from St. Mark,[6061]6061 who uses an

expression[6062]6062 which conveys, though not necessarily that the

Saviour had to be borne, yet that He had to be supported to Golgotha

from the place where they met Simon.

Here, where, if the Saviour did not actually sink under His burden, it

yet required to be transferred to the Cyrenian, while Himself

henceforth needed bodily support, we place the next incident in this

history.[6063]6063 While the Cross was laid on the unwilling Simon,

the women who had followed with the populace closed around the

Sufferer, raising their lamentations.[6064]6064 At His Entrance into

Jerusalem,[6065]6065 Jesus had wept over the daughters of Jerusalem;

as He left it for the last time, they wept over Him. But far different

were the reasons for His tears from theirs of mere pity. And, if proof

were required of His Divine strength, even in the utmost depth of His

Human weakness - how, conquered, He was Conqueror - it would surely be

found in the words in which He bade them turn their thoughts of pity

where pity would be called for, even to themselves and their children

in the near judgment upon Jerusalem. The time would come, when the Old

Testament curse of barrenness[6066]6066 would be coveted as a

blessing. To show the fulfilment of this prophetic lament of Jesus, it

is not necessary to recall the harrowing details recorded by

Josephus,[6067]6067 when a frenzied mother roasted her own child, and

in the mockery of desperateness reserved the half of the horrible meal

for those murderers who daily broke in upon her to rob her of what

scanty food had been left her; nor yet other of those incidents, too

revolting for needless repetition, which the historian of the last

siege of Jerusalem chronicles. But how often, these many centuries,

must Israel's women have felt that terrible longing for childlessness,

and how often must the prayer of despair for the quick death of

falling mountains and burying hills rather than prolonged

torture[6068]6068 have risen to the lips of Israel's sufferers! And

yet, even so, these words were also prophetic of a still more terrible

future![6069]6069 For, if Israel had put such flame to its 'green

tree' how terribly would the Divine judgment burn among the dry wood

of an apostate and rebellious people, that had so delivered up its

Divine King, and pronounced sentence upon itself by pronouncing it

upon Him!

And yet natural, and, in some respects, genuine, as were the tears of

'the daughters of Jerusalem,' mere sympathy with Christ almost

involves guilt, since it implies a view of Him which is essentially

the opposite of that which His claims demand. These tears were the

emblem of that modern sentiment about the Christ which, in its

effusiveness, offers insult rather than homage, and implies rejection

rather than acknowledgment of Him. We shrink with horror from the

assumption of a higher standpoint, implied in so much of the modern

so-called criticism about the Christ. But even beyond this, all mere

sentimentalism is here the outcome of unconsciousness of our real

condition. When a sense of sin has been awakened in us, we shall

mourn, not for what Christ has suffered, but for what He suffered for

us. The effusiveness of mere sentiment is impertinence or folly:

impertinence, if He was the Son of God; folly, if He was merely Man.

And, even from quite another point of view, there is here a lesson to

learn. It is the peculiarity of Romanism ever to present the Christ in

His Human weakness. It is that of an extreme section on the opposite

side, to view Him only in His Divinity. Be it ours ever to keep before

us, and to worship as we remember it, that the Christ is the Saviour

God-Man.

It was nine of the clock when the melancholy procession reached

Golgotha, and the yet more melancholy preparations for the Crucifixion

commenced. Avowedly, the punishment was invented to make death as

painful and as lingering as the power of human endurance. First, the

upright wood was planted in the ground. It was not high, and probably

the Feet of the Sufferer were not above one or two feet from the

ground. Thus could the communication described in the Gospels take

place between Him and others; thus, also, might His Sacred Lips be

moistened with the sponge attached to a short stalk of hyssop. Next,

the transverse wood (antenna) was placed on the ground, and the

Sufferer laid on it, when His Arms were extended, drawn up, and bound

to it. Then (this not in Egypt, but in Carthage and in Rome) a strong,

sharp nail was driven, first into the Right, then into the Left Hand

(the clavi trabales). Next, the Sufferer was drawn up by means of

ropes, perhaps ladders;[6070]6070 the transverse either bound or

nailed to the upright, and a rest or support for the Body (the cornu

or sedile) fastened on it. Lastly, the Feet were extended, and either

one nail hammered into each, or a larger piece of iron through the

two. We have already expressed our belief that the indignity of

exposure was not offered at such a Jewish execution. And so might the

crucified hang for hours, even days, in the unutterable anguish of

suffering, till consciousness at last failed.

It was a merciful Jewish practice to give to those led to execution a

draught of strong wine mixed with myrrh so as to deaden

consciousness.[6071]6071 This charitable office was performed at the

cost of, if not by, an association of women in Jerusalem.[6072]6072

That draught was offered to Jesus when He reached Golgatha.[6073]6073

But having tasted it, and ascertained its character and object, He

would not drink it. It was like His former refusal of the pity of the

'daughters of Jerusalem.' No man could take His Life from Him; He had

power to lay it down, and to take it up again. Nor would He here yield

to the ordinary weakness of our human nature; nor suffer and die as if

it had been a necessity, not a voluntary self-surrender. He would meet

Death, even in his sternest and fiercest mood, and conquer by

submitting to the full. A lesson this also, though one difficult, to

the Christian sufferer.

And so was He nailed to His Cross, which was placed between, probably

somewhat higher than, those of the two malefactors crucified with

Him.[6074]6074 One thing only still remained: to affix to His Cross

the so-called 'title' (titulus), on which was inscribed the charge on

which He had been condemned. As already stated, it was customary to

carry this board before the prisoner, and there is no reason ffor

supposing any exception in this respect. Indeed, it seems implied in

the circumstance, that the 'title' had evidently been drawn up under

the direction of Pilate. It was - as might have been expected, and yet

most significantly[6075]6075 - trilingual: in Latin, Greek, and

Aramæan. We imagine, that it was written in that order,[6076]6076 and

that the words were those recorded by the Evangelists (excepting St.

Luke,[6077]6077 who seems to give a modification of the orginal, or

Aramæan, text). The inscription given by St. Matthew exactly

corresponds with that which Eusebius[6078]6078 records as the Latin

titulus on the cross of one of the early martyrs. We therefore

conclude, that it represents the Latin words. Again, it seems only

natural, that the fullest, and to the Jews most offensive, description

should have been in Aramæan, which all could read. Very significantly

this is given by St. John. It follows, that the inscription given by

St. Mark must represent that in Greek. Although much less

comprehensive, it had the same number of words, and precisely the same

number of letters, as that in Aramæan, given by St. John.[6079]6079

It seems probable, that the Sanhedrists had heard from some one, who

had watched the procession on its way to Golgotha, of the inscription

which Pilate had written on the 'titulus' - partly to avenge himself

on, and partly to deride, the Jews. It is not likely that they would

have asked Pilate to take it down after it had been affixed to the

Cross; and it seems scarcely credible, that they would have waited

outside the Prætorium till the melancholy procession commenced its

march. We suppose that, after the condemnation of Jesus, the

Sanhedrists had gone from the Prætorium into the Temple, to take part

in its services. When informed of the offensive tablet, they hastened

once more to the Prætorium, to induce Pilate not to allow it to be put

up. This explains the inversion in the order of the account in the

Gospel of St. John,[6080]6080 or rather, its location in that

narrative in immediate connection with the notice, that the

Sanhedrists were afraid the Jews who passed by might be influenced by

the inscription. We imagine, that the Sanhedrists had originally no

intention of doing anything so un-Jewish as not only to gaze at the

sufferings of the Crucified, but to even deride Him in His Agony -

that, in fact, they had not intended going to Golgotha at all. But

when they found that Pilate would not yield to their remonstrances,

some of them hastened to the place of Crucifixion, and, mingling with

the crowd, sought to incite their jeers, so as to prevent any deeper

impression[6081]6081 which the significant words of the inscription

might have produced.[6082]6082

Before nailing Him to the Cross, the soldiers parted among them the

poor worldly inheritance of His raiment.[6083]6083 On this point there

are slight seeming differences[6084]6084 between the notices of the

Synoptists and the more detailed account of the Fourth Gospel. Such

differences, if real, would afford only fresh evidence of the general

trustworthiness of the narrative. For, we bear in mind that, of all

the disciples, only St. John witnessed the last scenes, and that

therefore the other accounts of it circulating in the early Church

must have been derived, so to speak, from second sources. This

explains, why perhaps the largest number of seeming discrepancies in

the Gospels occurs in the narrative of the closing hours in the Life

of Christ, and how, contrary to what otherwise we might have expected,

the most detailed as well as precise account of them comes to us from

St. John. In the present instance these slight seeming differences may

be explained in the following manner. There was, as St. John states,

first a division into four parts - one to each of the soldiers - of

such garments of the Lord as were of nearly the same value. The

head-gear, the outer cloak-like garment, the girdle, and the sandals,

would differ little in cost. But the question, which of them was to

belong to each of the soldiers, would naturally be decided, as the

Synoptists inform us, by lot.

But, besides these four articles of dress, there was the seamless

woven inner garment,[6085]6085 by far the most valuable of all, and

for which, as it could not be partitioned without being destroyed,

they would specially cast lots[6086]6086 (as St. John reports).

Nothing in this world can be accidental, since God is not far from any

of us. But in the History of the Christ the Divine purpose, which

forms the subject of all prophecy, must have been constantly realised;

nay, this must have forced itself on the mind of the observer, and the

more irresistibly when, as in the present instance, the outward

circumstances were in such sharp contrast to the higher reality. To

St. John, the loving and loved disciple, greater contrast could

scarcely exist than between this rough partition by lot among the

soldiery, and the character and claims of Him Whose garments they were

thus apportioning, as if He had been a helpless Victim in their hands.

Only one explanation could here suggest itself: that there was a

special Divine meaning in the permission of such an event - that it

was in fulfilment of ancient prophecy. As he gazed on the terrible

scene, the words of the Psalm[6087]6087 [6088]6088 which portrayed the

desertion, the sufferings, and the contempt even unto death of the

Servant of the Lord, stood out in the red light of the Sun setting in

Blood. They flashed upon his mind - for the first time he understood

them;[6089]6089 and the flames which played around the Sufferer were

seen to be the sacrificial fire that consumed the Sacrifice which He

offered. That this quotation is made in the Fourth Gospel alone,

proves that its writer was an eyewitness; that it was made in the

Fourth Gospel at all, that he was a Jew, deeply imbued with Jewish

modes of religious thinking. And the evidence of both is the stronger,

as we recall the comparative rareness, and the peculiarly Judaic

character of the Old Testament quotations in the Fourth

Gospel.[6090]6090

It was when they thus nailed Him to the Cross, and parted His raiment,

that He spake the first of the so-called 'Seven Words:' 'Father,

forgive them, for they know not what they do.'[6091]6091 Even the

reference in this prayer to 'what they do' (not in the past, nor

future) points to the soldiers as the primary, though certainly not

the sole object of the Saviour's prayer.[6092]6092 [6093]6093 But

higher thoughts also come to us. In the moment of the deepest

abasement of Christ's Human Nature, the Divine bursts forth most

brightly. It is, as if the Saviour would discard all that is merely

human in His Sufferings, just as before He had discarded the Cup of

stupefying wine. These soldiers were but the unconscious instruments:

the form was nothing; the contest was between the Kingdom of God and

that of darkness, between the Christ and Satan, and these sufferings

were but the necessary path of obedience, and to victory and glory.

When He is most human (in the moment of His being nailed to the

Cross), then is He most Divine, in the utter discarding of the human

elements of human instrumentality and of human suffering. Then also in

the utter self-forgetfulness of the God-Man - which is one of the

aspects of the Incarnation - does He only remember Divine mercy, and

pray for them who crucify Him; and thus also does the Conquered truly

conquer His conquerors by asking for them what their deed had

forfeited. And lastly, in this, that alike the first and the last of

His Utterances begin with 'Father,' does He show by the unbrokenness

of His faith and fellowship the real spiritual victory which He has

won. And He has won it, not only for the martyrs, who have learned

from Him to pray as He did, but for everyone who, in the midst of all

that seems most opposed to it, can rise, beyond mere forgetfulness of

what is around, to realising faith and fellowship with God as 'the

Father,' - who through the dark curtain of cloud can discern the

bright sky, and can feel the unshaken confidence, if not the unbroken

joy, of absolute trust.

This was His first Utterance on the Cross - as regarded them; as

regarded Himself; and as regarded God. So, surely, suffered not Man.

Has this prayer of Christ been answered? We dare not doubt it; nay, we

perceive it in some measure in those drops of blessing which have

fallen upon heathen men, and have left to Israel also, even in its

ignorance, a remnant according to the election of grace.[6094]6094

And now began the real agonies of the Cross - physical, mental, and

spiritual. It was the weary, unrelieved waiting, as thickening

darkness gradually gathered around. Before sitting down to their

melancholy watch over the Crucified,[6095]6095 the soldiers would

refresh themselves, after their exertion in nailing Jesus to the

Cross, lifting it up, and fixing it, by draughts of the cheap wine of

the country. As they quaffed it, they drank to Him in their coarse

brutality, and mockingly came to Him, asking Him to pledge them in

response. Their jests were, indeed, chiefly directed not against Jesus

personally, but in His Representative capacity, and so against the

hated, despised Jews, whose King they now derisively challenged to

save Himself.[6096]6096 Yet even so, it seems to us of deepest

significance, thatHe was so treated and derided in His Representative

Capacity and as the King of the Jews. It is the undesigned testimony

of history, alike as regarded the character of Jesus and the future of

Israel. But what from almost any point of view we find so difficult to

understand is, the unutterable abasement of the Leaders of Israel -

their moral suicide as regarded Israel's hope and spiritual existence.

There, on that Cross, hung He, Who at least embodied that grand hope

of the nation; Who, even on their own showing, suffered to the extreme

for that idea, and yet renounced it not, but clung fast to it in

unshaken confidence; One, to Whose Life or even Teaching no objection

could be offered, save that of this grand idea. And yet, when it came

to them in the ribald mockery of this heathen soldiery, it evoked no

other or higher thoughts in them; and they had the indescribable

baseness of joining in the jeer at Israel's great hope, and of leading

the popular chorus in it!

For, we cannot doubt, that - perhaps also by way of turning aside the

point of the jeer from Israel - they took it up, and tried to direct

it against Jesus; and that they led the ignorant mob in the piteous

attempts at derision. And did none of those who so reviled Him in all

the chief aspects of His Work feel, that, as Judas had sold the Master

for nought and committed suicide, so they were doing in regard to

their Messianic hope? For, their jeers cast contempt on the four great

facts in the Life and Work of Jesus, which were also the underlying

ideas of the Messianic Kingdom: the new relationship to Israel's

religion and the Temple ('Thou that destroyest the Temple, and

buildest it in three days'); the new relationship to the Father

through the Messiah, the Son of God ('if Thou be the Son of God'); the

new all-sufficient help brought to body and soul in salvation ('He

saved others'); and, finally, the new relationship to Israel in the

fulfilment and perfecting of its Mission through its King ('if He be

the King of Israel'). On all these, the taunting challenge of the

Sanhedrists, to come down from the Cross, and save Himself, if he

would claim the allegiance of their faith, cast what St. Matthew and

St. Mark characterise as the 'blaspheming'[6097]6097 of doubt. We

compare with theirs the account of St. Luke and St. John. That of St.

Luke reads like the report of what had passed, given by one who

throughout had been quite close by, perhaps taken part in the

Crucifixion[6098]6098 - one might almost venture to suggest, that it

had been furnished by the Centurion.[6099]6099 The narrative of St.

John reads markedly like that of an eyewitness, and he a

Judæan.[6100]6100 And as we compare both the general Judæan cast and

Old Testament quotations in this with the other parts of the Fourth

Gospel, we feel as if (as so often), under the influence of the

strongest emotions, the later development and peculiar thinking of so

many years afterwards had for the time been effaced from the mind of

St. John, or rather given place to the Jewish modes of conception and

speech, familiar to him in earlier days. Lastly, the account of St.

Matthew seems as if written from the priestly point of view, as if it

had been furnished by one of the Priests or Sanhedrist party, present

at the time.

Yet other inferences come to us. First, there is a remarkable

relationship between what St. Luke quotes as spoken by the soldiers:

'If Thou art the King of the Jews, save Thyself,' and the report of

the words in St. Matthew:[6101]6101 'He saved others - Himself He

cannot save. He[6102]6102 is the King of Israel! Let Him now come down

from the Cross, and we will believe on Him!' These are the words of

the Sanhedrists, and they seem to respond to those of the soldiers, as

reported by St. Luke, and to carry them further. The 'if' of the

soldiers: 'If Thou art the King of the Jews,' now becomes a direct

blasphemous challenge. As we think of it, they seem to re-echo, and

now with the laughter of hellish triumph, the former Jewish challenge

for an outward, infallible sign to demonstrate His Messiahship. But

they also take up, and re-echo, what Satan had set before Jesus in the

Temptation of the wilderness. At the begining of His Work, the Tempter

had suggested that the Christ should achieve absolute victory by an

act of presumptuous self-assertion, utterly opposed to the spirit of

the Christ, but which Satan represented as an act of trust in God,

such as He would assuredly own. And now, at the close of His Messianic

Work, the Tempter suggested, in the challenge of the Sanhedrists, that

Jesus had suffered absolute defeat, and that God had publicly disowned

the trust which the Christ had put in Him. 'He trusteth in God: let

Him deliver Him now, if He will have Him.'[6103]6103 Here, as in the

Temptation of the Wilderness, the words misapplied were those of Holy

Scripture - in the present instance those of Ps. xxii. 8. And the

quotation, as made by the Sanhedrists, is the more remarkable, that,

contrary to what is generally asserted by writers, this

Psalm[6104]6104 was Messianically applied by the ancient

Synagogue.[6105]6105 More especially was this verse,[6106]6106 which

precedes the mocking quotation of the Sanhedrists, expressly applied

to the sufferings and the derision which Messiah was to undergo from

His enemies: 'All they that see Me laugh Me to scorn: they shoot out

the lip, they shake the head.'[6107]6107 [6108]6108

The derision of the Sanhedrists under the Cross was, as previously

stated, not entirely spontaneous, but had a special motive. The place

of Crucifixion was close to the great road which led from the North to

Jerusalem. On that Feast-day, when, as there was no law to limit, as

on the weekly day of rest, locomotion to a 'Sabbath day's journey,'

many would pass in and out of the City, and the crowd would naturally

be arrested by the spectacle of the three Crosses. Equally naturally

would they have been impressed by the titulus over the Cross of

Christ. The words, describing the Sufferer as 'the King of the Jews,'

might, when taken in connection with what was known of Jesus, have

raised most dangerous questions. And this the presence of the

Sanhedrists was intended to prevent, by turning the popular mind in a

totally different direction. It was just such a taunt and

argumentation as would appeal to that coarse realism of the common

people, which is too often misnamed 'common sense.' St. Luke

significantly ascribes the derision of Jesus only to the

Rulers,[6109]6109 and we repeat, that that of the passers by, recorded

by St. Matthew and St. Mark, was excited by them. Thus here also the

main guilt rested on the leaders of the people.[6110]6110

One other trait comes to us from St. Luke, confirming our impression

that his account was derived from one who had stood quite close to the

Cross, probably taken official part in the Crucifixion. St. Matthew

and St. Mark merely remark in general, that the derision of the

Sanhedrists and people was joined in by the thieves on the

Cross.[6111]6111 A trait this, which we feel to be not only

psychologically true, but the more likely of occurrence, that any

sympathy or possible alleviation of their sufferings might best be

secured by joining in the scorn of the leaders, and concentrating

popular indignation upon Jesus. But St. Luke also records a vital

difference between the two 'robbers' on the Cross.[6112]6112 The

impenitent thief takes up the jeer of the Sanhedrists: 'Art Thou not

the Christ?[6113]6113 Save Thyself and us!' The words are the more

significant, alike in their bearing on the majestic calm and pitying

love of the Saviour on the Cross, and on the utterance of the

'penitent thief,' that - strange as it may sound - it seems to have

been a terrible phenomenon, noted by historians,[6114]6114 that those

on the cross were wont to utter insults and imprecations on the

onlookers, goaded nature perhaps seeking relief in such outbursts. Not

so when the heart was touched in true repentance.

If a more close study of the words of the 'penitent thief' may seem to

diminish the fulness of meaning which the traditional view attaches to

them, they gain all the more as we perceive their historic reality.

His first words were of reproof to his comrade. In that terrible hour,

amidst the tortures of a slow death, did not the fear of God creep

over him - at least so far as to prevent his joining in the vile jeers

of those who insulted the dying agonies of the Sufferer?[6115]6115 And

this all the more, in the peculiar circumstances. They were all three

sufferers; but they two justly, while He Whom he insulted had done

nothing amiss. From this basis of fact, the penitent rapidly rose to

the height of faith. This is not uncommon, when a mind is learning the

lessons of truth in the school of grace. Only, it stands out here the

more sharply, because of the dark background against which it is

traced in such broad and brightly shining outlines. The hour of the

deepest abasement of the Christ was, as all the moments of His

greatest Humilation, to be marked by a manifestation of His Glory and

Divine Character - as it were, by God's testimony to Him in history,

if not by the Voice of God from heaven. And, as regarded the

'penitent' himself, we notice the progression in his soul. No one

could have been ignorant - least of all those who were led forth with

Him to crucifixion, that Jesus did not suffer for any crime, nor for

any political movement, but because He professed to embody the great

hope of Israel, and was rejected by its leaders. And, if any had been

ignorant, the 'title' over the Cross and the bitter enmity of the

Sanhedrists, which followed Him with jeers and jibes, where even

ordinary humanity, and still more Jewish feeling, would have enjoined

silence, if not pity, must have shown what had been the motives of

'the condemnation' of Jesus. But, once the mind was opened to perceive

all these facts, the progress would be rapid. In hours of extremity a

man may deceive himself and fatally mistake fear for the fear of God,

and the remembrance of certain external knowledge for spiritual

experience. But, if a man really learns in such seasons, the teaching

of years may be compressed into moments, and the dying thief on the

Cross might outdistance the knowledge gained by Apostles in their

years of following Christ.

One thing stood out before the mind of the 'penitent thief,' who in

that hour did fear God. Jesus had done nothing amiss. And this

surrounded with a halo of moral glory the inscription on the Cross,

long before its words acquired a new meaniag. But how did this

Innocent One bear Himself in suffering? Right royally - not in an

earthly sense, but in that in which alone He claimed the Kingdom. He

had so spoken to the women who had lamented Him, as His faint form

could no longer bear the burden of the Cross; and He had so refused

the draught that would have deadened consciousness and sensibility.

Then, as they three were stretched on the transverse beam, and, in the

first and sharpest agony of pain, the nails were driven with cruel

stroke of hammer through the quivering flesh, and, in the nameless

agony that followed the first moments of the Crucifixion, only a

prayer for those who in ignorance, were the instruments of His

torture, had passed His lips. And yet He was innocent, Who so cruelly

suffered. All that followed must have only deepened the impression.

With what calm of endurance and majesty of silence He had borne the

insult and jeers of those who, even to the spiritually unenlightened

eye, must have seemed so infinitely far beneath Him! This man did feel

the 'fear' of God, who now learned the new lesson in which the fear of

God was truly the beginning of wisdom. And, once he gave place to the

moral element, when under the fear of God he reproved his comrade,

this new moral decision became to him, as so often, the beginning of

spiritual life. Rapidly he now passed into the light, and onwards and

upwards: 'Lord, remember me, when Thou comest in Thy Kingdom!'

The familiar words of our Authorised Version - 'When Thou comest into

Thy Kingdom' - convey the idea of what we might call a more spiritual

meaning of the petition. But we can scarcely beleive, that at that

moment it implied either that Christ was then going into His Kingdom,

or that the 'penitent thief' looked to Christ for admission into the

Heavenly Kingdom. The words are true to the Jewish point of vision of

the man. He recognised and owned Jesus as the Messiah, and he did so,

by a wonderful forthgoing of faith, even in the utmost Humiliation of

Christ. And this immediately passed beyond the Jewish standpoint, for

he expected Jesus soon to come back in His Kingly might and power,

when he asked to be remembered by Him in mercy. And here we have again

to bear in mind that, during the Life of Christ upon earth, and,

indeed, before the outpouring of the Holy Ghost, men always first

learned to believe in the Person of the Christ, and then to know His

teaching and His Mission in the forgiveness of sins. It was so in this

case also. If the 'penitent thief' had learned to know the Christ, and

to ask for gracious recognition in His coming Kingdom, the answering

assurance of the Lord conveyed not only the comfort that his prayer

was answered, but the teaching of spiritual things which he knew not

yet, and so much needed to know. The 'penitent' had spoken of the

future, Christ spoke of 'to-day'; the penitent had prayed about that

Messianic Kingdom which was to come, Christ assured him in regard to

the state of the disembodied spirits, and conveyed to him the promise

that he would be there in the abode of the blessed - 'Paradise' - and

that through means of Himself as the Messiah: 'Amen, I say unto thee -

To-day with Me shalt thou be in the Paradise.' Thus did Christ give

him that spiritual knowledge which he did not yet possess - the

teaching concerning the 'to-day,' the need of gracious admission into

Paradise, and that with and through Himself - in other words,

concerning the forgiveness of sins and the opening of the Kingdom of

Heaven to all believers. This, as the first and foundation-creed of

the soul, was the first and foundation-fact concerning the Messiah.

This was the Second Utterance from the Cross. The first had been of

utter self-forgetfullness; the second of deepest, wisest, most

gracious spiritual teaching. And, had He spoken none other than these,

He would have been proved to be the Son of God.[6116]6116

Nothing more would require to be said to the 'penitent' on the Cross.

The events which followed, and the words which Jesus would still

speak, would teach him more fully thatn could otherwise have been

done. Some hours - probably two - had passed since Jesus had been

nailed to the Cross. We wonder how it came that St. John, who tells us

some of the incidents with such exceeding particularity, and relates

all with the vivid realisation of a most deeply interested eyewitness,

should have been silent as to others - especially as to those hours of

derision, as well as to the conversion of the penitent thief. His

silence seems to us to have been due to absence from the scene. We

part company with him after his detailed account of the last scene

before Pilate.[6117]6117 The final sentence pronounced, we suppose him

to have hurried into the City, and to have acquainted such of the

disciples as he might find - but especially those faithful women and

the Virgin-Mother - with the terrible scenes that had passed since the

previous evening. Thence he returned to Golgotha, just in time to

witness the Crucifixion, which he again describes with peculiar

fulness of details.[6118]6118 When the Saviour was nailed to the

Cross, St. John seems once more to have returned to the City - this

time, to bring back with him those-women, in company of whom we now

find him standing close to the Cross. A more delicate, tender, loving

service could not have been rendered than this. Alone, of all the

disciples, he is there - not afraid to be near Christ, in the Palace

of the High-Priest, before Pilate, and now under the Cross. And alone

he renders to Christ this tender service of bringing the women and

Mary to the Cross, and to them the protection of his guidance and

company. He loved Jesus best; and it was fitting that to his manliness

and affection should be entrusted the unspeakable privilege of

Christ's dangerous inheritance.[6119]6119

The narrative[6120]6120 leaves the impression that with the beloved

disciple these four women were standing close to the Cross: the Mother

of Jesus, the Sister of His Mother, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary

of Magdala.[6121]6121 A comparison with what is related by St.

Matthew[6122]6122 and St. Mark[6123]6123 supplies further important

particulars. We read there of only three women, the name of the Mother

of our Lord being omitted. But then it must be remembered that this

refers to a later period in the history of the Crucifixion. It seems

as if John had fulfilled to the letter the Lord's command: 'Behold thy

mother,' and literally 'from that very hour' taken her to his own

home. If we are right in this supposition, then, in the absence of St.

John - who led away the Virgin-Mother from that scene of horror - the

other three women would withdraw to a distance, where we find them at

the end, not 'by the Cross,' as in St. John xix. 25, but 'beholding

from afar,' and now joined by others also, who had loved and followed

Christ.

We further notice that, the name of the Virgin-Mother being omitted,

the other three are the same as mentioned by St. John; only, Mary of

Clopas is now described as 'the mother of James and Jose,'[6124]6124

and Christ's Mother's Sister' as 'Solome'[6125]6125 and 'the mother of

Zebedee's children.'[6126]6126 Thus Salome, the wife of Zebedee and

St. John's mother, was the sister of the Virgin, and the beloved

disciple the cousin (on the mother's side) of Jesus, and the nephew of

the Virgin. This also helps to explain why the care of the Mother had

been entrusted to him. Nor was Mary the wife of Clopas unconnected

with Jesus. What we have every reason to regard as a trustworthy

account[6127]6127 describes Clopas as the brother of Joseph, the

husband of the Virgin. Thus, not only Salome as the sister of the

Virgin, but Mary also as the wife of Clopas, would, in a certain

sense, have been His aunt, and her sons His cousins. And so we notice

among the twelve Apostles five cousins of the Lord: the two sons of

Salome and Zebedee, and the three sons of Alphæus or Clopas[6128]6128

and Mary: James, Judas surnamed Lebbæus and Thaddæus, and Simon

surnamed Zelotes or Cananæan.[6129]6129

We can now in some measure realise events. When St. John had seen the

Saviour nailed to the Cross, he had gone to the City and brought with

him for a last mournful farewell the Virgin, accompanied by those who,

as most nearly connected with her, would naturally be with her: her

own sister Salome, the sister-in-law of Joseph and wife (or more

probably widow) of Clopas, and her who of all others had experienced

most of His blessed power to save - Mary of Magdala. Once more we

reverently mark His Divine calm of utter self-forgetfulness and His

human thoughtfulness for others. As they stood under the Cross, He

committed His Mother to the disciple whom He loved, and established a

new human relationship between him and her who was nearest to

Himself.[6130]6130 And calmly, earnestly, and immediately did that

disciple undertake the sacred charge, and bring her - whose soul the

sword had pierced - away from the scene of unutterable woe to the

shelter of his home.[6131]6131 And this temporary absence of John from

the Cross may account for the want of all detail in his narrative till

quite the closing scene.[6132]6132

Now at last all that concerned the earthward aspect of His Mission -

so far as it had to be done on the Cross - was ended. He had prayed

for those who had nailed Him to it, in ignorance of what they did; He

had given the comfort of assurance to the penitent, who had owned His

Glory in His Humiliation; and He had made the last provision of love

in regard to those nearest to Him. So to speak, the relations of His

Humanity - that which touched His Human Nature in any direction - had

been fully met. He had done with the Human aspect of His Work and with

earth. And, appropriately, Nature seemed now to take sad farewell of

Him, and mourned its departing Lord, Who, by His Personal connection

with it, had once more lifted it from the abasement of the Fall into

the region of the Divine, making it the dwelling-place, the vehicle

for the manifestation, and the obedient messenger of the Divine.

For three hours had the Saviour hung on the Cross. It was midday. And

now the Sun was craped in darkness from the sixth to the ninth hour.

No purpose can be served by attempting to trace the source of this

darkness. It could not have been an eclipse, since it was the time of

full moon; nor can we place reliance on the later reports on this

subject of ecclesiastical writers.[6133]6133 It seems only in

accordance with the Evangelic narrative to regard the occurrence of

the event as supernatural, while the event itself might have been

brought about by natural causes; and among these we must call special

attention to the earthquake in which this darkness

terminated.[6134]6134 For, it is a well-known phenomenon that such

darkness not unfrequently precedes earthquakes. On the other hand, it

must be freely admitted, that the language of the Evangelists seems to

imply that this darkness extended, not only over the land of Israel,

but over the inhabited earth. The expression must, of course, not be

pressed to its full literality, but explained as meaning that it

extended far beyond Judæa and to other lands. No reasonable objection

can be raised from the circumstance, that neither the earthquake nor

the preceding darkness are mentioned by any profane writer whose works

have been preserved, since it would surely not be maintained that an

historical record must have been preserved of every earthquake that

occurred, and of every darkness that may have preceded it.[6135]6135

But the most unfair argument is that, which tries to establish the

unhistorical character of this narrative by an appeal to what are

described as Jewish sayings expressive of similar

expectancy.[6136]6136 It is quite true that in old Testament prophecy

- whether figuratively or really - the darkening, though not only of

the sun, but also of the moon and stars, is sometimes connected, not

with the Coming of Messiah, still less with His Death, but with the

final Judgement.[6137]6137 But Jewish tradition never speaks of such

an event in connection with Messiah, or even with the Messianic

judgments, and the quotations from Rabbinic writings made by negative

critics must be characterised as not only inapplicable but even

unfair.[6138]6138

But to return from this painful digression. The three hours' darkness

was such not only to Nature; Jesus, also, entered into darkness: Body,

Soul, and Spirit. It was now, not as before, a contest - but

suffering. Into this, to us, fathomless depth of the mystery of His

Sufferings, we dare not, as indeed we cannot, enter. It was of the

Body; yet not of the Body only, but of physical life. And it was of

the Soul and Spirit; yet not of them alone, but in their conscious

relation to man and to God. And it was not of the Human only in

Christ, but in its indissolube connection with the Divine: of the

Human, where it reached the utmost verge of humiliation to body, soul,

and spirit - and in it of the Divine, to utmost self-exinanition. The

increasing, nameless agonies of the Crucifixion[6139]6139 were

deepening into the bitterness of death. All nature shrinks from death,

and there is a physical horror of the separation between body and soul

which, as a purely natural phenomenon, is in every instance only

overcome, and that only by a higher principle. And we conceive that

the purer the being the greater the violence of the tearing asunder of

the bond with which God Almighty originally bound together body and

soul. In the Perfect Man this must have reached the highest degree.

So, also, had in those dark hours the sense of man-forsakenness and

His own isolation from man; so, also, had the intense silence of God,

the withdrawal of God, the sense of His God-forsakenness and absolute

loneliness. We dare not here speak of punitive suffering, but of

forsakenness and loneliness. And yet as we ask ourselves how this

forsakeness can be though of as so complete in view of His Divine

consciousness, which at least could not have been wholly extinguished

by His Self-exinanition, we feel that yet another element must be

taken into account. Christ on the Cross suffered for man; He offered

Himself a sacrifice; He died for our sins, that, as death was the

wages of sin, so He died as the Representative of man - for man and in

room of man; He obtained for man 'eternal redemption,'[6140]6140

having given His Life 'a ransom,[6141]6141 for many.' For, men were

'redeemed' with the 'precious Blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without

blemish and without spot;'[6142]6142 and Christ 'gave Himself for us,

that He might "redeem" us from all iniquity;'[6143]6143 He 'gave

Himself "a ransom" for all;'[6144]6144 'Christ died for

all;'[6145]6145 Him, Who knew no sin, God 'made sin for us;' 'Christ

redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us' -

and this, with express reference to the Crucifixion.[6146]6146 This

sacrifice, vicarious, expiatory, and redemptive character of His

Death, if it does not explain to us, yet helps us to understand,

Christ's sense of God-forsakenness in the surpreme moment of the

Cross; if one might so word it - the passive character of His

activeness through the active character of His passiveness.

It was this combination of the Old Testament idea of sacrifice, and of

the Old Testament ideal of willing suffering as the Servant of

Jehovah, now fulfilled in Christ, which found its fullest expression

in the language of the twenty-second Psalm. It was fitting - rather,

it was true - that the willing suffering of the true Sacrifice should

now find vent in its opening words: 'My God, My God, why hast Thou

forsaken Me?' - Eli, Eli, lema sabachthanei?[6147]6147 These words,

cried with a loud voice[6148]6148 at the close of the period of

extreme agony,[6149]6149 marked the climax and the end of this

suffering of Christ, of which the utmost compass was the withdrawal of

God and the felt loneliness of the Sufferer. But they that stood by

the Cross, misinterpreting the meaning, and mistaking the opening

words for the name Elias, imagined that the Sufferer had called for

Elias. We can scarcely doubt, that these were the soldiers who stood

by the Cross. They were not necessarily Romans; on the contrary, as we

have seen, these Legions were generally recruited from Provincials. On

the other hand, no Jew would have mistaken Eli for the name of Elijah,

not yet misinterpreted a quotation of Psalm xxii. 1 as a call for that

prophet. And it must be remembered, that the words were not whispered,

but cried with a loud voice. But all entirely accords with the

misunderstanding of non-Jewish soldiers, who, as the whole history

shows, had learned from His accusers and the infuriated mob snatches

of a distorted story of the Christ.

And presently the Sufferer emerged on the other side. It can scarcely

have been a minute or two from the time that the cry from the

twenty-second Psalm marked the high-point of His Agony, when the words

'I thirst'[6150]6150 seem to indicate, by the prevalence of the merely

human aspect of the suffering, that the other and more terrible aspect

of sin-bearing and God-forsakenness was past. To us, therefore, this

seems the beginning, if not of Victory, yet of Rest, of the End. St.

John alone records this Utterance, prefacing it with this distinctive

statement, that Jesus so surrendered Himself to the human feeling,

seeking the bodily relief by expressing His thirst: 'knowing that all

things were now finished, that the Scripture might be

fulfilled.'[6151]6151 In other words, the climax of The anthropic

Suffering in His feeling of God-forsakenness, which had led to the

utterance of Psalm xxii. 1, was now, to His consciousness, the end of

all which in accordance with Scripture-prediction He had to bear. He

now could and did yield Himself to the mere physical wants of His

Body.

It seems as if St. John, having perhaps just returned to the scene,

and standing with the women 'afar off,' beholding these

things,[6152]6152 had hastened forward on the cry from Psalm

xxii.,[6153]6153 and heard Him express the feeling of thirst, which

immediately followed. And so St. John alone supplies the link between

that cry and the movement on the part of the soldiers, which St.

Matthew and St. Mark, as well as St. John, report. For, it would be

impossible to understand why, on what the soldiers regarded as a call

for Elijah, one of them should have hastened to relieve His thirst,

but for the Utterance recorded in the Fourth Gospel. But we can quite

understand it, if the Utterance, 'I thirst,' followed immediately on

the previous cry.

One of the soldiers - may we not be allowed to believe, one who either

had already learned from that Cross, or was about to learn, to own Him

Lord - moved by sympathy, now ran to offer some slight refreshment to

the Sufferer by filling a sponge with the rough wine of the soldiers

and putting it to His lips, having first fastened it to the stem

('reed') of the caper ('hyssop'), which is said to grow to the height

of even two or three feet.[6154]6154 But, even so, this act of

humanity was not allowed to pass unchallenged by the coarse jibes of

the others who would bid him leave the relief of the Sufferer to the

agency of Elijah, which in their opinion He had invoked. Nor should we

perhaps wonder at the weakness of that soldier himself, who, though he

would not be hindered in his good deed, yet averted the opposition of

the others by apparently joining in their mockery.[6155]6155

By accepting the physical refreshment offered Him, the Lord once more

indicated the completion of the work of His Passion. For, as He would

not enter on it with His senses and physical consciousness lulled by

narcotised wine, so He would not pass out of it with senses and

physical consciousness dulled by the absolute failure of life-power.

Hence He took what for the moment restored the physical balance,

needful for thought and word. And so He immediately passed on to

'taste death for every man.' For, the two last 'sayings' of the

Saviour now followed in rapid succession: first, that with a loud

voice, which expressed it, that the work given Him to do, as far as

concerned His Passion, was 'finished;'[6156]6156 and then, that in the

words of Psalm xxxi. 5, in which He commended His Spirit into the

Hands of the Father.[6157]6157 Attempts at comment could only weaken

the solemn thoughts which the words awaken. Yet some points should be

noted for our teaching. His last cry 'with a loud voice' was not like

that of one dying. St. Mark notes, that this made such deep impression

on the Centurion.[6158]6158 In the language of the early Christian

hymn, it was not Death which approached Christ, but Christ Death: He

died without death.[6159]6159 Christ encountered Death, not as

conquered, but as the Conqueror. And this also was part of His work,

and for us: now the beginning of His Triumph. And with this agrees the

peculiar language of St. John, that He 'bowed the Head, and gave up

the Spirit' (t_ pne_ma).

Nor should we fail to mark the peculiarities of His last Utterance.

The 'My God' of the fourth Utterance had again passed into the

'Father' of conscious fellowship. And yet neither in the Hebrew

original of this Psalm, nor in its Greek rendering by the LXX., does

the word 'Father' occur. Again, in the LXX. translation of the Hebrew

text this word expressive of entrustment - the commending - is in the

future tense; on the lips of our Lord it is in the present

tense.[6160]6160 And the word, in its New Testament sense, means not

merely commending: it is to deposit, to commit for safe

keeping.[6161]6161 That in dying - or rather meeting and overcoming

Death - He chose and adapted these words, is matter for deepest

thankfulness to the Church. He spoke them for His people in a twofold

sense: on their behalf, that they might be able to speak them; and

'for them,' that henceforth they might speak them after Him. How many

thousands have pillowed their heads on them when going to rest! They

were the last words of a Polycarp, a Bernard, Huss, Luther, and

Melanchthon. And to us also they may be the fittest and the softest

lullaby. And in 'the Spirit' which He had committed to God did He now

descend into Hades, 'and preached unto the spirits in

prison.'[6162]6162 But behind this great mystery have closed the

two-leaved gates of brass, which only the Hand of the Conqueror could

burst open.

And now a shudder ran through Nature, as its Sun had set. We dare not

do more than follow the rapid outlines of the Evangelic narrative. As

the first token, it records the rending of the Temple-Veil in two from

the top downward to the bottom; as the second, the quaking of the

earth, the rending of the rocks and the opening of the graves.

Although most writers have regarded this as indicating the strictly

chronological succession, there is nothing in the text to bind us to

such a conclusion. Thus, while the rending of the Veil is recorded

first, as being the most significant token to Israel, it may have been

connected with the earthquake, although this alone might scarcely

account for the tearing of so heavy a Veil from the top to the bottom.

Even the latter circumstance has its significance. That some great

catastrophe, betokening the impending destruction of the Temple, had

occurred in the Sanctuary about this very time, is confirmed by not

less than four mutually independent testimonies: those of

Tacitus,[6163]6163 of Josephus,[6164]6164 of the Talmud,[6165]6165 and

of earliest Christian tradition[6166]6166. The most important of these

are, of course, the Talmud and Josephus. The latter speaks of the

mysterious extinction of the middle and chief light in the Golden

Candlestick, forty years before the destruction of the Temple; and

both he and the Talmud refer to a supernatural opening by themselves

of the great Temple-gates that had been previously closed, which was

regarded as a portent of the coming destruction of the Temple. We can

scarcely doubt, that some historical fact must underlie so peculiar

and widespread a tradition, and we cannot help feeling that it may be

a distorted version of the occurrence of the rending of the

Temple-Veil (or of its report) at the Crucifixion of Christ.[6167]6167

But even if the rending of the Temple-Veil had commenced with the

earthquake, and, according to the Gospel to the Hebrews, with the

breaking of the great lintel over the entrance, it could not be wholly

accounted for in this manner. According to Jewish tradition, there

were, indeed, two Veils before the entrance to the Most Holy

Place.[6168]6168 The Talmud explains this on the ground that it was

not known, whether in the former Temple the Veil had hung inside or

outside the entrance and whether the partition-wall had stood in the

Holy or Most Holy Place.[6169]6169 Hence (according to

Maimonides)[6170]6170 there was not any wall between the Holy and Most

Holy Place, but the space of one cubit, assigned to it in the former

Temple, was left unoccupied, and one Veil hung on the side of the

Holy, the other on that of the Most Holy Place. According to an

account dating from Temple-times, there were altogether thirteen Veils

used in various parts of the Temple - two new ones being made every

year.[6171]6171 The Veils before the Most Holy Place were 40 cubits

(60 feet) long, and 20 (30 feet) wide, of the thickness of the palm of

the hand, and wrought in 72 squares, which were joined together; and

these Veils were so heavy, that, in the exaggerated language of the

time, it needed 3000 priests to manipulate each. If the Veil was at

all such as is described in the Talmud, it could not have been rent in

twain by a mere earthquake or the fall of the lintel, although its

composition in squares fastened together might explain, how the rent

might be as described in the Gospel.

Indeed, everything seems to indicate that, although the earthquake

might furnish the physical basis, the rent of the Temple-Veil was -

with reverence be it said - really made by the Hand of God. As we

compute, it may just have been the time when, at the

Evening-Sacrifice, the officiating Priesthood entered the Holy Place,

either to burn the incense or to do other sacred service there. To see

before them, not as the aged Zacharias at the beginning of this

history the Angel Gabriel, but the Veil of the Holy Place rent from

top to bottom - that beyond it they could scarcely have seen - and

hanging in two parts from its fastenings above and at the side, was,

indeed, a terrible portent, which would soon become generally known,

and must, in some form or other, have been preserved in tradition. And

they all must have understood, that it meant that God's Own Hand had

rent the Veil, and for ever deserted and thrown open that Most Holy

Place where He had so long dwelt in the mysterious gloom, only lit up

once a year by the glow of the censer of him, who made atonement for

the sins of the people.[6172]6172

Other tokens were not wanting. In the earthquake the rocks were rent,

and their tombs opened. This, as Christ descended into Hades. And when

He ascended on the third day, it was with victorious saints who had

left those open graves. To many in the Holy City on that

ever-memorable first day, and in the week that followed, appeared the

bodies of many of those saints who had fallen on sleep in the sweet

hope of that which had now become reality.[6173]6173

But on those who stood under the Cross, and near it, did all that was

witnessed make the deepest and most lasting impression. Among them we

specially mark the Centurion under whose command the soldiers had

been. Many a scene of horror must he have witnessed in those sad times

of the Crucifixion, but none like this. Only one conclusion could

force itself on his mind. It was that which, we cannot doubt, had made

its impression on his heart and conscience. Jesus was not what the

Jews, His infuriated enemies, had described Him. He was what He

professed to be, what His bearing on the Cross and His Death attested

Him to be: 'righteous,' and hence, 'the Son of God.' From this there

was only a step to personal allegiance to Him, and, as previously

suggested, we may possibly owe to him some of those details which St.

Luke alone has preserved.

The brief spring-day was verging towards the 'evening of the Sabbath.'

In general, the Law ordered that the body of a criminal should not be

left hanging unburied over night.[6174]6174 Perhaps in ordinary

circumstances the Jews might not have appealed so confidently to

Pilate as actually to ask[6175]6175 him to shorten the sufferings of

those on the Cross, since the punishment of crucifixion often lasted

not only for hours but days, ere death ensued. But here was a special

occasion. The Sabbath about to open was a 'high-day' - it was both a

Sabbath and the second Paschal Day, which was regarded as in every

respect equally sacred with the first - nay, more so, since the

so-called Wavesheaf was then offered to the Lord. And what the Jews

now proposed to Pilate was, indeed, a shortening, but not in any sense

a mitigation, of the punishment. Sometimes there was added to the

punishment of crucifixion that of breaking the bones (crurifragium,

skelokop_a) by means of a club or hammer. This would not itself bring

death, but the breaking of the bones was always followed by a coup de

grâce, by sword, lance, or stroke (the perforatio or percussio sub

alas), which immediately put an end to what remained of

life.[6176]6176 Thus the 'breaking of the bones' was a sort of

increase of punishment, by way of compensation for its shortening by

the final stroke that followed.

It were unjust to suppose, that in their anxiety to fulfil the letter

of the Law as to burial on the eve of that high Sabbath, the Jews had

sought to intensify the sufferings of Jesus. The text gives no

indication of this; and they could not have asked for the final stroke

to be inflicted without the 'breaking of the bones,' which always

preceded it. The irony of this punctilious care for the letter of the

Law about burial and high Sabbath by those who had betrayed and

crucified their Messiah on the first Passover-day is sufficiently

great, and, let us add, terrible, without importing ficticious

elements. St. John, who, perhaps, immediately on the death of Christ,

left the Cross, alone reports circumstance. Perhaps it was when he

concerted with Joseph of Arimathæa, with Nicodemus, or the two Marys,

measures for the burying of Christ, that he learned of the Jewish

deputation to Pilate, followed it to Prætorium, and then watched how

it was all carried out on Golgotha. He records, how Pilate acceded to

the Jewish demand, and gave directions for the crurifragium, and

premission for the after-removal of the dead bodies, which otherwise

might have been left to hang, till putrescence or birds of prey had

destroyed them. But St. John also tells us what he evidently regards

as so great a prodigy that he specially vouches for it, pledging his

own veracity, as an eyewitness, and grounding on it an appeal to the

faith of those to whom his Gospel is addressed. It is, that certain

'things came to pass [not as in our A. V., 'were done'] that the

Scripture should be fulfilled,' or, to put it otherwise, by which the

Scripture was fulfilled. These things were two, to which a thrid

phenomenon, not less remarkable, must be added. For, first, when, in

the crurifragium, the soldiers had broken the bones of two

malefactors, and then came to the Cross of Jesus, they found that He

was dead already, and so 'a bone of Him' was 'not broken.' Had it been

otherwise, the Scripture concerning the Paschal Lamb,[6177]6177 as

well that concerning the Righteous Suffering Servant of

Jehovah,[6178]6178 would have been broken. In Christ alone these two

ideas of the Paschal Lamb and the Righteous Suffering Servant of

Jehovah are combined into a unity and fulfilled in their highest

meaning. And when, by a strange concurrence of circumstances, it 'came

to pass' that, contrary to what might have been expected, 'a bone of

Him' was 'not broken' this outward fact served as the finger to point

to the predictions which were fulfilled of Him.

Not less remarkable is the second fact. If, on the Cross of Christ,

these two fundamental ideas in the prophetic description of the work

of the Messiah had been set forth: the fulfilment of the Paschal

Sacrifice, which, as that of the Covenant, underlay all sacrifices,

and the fulfilment of the ideal of the Righteous Servant of God,

suffering in a world that hated God, and yet proclaimed and realising

His Kingdom, a thrid truth remained to be exhibited. It was not in

regard to the character, but the effects, of the Work of Christ - its

reception, alike in the present and in the future. This had been

indicated in the prophecies of Zechariah,[6179]6179 which foretold

how, in the day of Israel's final deliverance and national conversion,

God would pour out the spirit of grace and of supplication, and as

'they shall look on Him Whom they pierced,' the spirit of true

repentance would be granted them, alike nationally and individually.

The application of this to Christ is the more striking, that even the

Talmud refers the prophecy to the Messiah.[6180]6180 And as these two

things really applied to Christ, alike in His rejection and in His

future return,[6181]6181 so did the strange historical occurence at

His Crucifixion once more point to it as the fulfilment of Scripture

prophecy. For, although the soldiers, on finding Jesus dead, broke not

one of His Bones, yet, as it was necessary to make sure of His Death,

one of them, with a lance, 'pierced His Side,' with a wound so deep,

that Thomas might afterwards have thrust his hand into His

Side.[6182]6182

And with these two, as fulfilling Holy Scripture, yet a third

phenonmenon was associated, symbolic of both. As the soldier pierced

the side of the Dead Christ, 'forthwith came there out Blood and

Water.' It has been thought by some,[6183]6183 that there was physical

cause for this - that Christ had literally died of a broken heart, and

that, when the lance pierced first the lung filled with blood and then

the pericardium filled with serous fluid,[6184]6184 there flowed from

the wound this double stream.[6185]6185 In such cases, the lesson

would be that reproach had literally broken His Heart.[6186]6186 But

we can scarcely believe that St. John could have wished to convey this

without clearly setting it forth - thus assuming on the part of his

readers knowledge of an obscure, and, it must be added, a

scientifically doubtful phenomenon. Accordingly, we rather believe

that to St. John, as to most of us, the significance of the fact lay

in this, that out of the Body of One dead had flowed Blood and Water -

that corruption had not fastened on Him. Then, there would be the

symbolic meaning conveyed by the Water (from the pericardium) and the

Blood (from the heart) - a symbolism most true, if corruption had no

power nor hold on Him - if in Death He was not dead, if He vanquished

Death and Corruption, and in this respect also fulfilled the prophetic

ideal of not seeing corruption.[6187]6187 To this symbolic bearing of

the flowing of Water and Blood from His pierced side, on which the

Evangelist dwells in his Epistle,[6188]6188 and to its external

expression in the symbolism of the two Sacraments, we can only point

the thoughtful Christian. For, the two Sacraments mean that Christ had

come; that over Him, Who was crucified for us and loved us unto death

with His broken heart, Death and Corruption had no power; and that He

liveth for us with the pardoning and cleansing power of His offered

Sacrifice.

Yet one other scene remains to be recorded. Whether before, or, more

probably, after the Jewish deputation to the Roman Governor, another

and a strange application came to Pilate. It was from one apparently

well known, a man not only of wealth and standing,[6189]6189 whose

noble bearing[6190]6190 corresponded to his social condition, and who

was known as a just and a good man.[6191]6191 Joseph of Arimathæa was

a Sanhedrist,[6192]6192 but he had not consented either to the counsel

or the deed of his colleagues. It must have been generally known that

he was one of those 'which waited for the Kingdom of God.' But he had

advanced beyond what that expression implies. Although secretly, for

fear of the Jews.[6193]6193 he was a disciple of Jesus. It is in

strange contrast to this 'fear,' that St. Mark tells us, that, 'having

dared,'[6194]6194 'he went in unto Pilate and asked for the Body of

Jesus.' Thus, under circumstances the most unlikely and unfavorable,

were his fears converted into boldness, and he, whom fear of the Jews

had restrained from making open avowal of discipleship during the

life-time of Jesus, not only professed such of the Crucified

Christ,[6195]6195 but took the most bold and decided step before Jews

and Gentiles in connection with it. So does trial elicit faith, and

the wind, which quenches the feeble flame that plays around the

outside, fan into brightness the fire that burns deep within, though

for a time unseen. Joseph of Arimathæa, now no longer a secret

disciple, but bold in the avowal of his reverent love, would show to

the Dead Body of his Master all veneration. And the Divinely ordered

concurrence of circumstances not only helped his pious purpose, but

invested all with deepest symbolic significance. It was Friday

afternoon, and the Sabbath was drawing near.[6196]6196 No time

therefore was to be lost, if due honour were to be paid to the Sacred

Body. Pilate give it to Joseph of Arimathæa. Such was within his

power, and a favour not unfrequently accorded in like

circumstances.[6197]6197 But two things must have powerfully impressed

the Roman Governor, and deepened his former thoughts about Jesus:

first, that the death on the Cross had taken place so rapidly, a

circumstance on which he personally questioned the

Centurion,[6198]6198 and then the bold appearance and request of such

a man as Joseph of Arimathæa.[6199]6199 Or did the Centurion express

to the Governer also some such feeling as that which had found

utterance under the Cross in the words: 'Truly this Man was the Son of

God?'

The proximity of the holy Sabbath, and the consequent need of haste,

may have suggested or determined the proposal of Joseph to lay the

Body of Jesus in his own rock-hewn new tomb,[6200]6200 wherein no one

had yet been laid.[6201]6201 The symbolic significance of this is the

more marked, that the symbolism was undersigned. These rock-hewn

sepulchres, and the mode of laying the dead in them, have been very

fully described in connection with the burying of Lazarus[6202]6202 We

may therefore wholly surrender overselves to the sacred thoughts that

gather around us. The Cross was lowered and laid on the ground; the

curel nails drawn out, and the ropes unloosed. Joseph, with those who

attended him, 'wrapped' the Sacred Body 'in a clean linen cloth,' and

rapidly carried It to the rock-hewn tomb in the garden close by. Such

a rock-hewn tomb or cave (Meartha) had niches (Kukhin), where the dead

were laid. It will be remembered, that at the entrance to 'the tomb' -

and within 'the rock' - there was 'a court,' nine feet square, where

ordinarly the bier was deposited, and its bearers gathered to do the

last offices for the Dead. Thither we suppose Joseph to have carried

the Sacred Body, and then the last scene to have taken place. For now

another, kindered to Joseph in spirit, history, and position, had

come. The same spiritual Law, which had brought Joseph to open

confession, also constrained the profession of that other Sanhedrist,

Nicodemus. We remember, how at the first he had, from fear of

detection,come to Jesus by night, and with what bated breath he had

pleaded with his colleagues not so much the cause of Christ, as on His

behalf that of law and justice.[6203]6203 He now came, bringing 'a

roll' of myrrh and aloes, in the fragrant mixture well known to the

Jews for puroses of anointing or burying.

It was in 'the court' of the tomb that the hasty embalmment - if such

it may be called - took place. None of Christ's former disciples seem

to have taken part in the burying. John may have withdrawn to bring

tidings to, and to comfort the Virgin-Mother; the others also, that

had 'stood after off, beholding,' appear to have left. Only a few

faithful ones,[6204]6204 notably among them Mary Magdalene and the

other Mary, the mother of Joses, stood over against the tomb, watching

at some distance where and how the Body of Jesus was laid. It would

scarcely have been in accordance with Jewish manners, if these women

had mingled more closely with the two Sanhedrists and their

attendants. From where they stood they could only have had a dim view

of what passed within the court, and this may explain how, on their

return, they 'prepared spices and ointments'[6205]6205 for the more

full honours which they hoped to pay the Dead after the Sabbath was

past.[6206]6206 For, it is of the greatest importance to remember,

that haste characterised all that was done. It seems as if the 'clean

linen cloth' in which the Body had been wrapped, was now torn into

'cloths' or swathes, into which the Body, limb by limb, was now

'bound,'[6207]6207 no doubt, between layers of myrrh and aloes, the

Head being wrapped in a napkin. And so they laid Him to rest in the

inche of the rock-hewn new tomb. And as they went out, they rolled, as

was the custom, a 'great stone' - the Golel - to close the entrance to

the tomb,[6208]6208 probably leaning against it for support, as was

the practice, a smaller stone - the so-called Dopheq.[6209]6209 It

would be where the one stone was laid against the other, that on the

next day, Sabbath though it was, the Jewish authorities would have

affixed the seal, so that the slightest disturbance might become

apparent.[6210]6210

. . .

. .

It was probably about the same time, that a noisy throng prepared to

follow delegates from the Sanhedrin to the ceremony of cutting the

Passover-sheaf. The Law had it, "he shall bring a sheaf [literally,

the Omer] with the first-fruits of your harvest, unto the priest; and

he shall wave the Omer before Jehovah, to be accepted for you." This

Passover-sheaf was reaped in public the evening before it was offered,

and it was to witness this ceremony that the crowd had gathered around

the elders. Already on the 14th Nisan the spot whence the first sheaf

was to be reaped had been marked out, by tying together in bundles,

while still standing, the barley that was to be cut down, according to

custom, in the sheltered Ashes-Valley across Kidron. When the time for

cutting the sheaf had arrived - that is, on the evening of the 15th

Nisan, even though it were a Sabbath, just as the sun went down, three

men, each with a sickle and basket, set to work. Clearly to bring out

what was distinctive in the ceremony, they first asked of the

bystanders three times each of these questions: "Has the sun gone

down?" "With this sickle?" "Into this basket?" "On this Sabbath? (or

first Passover-day)" - and, lastly, "shall I reap?" Having each time

been answered in the affirmative, they cut down barley to the amount

of one ephah, or about three pecks and three pints of our English

measure. This is not the place to follow the ceremony farther - how

the corn was threshed out, parched, ground, and one omer of the flour,

mixed with oil and frankincense, waved before the Lord in the Temple

on the second Paschal day (or 16th of Nisan). But, as this festive

procession started, amidst loud demonstrations, a small band of

mourners turned from having laid their dead Master in His

resting-place. The contrast is as sad as it is suggestive. And yet,

not in the Temple, nor by the priest, but in the silence of that

garden-tomb, was the first Omer of the new Paschal flour to be 'waved

before the Lord.'[6211]6211

. . .

. .

'Now on the morrow, which is after the preparation [the Friday], the

chief priests and the Pharisees were gathered together unto Pilate,

saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, which He was yet

alive, After three days I rise again. Command, therefore, that the

sephulchre be made sure until the third day, lest haply His disciples

come and steal Him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the

dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first. Pilate said

unto them, Take a guard, go your way, make it as sure as ye can. So

they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, the guard

being with them.'

. . .

. .

But was there really need for it? Did they, who had spent what

remained of daylight to prepare spices wherewith to anoint the Dead

Christ, expect His Body to be removed, or did they expect - perhaps in

their sorrow even think of His word: 'I rise again?' But on that holy

Sabbath, when the Sanhedrists were thinking of how to make sure of the

Dead Christ, what were the thoughts of Joseph of Arimathæa and

Nicodemus, of Peter and John, of the other disciples, and especially

of the loving women who only waited for the first streak of

Easter-light to do their last service of love? What were their

thoughts of God - what of Christ - what of the Words He had spoken,

the Deeds He had wrought, the salvation He had come to bring, and the

Kingdom of Heaven which He was to open to all believers?

Behind Him had closed the gates of Hades; but upon them rather than

upon Him had fallen the shadows of death. Yet they still loved Him -

and stronger than death was love.

CHAPTER XVI.

ON THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST FROM THE DEAD.

The history of the Life of Christ upon earth closes with a Miracle as

great as that of its inception. It may be said that the one casts

light upon the other. If He was what the Gospels represent Him, He

must have been born of a pure Virgin, without sin, and He must have

risen from the Dead. If the story of His Birth be true, we can believe

that of His Resurrection; if that of His Resurrection be true, we can

believe that of His Birth. In the nature of things, the latter was

incapable of strict historical proof; and, in the nature of things,

His Resurrection demanded and was capable of the fullest historical

evidence. If such exists, the keystone is given to the arch; the

miraculous Birth becomes almost a necessary postulate, and Jesus is

the Christ in the full sense of the Gospels. And yet we mark, as

another parallel point between the account of the miraculous Birth and

that of the Resurrection, the utter absence of details as regards

these events themselves. If this circumstance may be taken as indirect

evidence that they were not legendary, it also imposes on us the duty

of observing the reverent silence so well-befitting the case, and not

intruding beyond the path which the Evangelic narrative has opened to

us.

That path is sufficiently narrow, and in some respects difficult; not,

indeed, as to the great event itself, nor as to its leading features,

but as to the more minute details. And here, again, our difficulties

arise, not so much from any actual disagreement, as from the absence

of actual identity. Much of this is owning to the great compression in

the various narratives, due partly to the character of the event

narrated, partly to the incomplete information possessed by the

narrators - of whom only one was strictly an eyewitness, but chiefly

to this, that to the different narrators the central point of interest

lay in one or the other aspect of the circumstances connected with the

Resurrection. Not only St. Matthew,[6212]6212 but also St. Luke, so

compresses the narrative that 'the distinction of points of time' is

almost effaced. St. Luke seems to crowd into the Easter Evening what

himself tells us occupied forty days.[6213]6213 His is, so to speak,

the pre-eminently Jerusalem account of the evidence of the

Resurrection; that of St. Matthew the pre-eminently Galilean account

of it. Yet each implies and corroborates the facts of the

other.[6214]6214 In general we ought to remember, that the

Evangelists, and afterwards St. Paul, are not so much concerned to

narrate the whole history of the Resurrection as to furnish the

evidence for it. And here what is distinctive in each is also

characteristic of his special view-point. St. Matthew describes the

impression of the full evidence of that Easter morning on friend and

foe, and then hurries us from the Jerusalem stained with Christ's

Blood back to the sweet Lake and the blessed Mount where first He

spake. It is, as if he longed to realise the Risen Christ in the

scenes where he had learned to know Him. St. Mark, who is much more

brief, gives not only a mere summary,[6215]6215 but, if one might use

the expression, tells it as from the bosom of the Jerusalem family,

from the house of his mother Mary.[6216]6216 St. Luke seems to have

made most full inquiry as to all the facts of the Resurrection, and

his narrative might almost be inscribed: 'Easter Day in Jerusalem.'

St. John paints such scenes - during the whole forty days, whether in

Jerusalem or Galilee - as were most significant and teachful of this

threefold lesson of his Gospels: that Jesus was the Christ, that He

was the Son of God, and that, believing, we have life in His Name.

Lastly, St. Paul - as one born out of due time - produces the

testimony of the principal witnesses to the fact, in a kind of

ascending climax.[6217]6217 And this the more effectively, that he is

evidently aware of the difficulties and the import of the question,

and has taken pains to make himself acquainted with all the facts of

the case.

The question is of such importance, alike in itself and as regards

this whole history, that a discussion, however brief and even

imperfect,[6218]6218 preliminary to the consideration of the Evangelic

narrations, seems necessary.

What thoughts concerning the Dead Christ filled the minds of Joseph of

Arimathæa, of Nicodemus, and of the other disciples of Jesus, as well

as of the Apostles and of the pious women? They believed Him to be

dead, and they did not expect Him to rise again from the dead - at

least, in our accepted sense of it. Of this there is abundant evidence

from the moment of His Death, in the burial spices brought by

Nicodemus, in those prepared by the women (both of which were intended

as against corruption), in the sorrow of the women at the empty tomb,

in their supposition that the Body had been removed, in the perplexity

and bearing of the Apostle, in the doubts of so many, and indeed in

the express statement: 'For as yet they knew not the Scripture, that

He must rise again from the dead.'[6219]6219 And the notice in St.

Matthew's Gospel,[6220]6220 that the Sanhedrists had taken precautions

against His Body being stolen, so as to give the appearance of

fulfilment to His prediction that He would rise again after three

days[6221]6221 - that, therefore, they knew of such a prediction, and

took it in the literal sense - would give only more emphasis to the

opposite bearing of the disciples and their manifest non-expectancy of

a literal Resurrection. What the disciples expected, perhaps wished,

was not Christ's return in glorified corporeity, but His Second Coming

in glory into His Kingdom.

But if they regarded Him as really dead and not to rise again in the

literal sense, this had evidently no practical effect, not only on

their former feelings towards Him, but even on their faith in Him as

the promised Messiah.[6222]6222 This appears from the conduct of

Joseph and Nicodemus, from the language of the women, and from the

whole bearing of the Apostles and disciples. All this must have been

very different, if they had regarded the Death of Christ, even on the

Cross, as having given the lie to His Messianic Claims.[6223]6223 On

the contrary, the impression left on our minds is, that, although they

deeply grieved over the loss of their Master, and the seeming triumph

of His foes,[6224]6224 yet His Death came to them not unexpectedly,

but rather as of internal necessity and as the fulfilment of His often

repeated prediciton. Nor can we wonder at this, since He had, ever

since the Transfiguration, laboured, against all their resistance and

reluctance, to impress on them the act of His Betrayal and Death. He

had, indeed - although by no means so frequently or clearly - also

referred to His Resurrection. But of this they might, according to

their Jewish ideas, form a very different conception from that of a

literal Resurrection of that Crucified Body in a glorified state, and

yet capable of such terrestial intercourse as the Risen Christ held

with them. And if it be objected that, in such case, Christ must have

clearly taught them all this, it is sufficient to answer, that there

was no need for such clear teaching on the point at that time; that

the event itself would soon and best teach them; that it would have

been impossible really to teach it, except by the event; and that any

attempt at it would have involved a far fuller communication on this

mysterious subject than, to judge from what is told us in Scripture,

it was the purpose of Christ to impart in our present state of faith

and expectancy. Accordingly, from their point of view, the prediction

of Christ might have referred to the continuance of His Work, to his

Vindication, or to some apparition of Him, whether from heaven or on

earth - such as that of the saints in Jerusalem after the

Resurrection, or that of Elijah in Jewish belief - but especially to

His return in glory; certainly, not to the Resurrecton as it actually

took place. The fact itself would be quite foreign to Jewish ideas,

which embraced the continuance of the soul after death and the final

resurrection of the body, but not a state of spiritual corporeity, far

less, under conditions such as those described in the

Gospels.[6225]6225 Elijah, who is so constantly introduced in Jewish

tradition, is never represented as sharing in meals or offering his

body for touch; nay, the Angels who visited Abraham are represented as

only making show of, not really, eating.[6226]6226 Clearly, the

Apostles had not learned the Resurrection of Christ either from the

Scriptures - and this proves that the narrative of it was not intended

as a fulfilment of previous expectancy - nor yet from the predictions

of Christ to that effect; although without the one, and especially

without the other, the empty grave would scarcely have wrought in them

the assured conviction of the Resurrection of Christ.[6227]6227

This brings us to the real question in hand. Since the Apostles and

others evidently believed Him to be dead, and expected not His

Resurrection, and since the fact of His Death was not to them a

formidable, if any, objection to His Messianic Character - such as

might have induced them to invent or imagine a Resurrection - how are

we to account for the history of the Resurrection with all its details

in all the four Gospels and by St. Paul? The details, or 'signs' are

clearly intended as evidences to all of the reality of the

Resurrection, without which it would not have been believed; and their

multiplication and variety must, therefore, be considered as

indicating what otherwise would have been not only numerous but

insuperable difficulties. similarly, the language of St.

Paul[6228]6228 implies a careful and searching inquiry on his

part;[6229]6229 the more rational, that, besides intrinsic

difficulties and Jewish preconceptions against it, the objections to

the fact must have been so often and coarsely obtruded on him, whether

in disputation or by the jibes of the Greek scholars and students who

derided his preaching.[6230]6230

Hence, the question to be faced is this: Considering their previous

state of mind and the absence of any motive, how are we to account for

the change of mind on the part of the disciples in regard to the

Resurrection? There can at least be no question, that they came to

believe, and with the most absolute certitude, in the Resurrection as

an historical fact; nor yet, that it formed the basis and substances

of all their preaching of the Kingdom; nor yet, that St. Paul, up to

his conversion a bitter enemy of Christ, was fully persuaded of it;

not - to go a step back - that Jesus Himself expected it. Ineed, the

world would not have been converted to a dead Jewish Christ, however

His intimate disciples might have continued to love His memory. But

they preached everywhere, first and foremost, the Resurrection from

the dead! In the language of St. Paul: 'If Christ hath not been

raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain. Yea, and

we are found false witnesses of God . . . ye are yet in your

sins.'[6231]6231 We must here dismiss what probably underlies the

chief objection to the Resurrection: its miraculour character. The

objection to Miracles, as such, proceeds on that false

Supernaturalism, which traces a Miracle to the immediate fiat of the

Almighty without any intervening links;[6232]6232 and, as already

shown, it involves a vicious petitio principii. But, after all, the

Miraculous is only the to us unprecedented and uncognisable - a very

narrow basis on which to refuse historical investigation. And the

historian has to account for the undoubted fact, that the Resurrection

was the fundamental personal conviction of the Apostles and disciples,

the basis of their preaching, and the final support of their

martyrdom. What explanation then can be offered of it?

1. We may here put aside two hypotheses, now universally discarded

even in Germany, and which probably have never been seriously

entertained in this country. They are that of gross fraud on the part

of the disciples, who had stolen the Body of Jesus - as to which even

Strauss remarks, that such a falsehood is wholly incompatible with

their after-life, heroism, and martyrdom; - and again this, that

Christ had not been really dead when taken from the Cross, and that He

gradually revived again. Not to speak of the many absurdities which

this theory involves,[6233]6233 it really shifts - if we acquit the

disciples of complicity - the fraud upon Christ Himself.

2. The only other explanation, worthy of attention, is the so called

'Vision-hypothesis:' that the Apostles really believed in the

Resurrection, but the mere visions of Christ had wrought in them this

belief. The hypothesis has been variously modified. According to some,

these visions were the outcome of an excited imagination, of a morbid

state of the nervous system. To this there is, of course, the

preliminary objection, that such visions presuppose a previous

expectancy of the event, which, as we know, is the opposite of the

fact. Again, such a 'Vision-hypothesis' in no way agrees with the many

details and circumstances narrated in connection with Risen One, Who

is described as having appeared not only to one or another in the

retirement of the chamber, but to many, and in a manner and

circumstances which render the idea of a mere vision impossible.

Besides, the visions of an excited imagination would not have endured

and led to such results; most probably they would soon have given

place to corresponding depression.

The 'Vision-hypothesis' is not much improved, if we regard the

supposed vision as the result of reflection - that the disciples,

convinced that the Messiah could not remain dead (and this again is

contrary to fact) had wrough themselves first into a persuasion that

He must rise, and then into visions of the Risen[6234]6234 One. Nor

yet would it commend itself more to our mind, if were to assume that

thes visions had been directly sent from God Himself,[6235]6235 to

attest the fact that Christ lived. For, we have here to deal with a

series of facts that cannot be so explained, such as the showing them

His Sacred Wounds; the offer touch them; the command to handle Him, so

as to convince themselves of His real corporeity; the eating with the

disciples; the appearance by the Lake of Galilee, and others. Besides,

the 'Vision-hypothesis' has to account for the events of the

Easter-morning, and especially for the empty tomb from which the great

stone had been rolled, and in which the very cerements[6236]6236 of

death were seen by those who entered it. In fact, such a narrative as

that recorded by St. Luke[6237]6237 seems almost designed to render

the 'Vision-hypothesis' impossible. We are expressly told, that the

appearance of the Risen Christ, so far from meeting their

anticipations, had affrighted them, and that they had thought it

spectral, on which Christ had reassured them, and bidden them handle

Him, for 'a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye behold Me having.'

Lastly, who removed the Body of Christ from the tomb? Six weeks

afterwards, Peter preached the Resurrection of Christ in Jerusalem. If

Christ's enemies had removed the Body, they could easily have silenced

Peter; if His friends, they would have been guilty of such fraud, as

not even Strauss deems possible in the circumstances. The theories of

deception, delusion,[6238]6238 and vision being thus impossible, and

the à priori objection to the fact, as involving a Miracle, being a

petitio principii, the historical student is shut up to the simple

acceptance of the narrative. To this conclusion the unpreparedness of

the disciples, their previous opinions, their new testimony unto

martyrdom, the foundation of the Christian Church, the testimony of so

many, singly and in company, and the series of recorded manifestations

during forty days, and in such different circumstances, where mistake

was impossible, had already pointed with unerring certainty.[6239]6239

And even if slight discrepancies, nay, some not strictly historical

details, which might have been the outcome of earliest tradition in

the Apostolic Church, could be shown in those accounts which were not

of eyewitnesses, it would assuredly not invalidate the great fact

itself, which may unhesitatingly be pronounced that best established

in history. At the same time we would carefully guard ourselves

against the admission that those hypothetical flaws really exist in

the narratives. On the contrary, we believe them capable of the most

satisfactory arrangement, unless under the strain of hypercriticism.

The importance of all this cannot be adequately expressed in words. A

dead Christ might have been a Teacher and Wonder-worker, and

remembered and loved as such. But only a Risen and Living Christ could

be the Saviour, the Life, and the Life-Giver, and as such preached to

all men. And of this most blessed truth we have the fullest and most

unquestionable evidence. We can, therefore, implictly yeild ourselves

to the impression of these narratives, and, still more, to the

realisation of that most sacred and blessed fact. This is the

foundation of the Chruch, the inscription on the banner of her armies,

the strength and comfort of every Christian heart, and the grand hope

of humanity:

'The Lord is risen indeed.'[6240]6240

THE CROSS AND THE CROWN

CHAPTER XVII.

'ON THE THIRD DAY HE ROSE AGAIN FROM THE DEAD; HE ASCENDED INTO

HEAVEN'

(St. Matt. xxviii. 1-10; St. Mark xvi. 1-11; St. Luke xxiv. 1-12; St.

John xx. 1-18; St. Matt. xxviii. 11-15; St. Mark xvi. 12, 13; St. Luke

xxiv. 13-35; 1 Cor. xv. 5; St. Mark xvi. 14; St. Luke xxiv. 36-43; St.

John xx. 19-25; St. John xx. 26-29; St. Matt. xxviii. 16; St. John

xxi. 1-24; St. Matt. xxviii. 17-20; St. Mark xvi.15-28; 1 Cor. xv. 6;

St. Luke xxiv. 44-53; St. Mark xvi. 19, 20; Acts i. 3-12.)

GREY dawn was streaking the sky, when they who had so lovingly watched

Him to His Burying were making their lonely way to the rock-hewn Tomb

in the Garden.[6241]6241 Considerable as are the difficulties of

exactly harmonising the details in the various narratives - if,

indeed, importance attaches to such attempts - we are thankful to know

that any hesitation only attaches to the arrangement of minute

particulars,[6242]6242 and not to the great facts of the case. And

even these minute details would, as we shall have occasion to show, be

harmonious, if only we knew all the circumstances.

The difference, if such it may be called, in the names of the women,

who at early morn went to the Tomb, scarce requires elaborate

discussion. It may have been, that there were two parties, starting

from different places to meet at the Tomb, and that this also accounts

for the slight difference in the details of what they saw and heard at

the Grave. At any rate, the mention of the two Marys and Joanna is

supplemented in St. Luke[6243]6243 by that of the 'other women with

them,' while, if St. John speaks only of Mary Magdalene,[6244]6244 her

report to Peter and John: 'We know not where they have laid Him,'

implies, that she had not gone alone to the Tomb. It was the first day

of the week[6245]6245 - according to Jewish reckoning the third day

from His Death.[6246]6246 The narrative leaves the impression that the

Sabbath's rest had delayed their visit to the Tomb; but it is at least

a curious coincidence that the relatives and friends of the deceased

were in the habit of going to the grave up to the third day (when

presumably corruption was supposed to begin), so as to make sure that

those laid there were really dead.[6247]6247 Commenting on this, that

Abraham described Mount Moriah on the third day,[6248]6248 the Rabbis

insist on the importance of 'the third day' in various events

connected with Israel, and specially speak of it in connection with

the resurrection of the dead, referring in proof to Hos. vi.

2.[6249]6249 In another place, appealing to the same prophetic saying,

they infer from Gen. xlii. 7, that God never leaves the just more than

three days in anguish.[6250]6250 In mourning also the third day formed

a sort of period, because it was thought that the soul hovered round

the body till the third day, when it finally parted from its

tabernacle.[6251]6251

Although these things are here mentioned, we need scarcely say that no

such thoughts were present with the holy mourners who, in the grey of

that Sunday-morning,[6252]6252 went to the Tomb. Whether or not there

were two groups of women who started from different places to meet at

the Tomb, the most prominent figure among them was Mary

Magdalene[6253]6253 - as prominent among the pious women as Peter was

among the Apostles. She seems to have reached the Grave,[6254]6254

and, seeing the great stone that had covered its entrance rolled away,

hastily judged that the Body of the Lord had been removed. Without

waiting for further inquiry, she ran back to inform Peter and John of

the fact. The Evangelist here explains, that there had been a great

earthquake, and that the Angel of the Lord, to human sight as

lightning and in brilliant white garment, had rolled back the stone,

and sat upon it, when the guard, affrighted by what they heard and

saw, and especially by the look and attitude of heavenly power in the

Angel, had been seized with mortal faintness. Remembering the events

connected with the Crucifixion, which had no doubt been talked about

among the soldiery, and bearing in mind the impression of such a sight

on such minds, we could readily understand the effect on the two

sentries who that long night had kept guard over the solitary Tomb.

The event itself (we mean: as regards the rolling away of the stone),

we suppose to have taken place after the Resurrection of Christ, in

the early dawn, while the holy women were on their way to the Tomb.

The earth-quake cannot have been one in the ordinary sense, but a

shaking of the place, when the Lord of Life burst the gates of Hades

to re-tenant His Glorified Body, and the lightning-like Angel

descended from heaven to roll away the stone. To have left it there,

when the Tomb was empty, would have implied what was no longer true.

But there is a sublime irony in the contrast between man's elaborate

precautions and the ease with which the Divine Hand can sweep them

aside, and which, as throughout the history of Christ and of His

Church, recalls the prophetic declaration: 'He that sitteth in the

heavens shall laugh at them.'

While the Magdalene hastened, probably by another road, to the abode

of Peter and John, the other women also had reached the Tomb, either

in one party, or, it may be, in two companies. They had wondered and

feared how they could accomplish their pious purpose - for, who would

roll away the stone for them? But, as often, the difficulty

apprehended no longer existed. Perhaps they thought that the now

absent Mary Magdalene had obtained help for this. At any rate, they

now entered the vestibule of the Sepulchre. Here the appearance of the

Angel filled them with fear. But the heavenly Messenger bade them

dismiss apprehension; he told them that Christ was not there, nor yet

any longer dead, but risen, as indeed, He had foretold in Galilee to

His disciples; finally, he bade them hasten with the announcements to

the disciples, and with this message, that, as Christ had directed

them before, they were to meet Him in Galilee. It was not only that

this connected, so to speak, the wondrous present with the familiar

past, and helped them to realise that it was their very Master; nor

yet that in the retirement, quiet, and security of Galilee, there

would be best opportunity for fullest manifestation, as to the five

hundred, and for final conversation and instruction. But the main

reason, and that which explains the otherwise strange, almost

exclusive, prominence given at such a moment to the direction to meet

Him in Galilee, has already been indicated in a previous

chapter.[6255]6255 With the scattering of the Eleven in Gethsemane on

the night of Christ's betrayal, the Apostolic College was temporarily

broken up. They continued, indeed, still to meet together as

individual disciples, but the bond of the Apostolate was for the

moment, dissolved. And the Apostolic circle was to be reformed, and

the Apostolic Commission renewed and enlarged, in Galilee; not,

indeed, by its Lake, where only seven of the Eleven seem to have been

present,[6256]6256 but on the mountain where He had directed them to

meet Him.[6257]6257 Thus was the end to be like the beginning. Where

He had first called, and directed them for their work, there would He

again call them, give fullest directions, and bestow new and amplest

powers. His appearances in Jerusalem were intended to prepare them for

all this, to assure tham completely and joyously of the fact of His

Resurrection - the full teaching of which would be given in Galilee.

And when the women, perplexed and scarcely conscious, obeyed the

command to go in and examine for themselves the now empty niche in the

Tomb, they saw two Angels[6258]6258 - probably as the Magdalene

afterwards saw them - one at the head, the other at the feet, where

the Body of Jesus had lain. They waited no longer, but hastened,

without speaking to anyone, to carry to the disciples the tidings of

which they could not even yet grasp the full import.[6259]6259

2. But whatever unclearness of detail may rest on the narratives of

the Synoptists, owing to their great compression, all is distinct when

we follow the steps of the Magdalene, as these traced in the Fourth

Gospel. Hastening from the Tomb, she ran to the lodging of Peter and

to that of John - the repetition of the preposition 'to' probably

marking, that the two occupied different, although perhaps closely

adjoining, quarters.[6260]6260 Her startling tidings induced them to

go at once - 'and they went towards the sepulchre.' 'But they began to

run, the two together' - probably so soon as they were outside the

town and near 'the Garden.' John, as the younger, outran

Peter.[6261]6261 Reaching the Sepulchre first, and stooping down, 'he

seeth' (bl_pei) the linen clothes, but, from his position, not the

napkin which lay apart by itself. If reverence and awe prevented John

from entering the Sepulchre, his impulsive companion, who arrived

immediately after him, thought of nothing else than the immediate and

full clearing up of the mystery. As he entered the sepulchre, he

'steadfastly (intently) beholds' (qewre_) in one place the linen

swathes that had bound about His Head. There was no sign of haste, but

all was orderly, leaving the impression of One Who had leisurely

divested Himself of what no longer befitted Him. Soon 'the other

disciples' followed Peter. The effect of what he saw was, that he now

believed in his heart that the Master was risen - for till then they

had not yet derived from Holy Scripture the knowledge that He must

rise again. And this also is most instructive. It was not the belief

prerviously derived from Scripture, that the Christ was to rise from

the Dead, which led to expectancy of it, but the evidence that He had

risen which led them to the knowledge of what Scripture taught on the

subject.

3. Yet whatever light had risen in the inmost sanctuary of John's

heart, he sapke not his thoughts to the Magdalene, whether she had

reached the Sepulchre ere the two left it, or met them by the way. The

two Apostles returned to their home, either feeling that nothing more

could be learned at the Tomb, or to wait for further teaching and

guidance. Or it might even have been partly due to a desire not to

draw needless attention to the empty Tomb. But the love of the

Magdalene could not rest satisfied, while doubt hung over the fate of

His Sacred Body. It must be remembered that she knew only of the empty

Tomb. For a time she gave away the agony of her sorrow; then, as she

wiped away her tears, she stopped to take one more look into the Tomb,

which she thought empty, when, as she 'intently gazed' (qewre_), the

Tomb seemed no longer empty. At the head and feet, where the Sacred

Body had lain, were seated two Angels in white. Their question, so

deeply true from their knowledge that Christ had risen: 'Woman, why

weepest thou?' seems to have come upon the Magdalene with such

overpowering suddenness, that, without being able to realise - perhaps

in the semi-gloom - who it was that had asked it, she spake, bent only

on obtaining the information she sought: 'Because they have taken away

my Lord, and I know not[6262]6262 where they have laid Him.' So is it

often with us, that, weeping, we ask the question of doubt or fear,

which, if we only knew, would never have risen to our lips; nay, that

heaven's own 'Why?' fails to impress us, even when the Voice of its

Messengers would gently recall us from the error of our impatience.

But already another was to given to the Magdalene. As she spake, she

became conscious of another Presence close to her. Quickly turning

round, 'she gazed' (qewre_) on One Whom she recognised not, but

regarded as the gardener, from His presence there and from His

question: 'Woman, why weepest thou? Whom seekest thou?' The hope, that

she might now learn what she sought, gave wings to her words -

intensity and pathos. If the supposed gardener had borne to another

place the Sacred Body, she would take It away, if she only knew where

It was laid. This depth and agony of love, which made the Magdalene

forget even the restraints of a Jewish woman's intercourse with a

stranger, was the key that opened the Lips of Jesus. A moment's pause,

and He spake her name in those well-remembered accents, that had first

unbound her from sevenfold demoniac power and called her into a new

life. It was as another unbinding, another call into a new life. She

had not known His appearance, just as the others did not know at

first, so unlike, and yet so like, was the glorified Body to that

which they had known. But she could not mistake the Voice, especially

when It spake to her, and spake her name. So do we also often fail to

recognise the Lord when He comes to us 'in another form'[6263]6263

than we had known. But we cannot fail to recognise Him when He speaks

to us and speaks our name.

Perhaps we may here be allowed to pause, and, from the nonrecognition

of the Risen Lord till He spoke, ask this question: With what body

shall we rise? Like or unlike the past? Assuredly, most like. Our

bodies will then be true; for the soul will body itself forth

according to its past history - not only impress itself, as now on the

features, but express itself - so that a man may be known by what he

is, and as what he is. Thus, in this respect also, has the

Resurrection a moral aspect, and is the completion of the history of

mankind and of each man. And the Christ also must have borne in His

glorified Body all that He was, all that even His most intimate

disciples had not known nor understood while He was with them, which

they now failed to recognise, but knew at once when He spake to them.

It was precisely this which now prompted the action of the Magdalene -

prompted also, and explains, the answer of the Lord. As in her name

she recognised His Name, the rush of old feeling came over her, and

with the familiar 'Rabboni!'[6264]6264 - my Master - she would fain

have grasped Him. Was it the unconscious impulse to take hold on the

precious treasure which she had thought for ever lost; the unconscious

attempt to make sure that it was not merely an apparition of Jesus

from heaven, but the real Christ in His corporeity on earth; or a

gesture of generation, the beginning of such acts of worship as her

heart prompted? Probably all these; and yet probably she was not at

the moment distinctly conscious of either or of any of these feelings.

But to them all there was one answer, and in it a higher direction,

given by the words of the Lord: 'Touch Me not, for I am not yet

ascended to the Father.' Not the Jesus appearing from heaven - for He

had not yet ascended to the Father; not the former intercourse, not

the former homage and worship. There was yet a future of completion

before Him in the Ascension, of which Mary knew not. Between that

future of completion and the past of work, the present was a gap -

belonging partly to the past and partly to the future. The past could

not be recalled, the future could not be anticipated. The present was

of reassurance, of consolation, of preparation, of teaching. Let the

Magdalene go and tell His 'brethren' of the Ascension. So would she

best and most truly tell them that she had seen Him; so also would

they best learn how the Resurrection linked the past of His Work of

love for them to the future: 'I ascend unto My Father, and your

Father, and to my God, and your God.' Thus, the fullest teaching of

the past, the clearest manifestation of the present, and the brightest

teaching of the future - all as gathered up in the Resurrection - came

to the Apostles through the mouth of love of her out of whom He had

cast seven devils.

4. Yet another scene on that Easter morning does St. Matthew relate,

in explanation of how the well-known Jewish Calumny had arisen that

the disciples had stolen away the Body of Jesus. He tells, how the

guard had reported to the chief priests what had happened, and how

they had turn had bribed the guard to spread this rumor, at the same

time promising that if the fictitious account of their having slept

while the disciples robbed the Sepulchre should reach Pilate, they

would intercede on their behalf. Whatever else may be said, we know

that from the time of Justin Martyr[6265]6265 [6266]6266 this has been

the Jewish explanation.[6267]6267 Of late, however, it has, among

thoughtful Jewish writers, given place to the so-called

'Vision-hypothesis,' to which full reference has already been made.

5. It was the early afternoon of that spring-day perhaps soon after

the early meal, when two men from that circle of disciples left the

City. Their narrative affords deeply interesting glimpses into the

circle of the Church in those first days. The impression conveyed to

us is of utter bewilderment, in which only some things stood out

unshaken and firm: love to the Person of Jesus; love among the

brethren; mutual confidence and fellowship; together with a dim hope

of something yet to come - if not Christ in His Kingdom, yet some

manifestation of, or approach to it. The Apostolic College seems

broken up into units; even the two chief Apostles, Peter and John, are

only 'certain of them that were with us.' And no wonder; for they are

no longer 'Apostles' - sent out. Who is to send them forth? Not a dead

Christ! And what would be their commission, and to whom and whither?

And above all rested a cloud of utter uncertainty and perplexity.

Jesus was a Prophet mighty in word and deed before God and all the

people. But their rulers had crucified Him. What was to be their new

relation to Jesus; what to their rulers? And what of the great hope of

the Kingdom, which they had connected with Him?

Thus they were unclear on that very Easter Day even as to His Mission

and Work: unclear as to the past, the present, and the future. What

need for the Resurrection, and for the teaching which the Risen One

alone could bring! These two men had on that very day been in

communication with Peter and John. And it leaves on us the impression,

that, amidst the general confusion, all had brought such tidings as

they, or had come to hear them, and had tried but failed, to put it

all into order or to see light around it. 'The women' had come to tell

of the empty Tomb and of their vision of Angels, who said that He was

alive. But as yet the Apostles had no explanation to offer. Peter and

John had gone to see for themselves. They had brought back

confirmation of the report that the Tomb was empty, but they had seen

neither Angels nor Him Whom they were said to have declared alive.

And, although the two had evidently left the circle of the disciples,

if not Jerusalem, before the Magdalene came, yet we know that even her

account did not carry conviction to the minds of those that heard

it.[6268]6268

Of the two, who on that early spring afternoon left the City in

company, we know that one bore the name of Cleopas.[6269]6269 The

other, unnamed, has for that very reason, and because the narrative of

that work bears in its vividness the character of personal

recollection, been identified with St. Luke himself. If so, then, as

has been finely remarked,[6270]6270 each of the Gospels would, like a

picture, bear in some dim corner the indication of its author: the

first, that of the 'publican;' that by St. Mark, that of the young

man, who, in the night of the Betrayal, had fled from his captors;

that of St. Luke in the Companion of Cleopas; and that of St. John, in

the disciple whom Jesus loved. Uncertainty, almost equal to that about

the second traveller to Emmaus, rests on the identification of that

place.[6271]6271 But such great probability attaches, if not to the

exact spot, yet to the locality, or rather the valley, that we may in

imagination follow the two companies on their road.

We have leave the City by the Western Gate. A rapid progress for about

twenty-five minutes, and we have reached the edge of the plateau. The

blood-strained City, and the cloud-and-gloom-capped trying-place of

the followers of Jesus, are behind us; and with every step forward and

upward the air seems fresher and freer, as if we felt in it the scent

of mountains, or even the far-off breezes of the sea. Other

twenty-five or thirty minutes - perhaps a little more, passing here

and there country-houses - and we pause to look back, now on the wide

prospect far as Bethlehem. Again we pursue our way. We are now getting

beyond the dreary, rocky region, and are entering on a valley. To our

right is the pleasant spot that marks the ancient Nephtoah,[6272]6272

on the border of Judah, now occupied by the village of Lifta. A short

quarter of an hour more, and we have left the well-paved Roman road

and are heading up a lovely valley. The path gently climbs in a

north-westerly direction, with the height on which Emmaus stands

prominently before us. About equidistant are, on the right Lifta, on

the left Kolonieh. The roads from these two, describing almost a

semicircle (the one to the north-west, the other to the north-east),

meet about a quarter of a mile to the south of Emmaus (Hammoza, Beit

Mizza). What an oasis this in a region of hills! Among the course of

the stream, which babbles down, and low in the valley is crossed by a

bridge, are scented orange-and lemon-gardens, olive-groves, luscious

fruit trees, pleasant enclosures, shady nooks, bright dwellings, and

on the height lovely Emmaus. A sweet spot to which to wander on that

spring afternoon;[6273]6273 a most suitable place where to meet such

companionship, and to find such teaching, as on that Easter Day.

It may have been where the two roads from Lifta and Kolonieh meet,

that the mysterious Stranger, Whom they knew not, their eyes being

'holden,' joined the two friends. Yet all these six or seven

miles[6274]6274 their converse had been of Him, and even now their

flushed faces bore the marks of sadness[6275]6275 on account of those

events of which they had been speaking - disappointed hopes, all the

more bitter for the perplexing tidings about the empty Tomb and the

absent Body of the Christ. So is Christ often near to us when our eyes

are holden, and we know Him not; and so do ignorance and unbelief

often fill our hearts with sadness, even when truest joy would most

become us. To the question of the Stranger about the topics of a

conversation which had so visibly affected them,[6276]6276 they

replied in language which shows that they were so absorbed by it

themselves, as scarcely to understand how even a festive pilgrim and

stranger in Jerusalem could have failed to know it, or perceive its

supreme importance. Yet, strangely unsympathetic as from His question

He might seem, there was that in His Appearance which unlocked their

inmost hearts. They told Him their thoughts about this Jesus; how He

had showed Himself a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and

all the people;[6277]6277 then, how their rulers had crucified Him;

and, lastly, how fresh perplexity had come to them from the tidings

which the women had brought, and which Peter and John had so far

confirmed, but were unable to explain. Their words were almost

childlike in their simplicity, deeply truthful, and with a pathos and

earnest craving for guidance and comfort that goes straight to the

heart. To such souls it was, that the Risen Saviour would give His

first teaching. The very rebuke with which He opened it must have

brought its comfort. We also, in our weakness, are sometimes sore

distrest when we hear what, at the moment, seem to us insuperable

difficulties raised to any of the great of our holy faith; and, in

perhaps equal weakness, feel comforted and strengthened, when some

'great one' turns them aside, or avows himself in face of them a

believing disciple of Christ. As if man's puny height could reach up

to heaven's mysteries, or any big infant's strength were needed to

steady the building which God has reared on that great Cornerstone!

But Christ's rebuke was not of such kind. Their sorrow arose from

their folly in looking only at the things seen, and this, from their

slowness to believe what the prophets had spoken. Had they attended to

this, instead of allowing it all. Did not the Scriptures with one

voice teach this twofold truth about the Messiah, that He was to

suffer and to enter into His glory? Then why wonder - why not rather

expect, that He had suffered, and that Angels had proclaimed Him alive

again?

He spake it, and fresh hope sprang up in their hearts, new thoughts

rose in their minds. Their eager gaze was fastened on Him as He now

opened up, one by one, the Scriptures, from Moses and all the

prophets, and in each well-remembered passage interpreted to them the

things concerning Himself. Oh, that we had been there to hear - though

in silence of our hearts also, if only we crave for it, and if we walk

with Him, He sometimes so opens from the Scriptures - nay, from all

the Scriptures, that which comes not to us by critical study: 'the

things concerning Himself.' All too quickly fled the moments. The

brief space was traversed, and the Stranger seemed about to pass on

from Emmaus - not the feigning it, but really: for, the Christ will

only abide with us if our longing and loving constrain Him. But they

could not part with Him. 'They constrained Him.' Love made them

ingenious. It was toward evening; the day was far spent; He must even

abide with them. What rush of thought and feeling comes to us, as we

think of it all, and try to realise time, scenes, circumstances in our

experience, that are blessedly akin to it.

The Master allowed Himself to be constrained. He went in to be their

guest, as they thought, for the night. The simple evening-meal was

spread. He sat down with them to the frugal board. And now He was no

longer the Stranger; He was the Master. No one asked, or questioned,

as He took the bread and spake the words of blessing, then, breaking,

gave it to them. But that moment it was, as if an unfelt Hand had been

taken from their eyelids, as if suddenly the film had been cleared

from their sight. And as they knew Him, He vanished from their view -

for, that which He had come to do had been done. They were unspeakably

rich and happy now. But, amidst it all, one thing forced itself ever

anew upon them, that, even while their eyes had yet been holden, their

hearts had burned within them, while He spake to them and opened to

them the Scriptures. So, then, they had learned to full the

Resurrection-lesson - not only that He was risen indeed, but that it

needed not His seen Bodily Presence, if only He opened up to the heart

and mind all the Scriptures concerning Himself. And this, concerning

those other words about 'holding' and 'touching' Him - about having

converse and fellowship with Him as the Risen One, had been also the

lesson taught the Magdalene, when He would not suffer her loving,

worshipful touch, pointing her to the Ascension before Him. This is

the great lesson concerning the Risen One, which the Church fully

learned in the Day of Pentecost.

6. That same afternoon, in circumstances and manner to us unknown, the

Lord had appeared to Peter.[6278]6278 We may perhaps suggest, that it

was after His manifestation at Emmaus. This would complete the cycle

of mercy: first, to the loving sorrow of the woman; next, to the

loving perplexity of the disciples; then, to the anxious heart of the

stricken Peter - last, in the circle of the Apostles, which was again

drawing together around the assured fact of His Ressurrection.

7. These two in Emmaus could not have kept the good tidings to

themselves. Even if they had not remembered the sorrow and perplexity

in which they had left their fellow-disciples in Jersalem that

forenoon, they could not have kept it to themselves, could not have

remained in Emmaus, but must have gone to their brethren in the City.

So they left the uneaten meal, and hastened back the road they had

travelled with the now well-known Stranger - but, ah, with what

lighter hearts and steps!

They knew well the trysting-place where to find 'the Twelve' - nay,

not the Twelve now, but 'the Eleven' - and even thus their circle was

not complete, for, as already stated, it was broken up, and at least

Thomas was not with the others on that Easter-Evening of the first

'Lord's Day.' But, as St. Luke is careful to inform us,[6279]6279 with

the others who then associated with them. This is of extreme

importance, as marking that the words which the Risen Christ spake on

that occasion were addressed not to the Apostles as such - a thought

forbidden also by the absence of Thomas - but to the Church, although

it may be as personified and represented by such of the 'Twelve,' or

rather 'Eleven,' as were present on the occasion.

When the two from Emmanus arrived, they found the little band as sheep

sheltering within the fold from the storm. Whether they apprehended

persecution simply as disciples, or because the tidings of the empty

Tomb, which had reached the authorities, would stir the fears of the

Sanhedrists, special precautions had been taken. The outer and inner

doors were shut, alike to conceal their gathering and to prevent

surprise. But those assembled were now sure of at least one thing.

Christ was risen. And when they from Emmanus told their wondrous

story, the others could antiphonally reply by relating how He had

appeared, not only to the Magdalene, but also to Peter. And still they

seem not yet to have understood His Ressurection; to have regarded it

as rather an Ascension to Heaven, from which He had made

manifestation, that as the reappearance of His real, though glorified

Corporeity.

They were sitting at meat[6280]6280 - if we may infer from the notice

of St. Mark, and from what happened immediately afterwards,

discussing, not without considerable doubt and misgiving, the real

import of these appearances of Christ. That to the Magdalene seems to

have been put aside - at least, it is not mentioned, and, even in

regard to the others, they seem to have been considered, at any rate

by some, rather as what we might call spectral appearances. But all at

once He stood in the midst of them. The common salutation - on His

Lips not common, but a reality - fell on their hearts at first with

terror rather than joy. They had spoken of spectral appearances, and

now they believed they were 'gazing' (qewre_n) on 'a spirit.' This the

Saviour first, and once for all, corrected, by the exhibition of the

glorified marks of His Sacred Wounds, and by bidding them handle Him

to convince themselves, that His was a real Body, and what they saw

not a disembodied spirit.[6281]6281 The unbelief of doubt now gave

place to the not daring ot believe all that it meant, for very

gladness, and for wondering whether there could now be any longer

fellowship or bond between this Risen Christ and them in their bodies.

It was to remove this also, which, though from another aspect, was

equally unbelief, that the Saviour now partook before them of their

supper of broiled fish,[6282]6282 thus holding with them true human

fellowship as of old.[6283]6283

It was this lesson of His continuity - in the strictest sense - with

the past, which was required in order that the Church might be, so to

speak, reconstituted now in the Name, Power, and Spirit of the Risen

One Who had lived and died. Once more He spake the 'Peace be unto

you!' and now it was to them not occasion of doubt or fear, but the

well-known salutation of their old Lord and Master. It was followed by

the re-gathering and constituting of the Church as that of Jesus

Christ, the Risen One. The Church of the Risen One was to be the

Ambassador of Christ, as He had been the Delegate of the Father. 'The

Apostles were [say rather, 'the Church was'] commissioned to carry on

Christ's work, and not to begin a new one.'[6284]6284 'As the Father

has sent Me [in the past, for His Mission was completed], even so

send[6285]6285 I you [in the constant, present, till His coming

again].' This marks the threefold relation of the Church to the Son,

to the Father, and to the world, and her position in it. In the same

manner, for the same purpose, nay, so far as possible, with the same

qualification and the same authority as the Father had sent Christ,

does He commission His Church. And so it was that He made it a very

real commission when He breathed on them, not individually but as an

assembly, and said: 'Take ye the[6286]6286 Holy Ghost;' and this,

manifestly not in the absolute sense, since the Holy Ghost was not yet

given,[6287]6287 but as the connecting link with, and the

qualification for, the authority bestowed on the Church. Or, to set

forth another aspect of it by somewhat inverting the order of the

words: Alike the Mission of the Church and her authority to forgive or

retain sins are connected with a personal qualification: 'Take ye the

Holy Ghost;' - in which the word 'take' should also be marked. This is

the authority which the Church possesses, not ex opere operato, but as

not connected with the taking and the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in

the Church.

It still remains to explain, so far as we can, these two points: in

what this power of forgiving and retaining sins consists, and in what

manner it resides in the Church. In regard to the former we must first

inquire what idea it would convey to those to whom Christ spake the

words. It has already been explained,[6288]6288 that the power of

'loosing' and 'binding' referred to the legislative authority claimed

by, and conceded to, the Rabbinic College. Similarly, as previously

stated, that here referred to applied to their juridical or judicial

power, according to which they pronounced a person either, 'Zakkai,'

innocent or 'free;' 'absolved,' 'Patur;' or else 'liable,' 'guilty,'

'Chayyabh' (whether liable to punishment or sacrifice.) In the true

sense, therefore, this is rather administrative, disciplinary power,

'the power of the keys' - such as St. Paul would have had the

Corinthian Church put in force - the power of admission and exclusion,

of the authoritative declaration of the forgiveness of sins, in the

exercise of which power (as it seems to the present writer) the

authority for the administration of the Holy Sacraments is also

involved. And yet it is not, as is sometimes represented, 'absolution

from sin,' which belongs only to God and to Christ as Head of the

Church, but absolution of the sinner, which He has delegated to His

Church: 'Whosesover sins ye forgive, they are forgiven.' These words

also teach us, that the Rabbis claimed in virtue of their office, that

the Lord bestowed on His Church in virtue of her receiving, and of the

indwelling of, the Holy Ghost.

In answering the second question proposed, we must bear in mind one

important point. The power of 'binding' and 'loosing' had been

primarily committed to the Apostles,[6289]6289 and exercised by them

in connection with the Church.[6290]6290 On the other hand, that of

forgiving and retaining sins, in the sense explained, was primarily

bestowed on the Church, and excercised by her through her

representatives, the Apostles, and those to whom they committed

rule.[6291]6291 Although, therefore, the Lord on that night committed

this power to His Church, it was in the person of her representatives

and rulers. The Apostles alone could exercise legislative

function,[6292]6292 but the Church, has to the end of time 'the power

of the keys.'

8. There had been absent from the circle of disciples on that

Easter-Evening one of the Apostles, Thomas. Even when told of the

marvellous events at that gathering, he refused to believe, unless he

had personal and sensous evidence of the truth of the report. It can

scarecly have been, that Thomas did not believe in the fact that

Christ's Body had quitted the Tomb, or that He had really appeared.

But he held fast by what we may term the Vision-hypothesis, or, in

this case, rather the spectral theory. But until this Apostle also had

come to conviction of the Resurrection in the only real sense - of the

identical though glorified Corporeity of the Lord, and hence of the

continuity of the past with the present and future, it was impossible

to re-form the Apostlic Circle, or to renew the Apostolic commission,

since its primal message was testimony concerning the Risen One. This,

if we may so suggest, seems the reason why the Apostles still remain

in Jerusalem, instead of hastening, as directed, to meet the Master in

Galilee.

A quiet week had passed, during which - and this also may be for our

twofold learning - the Apostles excluded not Thomas,[6293]6293 nor yet

Thomas withdrew from the Apostles. Once more the day of days had come

- the Octave of the Feast. From that Easter-Day onwards the Church

must, even without special institution, have celebrated the

weekly-recurring memorial of His Resurrection, as that when He

breathed on the Church the breath of a new life, and consecrated it to

be His Representative. Thus, it was not only the memorial of His

Resurrection, but the birthday of the Church, even as Pentatecost was

her baptism day. On that Octave, then, the disciples were again

gathered, under circumstances precisely similar to those of Easter,

but now Thomas was also with them. Once more - and it is again

specially marked: 'the doors being shut'[6294]6294 - the Risen Saviour

appeared in the midst of the disciples with the well-known salutation.

He now offered to Thomas the demanded evidence; but it was no longer

either needed or sought. With a full rush of feeling he yielded

himself to the blessed conviction, which once formed, must immediately

have passed into act of adoration: 'My Lord and my God!' The fullest

confession this hitherto made, and which truly embraced the whole

outcome of the new conviction concerning the reality of Christ's

Resurrection. We remember how, under similar circumstances, Nathnael

had been the first to utter fullest confession.[6295]6295 We also

remember the analogous reply of the Saviour. As then, so now, He

pointed to the higher: to a faith which was not the outcome of sight,

and therefore limited and bounded by sight, whether of the sense or of

perception by the intellect. As one has finely remarked: 'This last

and greatest of the Beatitudes is the pecuilar hertiage of the later

Church'[6296]6296 - and thus most aptly comes as the consecration gift

of that Church.

9. The next scene presented to us is once again by the Lake of

Galilee. The manifestation to Thomas, and, with it, the restoration of

unity in the Aspostic Circle, had originally concluded the Gospel of

St. John.[6297]6297 But the report which had spread in the early

Church, that Disciple whom Jesus loved was not to die, led him to add

to his Gospel, by way of Appendix, and account of the events with

which this expectancy had connected itself. It is most instructive to

the critic, when challenged at every step to explain why one or

another fact is not mentioned or mentioned only in one Gospel, to find

that, but for the correction of a possible misapprehension in regard

to the aged Apostle, the Fourth Gospel would have contained no

reference to the manifestation of Christ in Galilee, nay, to the

presence of the disciples there before the Ascension. Yet, for all

that St. John had it in his mind. And should we not learn from this,

that what appear to us strange omissions, which, when held by the side

of the other Gospel-narratives, seem to involve discrepancies, may be

capable of the most satisfactory explanation, if we only knew all the

circumstance?

The history itself sparkles like a gem in its own peculiar setting. It

is of green Galilee, and of the blue Lake, and recalls the early days

and scenes of this history. As St. Matthew has it,[6298]6298 'the

eleven disciples went away into Galilee' - probably immediately after

that Octave of the Easter.[6299]6299 It can scarcely be doubted, that

they made known not only the fact of the Resurrection, but the

trysting which the Risen One had given them - perhaps at that Mountain

where He had spoken His first 'Sermon.' And so it was, that 'some

doubted,'[6300]6300 and that He afterwards appeared to the five

hundred at once.[6301]6301 But on that morning there were by the Lake

of Tiberias only seven of the disciples. Five of them only are named.

They are those who most closely kept in company with Him - perhaps

also they who lived nearest the Lake.

The scene is introduced by Peter's proposal to go a-fishing. It seems

as if the old habits had come back to them with the old associations.

Peter's companions naturally proposed to join him.[6302]6302 All that

still, clear night they were on the Lake, but caught nothing. Did not

this recall to them for former event, when James and John, and Peter

and Andrew were called to be Aspostles, and did it not specially

recall to Peter the searching and sounding of his heart on the morning

that followed?[6303]6303 But so utterly self-unconscious were they,

and, let us add, so far is this history from any trace of legendary

design,[6304]6304 that not the slightest indication of this appears.

Early morning was breaking, and under the rosy glow above the cool

shadows were still lying on the pebbly 'beach.' There stood the Figure

of One Whom they recognised not - nay, not even when He spake. Yet His

Words were intended to bring them this knowledge. The direction to

cast the net to the right side of the ship brought them, as He had

said, the haul for which they had toiled all night in vain. And more

than this: such a multitude of fishes, enough for 'the disciple whom

Jesus loved,' and whose heart may previously have misgiven him. He

whispered it to Peter: 'It is the Lord, 'and Simon, only reverently

gathering about him his fisher's upper garment,[6305]6305 cast himself

into the sea. Yet even so, except to be sooner by the side of Christ,

Peter seems to have gained nothing by his haste. The others, leaving

the ship, and transferring themselves to a small boat, which must have

been attached to it followed, rowing the short distance of about one

hundred yards,[6306]6306 and dragging after them the net, weighted

with the fishes.

They stepped on the beach, hallowed by His Presence, in silence, as if

they had entered Church or Temple. They dared not even dispose of the

netful of fishes which they had dragged on shore, until He directed

them what to do. This only they notice, that some unseen hand had

prepared the morning meal, which, when asked by the Master, they had

admitted they had not of their own. And now Jesus directed them to

bring the fish they had caught. When Peter dragged up the weight net,

it was found full of great fishes, not less than a hundred and

fifty-three in number. There is no need to attach any symbolic import

to that number, as the Fathers and later writers have done. We can

quite understand - nay, it seems almost natural, that, in the peculiar

circumstances, they should have counted the large fishes in that

miraculous draught that still left the net unbroken.[6307]6307 It may

have been, that they were told to count the fishes - partly, also, to

show the reality of what had taken place. But on the fire the coals

there seems to have been only one fish, and beside it only one

bread.[6308]6308 To this meal He now bade them, for they seem still to

have hung back in reverent awe, nor durst they ask him, Who He was,

well knowing it was the Lord. This, as St. John notes, was the third

appearance of Christ to the disciples as a body.[6309]6309

10. And still this morning of blessing was not ended. The frugal meal

was past, with all its significant teaching of just sufficient

provision for His servants, and abundant supply in the unbroken net

beside them. But some special teaching was needed, more even that that

to Thomas, for him whose work was to be so prominent among the

Apostles, whose love was so ardent, and yet in its very ardour so full

of danger to himself. For, our dangers spring not only from

deficiency, but it may be from excess of feeling, when that feeling is

not commensurate with inward strength. Had Peter not confessed, quite

honestly, yet, as the event proved, mistakingly, that his love to

Christ would endure even an ordeal that would disperse all the

others?[6310]6310 And had he not, almost immediately afterwards, and

though prophetically warned of it, thrice denied his Lord? Jesus had,

indeed, since then appeared specially to Peter as the Risen One. But

this threefold denial still, stood, as it were, uncancelled before the

other disciples, nay, before Peter himself. It was to this that the

threefold question to the Risen Lord now referred. Turning to Peter,

with pointed though most gentle allusion to be danger of

self-confidence - a confidence springing from only a sense of personal

affection, even though genuine - He asked: 'Simon, son of Jona' - as

it were with fullest reference to what he was naturally - 'lovest thou

Me more than these?' Peter understood it all. No longer with

confidence in self, avoiding the former reference to the others, and

even with marked choice of a different word to express his

affection[6311]6311 from that which the Saviour had used, he replied,

appealing rather to his Lord's, than to his own consciousness: 'Yea,

Lord, Thou knowest that I love Thee.' And even here the answer of

Christ is characteristic. it was to set him first the humblest work,

that which needed most tender care and patience: 'Feed [provide with

food] My Lambs.'

Yet a second time came the same question, although now without the

reference to the others, and, with the same answer by Peter, the now

varied and enlarged commission: 'Feed [shepherd, po_maine] My Sheep.'

Yet a third time did Jesus repeat the same question, now adopting in

it the very word which Peter had used to express his affection. Peter

was grieved at this threefold repetition. It recalled only too

bitterly his threefold denial. And yet the Lord was not doubtful of

Peter's love, for each time He followed up His question with a fresh

Apostle commission; but now that He put it for the third time, Peter

would have the Lord send down the sounding-line quite into the lowest

deep of this heart: 'Lord, Thou knowest all things - Thou

perceivest[6312]6312 that I love Thee!' And now the Saviour spake it:

'Feed [provide food for] My sheep.' His Lamb, His Sheep, to be

provided for, to be tended as such! And only love can do such service.

Yes, and Peter did love the Lord Jesus. He had loved Him when he said

it, only too confident in the strength of his feelings, that he would

follow the Master even unto death. And Jesus saw it all - yea, and how

this love of the ardent temperament which had once made him rove at

wild liberty, would give place to patient work of love, and be crowned

with that martyrdom which, when the beloved disciple wrote, was

already matter of the past. And the very manner of death by which he

was to glorify God was indicated in the words of Jesus.

As He spake them, He joined the symbolic action to His 'Follow Me.'

This command, and the encourgement of being in death literally made

like Him - following Him - were Peter's best strength. He obeyed; but

as he turned to do so, he saw another following. As St. John himself

puts it, it seems almost to convey that he had longed to share Peter's

call, with all that it implied. For, St. John speaks of himself as the

disciple whom Jesus loves, and he reminds us that in that night of

betrayal he had been specially a sharer with Peter, nay, had spoken

what the other had silently asked of him. Was it impatience, was it a

touch of the old Peter, or was it a simple inquiry of brotherly

interest which prompted the question, as he pointed to John: 'Lord -

and this man, what?' Whatever had been the motive, to him, as to us

all, when perplexed about those who seem to follow Christ, we ask it -

sometimes in bigoted narrowness, sometines in igornace, folly, or

jealousy - is this answer: 'What is that to thee? follow thou Me.' For

John also had his life-work for Christ. It was to 'tarry' while He was

coming[6313]6313 - to tarry those many years in patient labour, while

Christ was coming.

But what did it mean? The saying went aboard among the brethren that

John was not to die, but to tarry till Jesus came again to reign, when

death would be swallowed up in victory. But Jesus had not so said,

only: 'If I will that he tarry while I am coming.' What that 'Coming'

was, Jesus had not said, and John knew not. So, then, there are

things, and connected with His Coming, on which Jesus has left the

veil, only to be lifted by His own Hand - which He means us not to

know at present, and which we should be content to leave as He has

left them.

11. Beyond this narrative we have only briefest notices: by St. Paul,

of Christ manifesting Himself to James, which probably finally decided

him for Christ, and the Eleven meeting Him at the mountain, where He

had appointed them; by St. Luke, of the teaching in the Scriptures

during the forty days of communication between the Risen Christ and

the disciples.

But this twofold testimony comes to us from St. Matthew and St. Mark,

that then the worshipping disciples were once more formed into the

Apostolic Circle - Apostles, now, of the Risen Christ. And this was

the warrent of their new commission: 'All power (authority) has been

given to Me in heaven and on earth.' And this was their new

commission: 'Go ye, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations,

baptizing them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the

Holy Ghost.' And this was their work: 'Teaching them to observe all

things whatsoever I commanded you.' And this is His final and sure

promise: 'And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the

world.'

12. We are once more in Jersualem, whither He had bidden them go to

tarry for the fulfilment of the great promise. The Pentecost was

drawing nigh. And on that last day - the day of His Ascension - He led

them forth to the well-remembered Bethany. From where He had made His

last triumphal Entry into Jersualem before His Crucifixion, would He

make His truimphant Entry visibly into Heaven. Once more would they

have asked Him about that which seemed to them the final consummation

- the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel. But such questions became

them not. Theirs was to be work, not rest; suffering, not triumph. The

great promise before them was of spiritual, not outward, power: of the

Holy Ghost - and their call not yet to reign with Him, but to bear

witness for Him. And, as He so spake, He lifed His Hands in blessing

upon them, and, as He was visbly taken up, a cloud received Him. And

still they gazed, with upturned faces, on that luminous cloud which

had received Him, and two Angels spake to them this last message from

him, that He should so come in like manner - as they had beheld Him

going into heaven.

And so their last question to Him, ere He had parted from them, was

also answered, and with blessed assurance. Reverently they worshipped

Him; then, with great joy, returned to Jersualem. So it was all true,

all real - and Christ 'sat down at the Right Hand of God!' Henceforth,

neither doubting, ashamed, nor yet afraid, they 'were continually in

the Temple, blessing God,' 'And they went forth and preached

everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the

signs that followed. Amen.'

Amen! It is so. Ring out the bells of heaven; sing forth the Angelic

welcome of worship; carry it to the utmost bound of earth! Shine forth

from Bethany, Thou Sun of Righteousness, and chase away earth's mist

and darkness, for Heaven's golden day has broken!

Easter Morning, 1883. - Our task is ended - and we also worship and

look up. And we go back from this sight into a hostile world, to love,

and to live, and to work for Risen Christ. But as earth's day is

growing dim, and, with earth's gathering darkness, breaks over it

heaven's storm, we ring out - as of old they were wont, from

church-tower, to the mariners that hugged a rock-bound coast - our

Easter-bells to guide them who are belated, over the storm-tossed sea,

beyond the breakers, into the desired haven. Ring out, earth, all thy

Easter-chimes; bring you offerings, all ye people; worship in faith,

for -

'This Jesus, When was received up from you into heaven, shall so come,

in like manner as ye beheld Him going into heaven.' 'Even so, Lord

Jesus, come quickly!'

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I.

PSEUDEPIGRAPHIC WRITINGS

(See vol. i. pp. 37, 38, and other places.)

ONLY the briefest account of these can be given in this place; barely

more than an enumeration.

I. The Book of Enoch. - As the contents and the literature of this

remarkable book, which is quoted by St. Jude (vv. 14, 15), have been

fully described in Dr. Smith's and Wace's Dictionary of Christian

Biography (vol. ii. pp. 124-128), we may here refer to it the more

shortly.

It comes to us from Palestine, but has only been preserved in an

Ethiopic translation (published by Archbishop Laurence [Oxford, 1838;

in English transl. 3rd ed. 1821-1838; German transl. by A. G.

Hoffmann], then from five different MSS. by Professor Dillmann

[Leipzig, 1851; in German transl. Leipzig, 1853]). But even the

Ethiopic translation is not from the original Hebrew or Aramaic, but

from a Greek version, of which a small fragment has been discovered

(ch. lxxxix. 42-49; published by Cardinal Mai. Comp. also

Gildemeister, Zeitschr. d. D. Morg. Ges. for 1855, pp. 621-624, and

Gebhardt, Merx' Arch. ii. 1872, p. 243).

As regards the contents of the work: An Introduction of five brief

chapters, and the book (which, however, contains not a few spurious

passages) consists of five parts, followed by a suitable Epilogue. The

most interesting portions are those which tell of the Fall of the

Angels and its consequences, of Enoch's rapt journeys through heaven

and earth, and of what he saw and heard (ch. vi.-xxxvi.); the

Apocalyptic portions about the Kingdom of Heaven and the Advent of the

Messiah (lxxxiii-xci.); and, lastly, the hortatory discourses

(xci.-cv.). When we add, that it is pervaded by a tone of intense

faith and earnestness about the Messiah, 'the last things,' and other

doctrines specially brought out in the New Testament, its importance

will be understood. Altogether the Book of Enoch contains 108

chapters.

From a literary point of view, it has been arranged (by Schürer and

others) into three parts: - 1. The Original Work (Grundschrift), ch.

i.-xxxvi.; lxxii.-cv. This portion is supposed to date from about 175

b.c. 2. The Parables, ch. xxxvii.- liv. 6; lv. 3-lix.; lxi.-lxiv.;

lxix. 26-lxxi. This part also dates previous to the Birth of Christ -

perhaps from the time of Herod the Great. 3. The so-called Noachian

Sections, ch. liv. 7-lv. 2; lx.; lxv.-lxix. 25. To these must be added

ch. cvi., and the later conclusion in ch. cviii. On the dates of all

these portions it is impossible to speak definitely.

II. Even greater, though a different interest, attaches to the

Sibylline Oracles, written in Greek hexameters.[6314]6314 In their

present form they consist of twelve books, together with several

fragments. Passing over two large fragments, which seem to have

originally formed the chief part of the introduction to Book III., we

have (1) the two first Books. These contain part of an older and

Hellenist Jewish Sibyl, as well as of a poem by the Jewish

Pseudo-Phocylides, in which heathen myths concerning the first ages of

man are curiously welded with Old Testament views. The rest of these

two books was composed, and the whole put together, not earlier than

the close of the second century, perhaps by a Jewish Christian. (2)

The third Book is by far the most interesting. Besides the fragments

already referred to, vv. 97-807 are the work of a Hellenist Jew,

deeply imbued with the Messianic hope. This part dates from about 160

before our era, while vv. 49-96 seem to belong to the year 31 b.c. The

rest (vv. 1-45, 818-828) dates from a later period. We must here

confine our attention to the most ancient portion of the work. For our

present purpose, we may arrange it into three parts. In the first, the

ancient heathen theogony is recast in a Jewish mould - Uranus becomes

Noah; Shem, Ham, and Japheth are Saturn, Titan, and Japetus, while the

building of the Tower of Babylon is the rebellion of the Titans. Then

the history of the world is told, the Kingdom of Israel and of David

forming the centre of all. What we have called the second is the most

curious part of the work. It embodies ancient heathen oracles, so to

speak, in a Jewish recension, and interwoven with Jewish elements. The

third part may be generally described as anti-heathen, polemical, and

Apocalyptic. The Sibyl is thoroughly Hellenistic in spirit. She is

loud and earnest in her appeals, bold and defiant in the tone of her

Jewish pride, self-conscious and triumphant in her anticipations. But

the most remarkable circumstance is, that this Judaising and Jewish

Sibyl seems to have passed - though possibly only in parts - as the

oracles of the ancient Erythræan Sibyl, which had predicted to the

Greeks the fall of Troy, and those of the Sibyl of Cumæ, which, in the

infancy of Rome, Tarquinius Superbus had deposited in the Capitol, and

that as such it is quoted from by Virgil (in his 4th Eclogue) in his

description of the Golden Age.

Of the other Sibylline Books little need be said. The 4th, 5th, 9th,

and 12th Books were written by Egyptian Jews at dates varying from the

year 80 to the third century of our era. Book VI. is of Christian

origin, the work of a Judaising Christian, about the second half of

the second century. Book VIII., which embodies Jewish portions, is

also of Christian authorship, and so are Books X. and XI.

III. The collection of eighteen hymns, which in their Greek version

bear the name of the Psalter of Solomon, must originally have been

written in Hebrew, and dates from more than half a century before our

era. They are the outcome of a soul intensely earnest, although we not

unfrequently meet expressions of Pharisiac

self-religiousness.[6315]6315 It is a time of national sorrow in which

the poet sings, and it almost seems as if these 'Psalms' had been

intended to take up one or another of the leading thoughts in the

corresponding Davidic Psalms, and to make, as it were, application of

them to the existing circumstances.[6316]6316 Though somewhat

Hellenisttic in its cast, the collection breathes ardent Messianic

expectancy, and firm faith in the resurrection, and eternal reward and

punishment (iii. 16; xiii. 9, 10; xiv. 2, 6, 7; xv. 11 to the end).

IV. Another work of that class - 'Little Genesis,' or 'The Book of

Jubilees' - has been preserved to us in its Ethiopic translation

(though a Latin version of part of it has lately been discovered) and

is a Haggadic Commentary on Genesis. Professing to be a revelation to

Moses during the forty days on Mount Sinai, it seeks to fill lacunæ in

the sacred history, specially in reference to its chronology. Its

character is hortatory and warning, and it breathes a strong

anti-Roman spirit. It was written by a Palestinian in Hebrew, or

rather Aramæan, probably about the time of Christ. The name, 'Book of

Jubilees,' is derived from the circumstance that the

Scripture-chronology is arranged according to Jubilee periods of

forty-nine years, fifty of these (or 2,450 years) being counted from

the Creation to the entrance into Canaan.

V. Among the Pseudepigraphic Writings we also include the 4th Book of

Esdras, which appears among our Apocrypha as 2 Esdras ch. iii.-xiv.

(the two first and the two last chapters being spurious additions).

The work, originally written in Greek, has only been preserved in

translation into five different languages (Latin, Arabic, Syriac,

Ethiopic, and Armenian). It was composed probably about the end of the

first century after Christ. From this circumstance, and the influence

of Christianity on the mind of the writer, who, however, is an earnest

Jew, its interest and importance can be scarcely exaggerated. The name

of Ezra was probably assumed, because the writer wished to treat

mainly of the mystery of Israel's fall and restoration.

The other Pseudepigraphic Writings are: -

VI. The Ascension (ch. i.-v.) and Vision (ch. vi.-xi.) of Isaiah,

which describes the martyrdom of the prophet (with a Christian

interpolation [ch. iii. 14-iv. 22] ascribing his death to prophecy of

Christ, and containing Apocalyptic portions), and then what he saw in

heaven. The book is probably based on an older Jewish account, but is

chiefly of Christian heretical authroship. It exists only in

translations, of which that in Ethiopic (with Latin and English

versions) has been edited by Archibishop Laurence.

VII. The Assumption of Moses (probably quoted in St. Jude ver. 9) also

exists only in translation, and is really a fragment. It consists of

twelve chapters. After an Introduction (ch. i.), containing an address

of Moses to Joshua, the former, professedly, opens to Joshua the

future of Israel to the time of Varus. This is followed by an

Apocalyptic portion, beginning at ch. vii. and ending with ch. x. The

two concluding chapters are dialogues between Joshua and Moses. The

book dates probably from about the year 2 b.c., or shortly afterwards.

Besides the Apocalyptic portions the interest lies chiefly in the fact

that the writer seems to belong to the Nationalist party, and that we

gain some glimpses of the Apocalyptic views and hopes - the highest

spiritual tendency - of that deeply interesting movement. Most

markedly, this Book at least is strongly anti-Pharisaic, especially in

its opposition to their purifications (ch. vii.). We would here

specially note a remarkable resemblance between 2 Tim. iii. 1-5 and

this in Assump. Mos. vii. 3-10: (3) 'Et regnabunt de his homines

pestilentiosi et impii, dicentes se esse iustos, (4) et hi suscitabunt

iram animorum suorum, qui erunt homines dolosi, sibi placentes, ficti

in omnibus suiset onmi hora diei amantes convivia, devoratores gulæ

(5) ... (6) [paupe] rum bonorum comestores, dicentes se haec facere

propter misericordiam eorum, (7) sed et exterminatores, queruli et

fallaces, celantes se ne possint cognosci, impii in scelere, pleni et

inquitate ab oriente usque ad occidentem, (8) dicentes: habebimus

discubitiones et luxurian edentes et bibentes, et potabimus nos,

tamquam principes erimus. (9) Et manus eorum et dentes inmunda

tractabunt, et os eorum loquetur ingentia, et superdicent: (10) noli

[tu me] tangere, ne inquines me ...' But it is very significant, that

instead of the denunciation of the Pharisees in vv. 9,10 of the

Assumptio, we have in 2 Tim. iii. 5. the words 'having the form of

godliness, but denying the power thereof.'

VIII. The Apocalypse of Baruch. - This also exists only in Syriac

translation, and is apparently fragmentary, since the vision promised

in ch lxxvi. 3 is not reported, while the Epistle of Baruch to the two

and a half tribes in Babylon, referred to in lxxvii. 19, is also

missing. The book had been divided into seven sections(i.-xii.;

xiii.-xx.; xxi.-xxxxiv.; xxxv.-xlvi.; xlvii.-lii.; liii.-lxxvi.;

lxxvii.-lxxxvii.). The whole is in a form of revelation to Baruch, and

of his replies, and questions, or of notices about his bearing, fast,

prayers, &c. The most interesting parts are in sections v. and vi. In

the former we mark (ch. xlviii. 31-41) the reference to the

consequence of the sin of our first parents (ver. 42; comp. also xvii.

3; xxiii. 4; liv. 15, 19), and in ch. xlix. the discussion and

information; with what body and in what form the dead shall rise,

which is answered, not as by St. Paul in 1 Cor. xv. - though the

question raised (1 Cor. xv. 35) is precisely the same - but in the

strictly Rabbinic manner, described by us in Vol. ii. pp. 398, 399. In

section vi. we specially mark (ch. lxix.-lxxiv.) the Apocalyptic

descriptions of the Last Days, and of the Reign and Judgment of

Messiah. In general, the figurative language in that Book is

instructive in regard to the phraseology used in the Apocalyptic

portions of the New Testament. Lastly, we mark that the views on the

consequences of the Fall are much more limited than those expressed in

4 Esdras. Indeed, they do not go beyond physical death as the

consequence of the sin of our first parents (see especially liv. 19:

Non est ergo Adam causa, nisi animæ suæ tantum; nos vero unusquisque

fuit animæ suæ Adam). At the same time, it seems to use, as if perhaps

the reasoning rather than the language of the writer indicated

hesitation on his part (liv. 14-19; comp. also first clause of xlviii.

43). It almost seems as if liv. 14-19 were intended as against the

reasoning of St. Paul, Rom. v. 12 to the end. In this respect the

passage in Baruch is most interesting, not only in itself (see for ex.

ver. 16: Certo enim qui credit recipiet mercedem), but in reference to

the teaching of 4 Esdras which, as regards original sin, takes another

direction than Baruch. But I have little doubt that both allude to the

- to them - novel teaching of St. Paul on that doctrine. Lastly, as

regards the question when this remarkable work was written, we would

place its composition after the destruction of Jerusalem. Most writers

date it before the publication of 4 Esdras, Even the appearance of a

Pseudo-Baruch and Pseudo-Esdras are significant of the political

circumstances and the religious hopes of the nation.

For criticism and fragments of other Old Testament Pseudepigrapha,

comp. Fabricius, Codex Pseudepigraphus Vet. Test., 2 vols. (ed. 2,

1722). The Psalter of Sol., IV. Esdr. (or, as he puts it, IV. and V.

Esd.), the Apocal of Baruch, and the Assumption of Mos., have been

edited by Fritzsche (Lips. 1871); other Jewish (Hebrew) O. T.

Pseudepigraphs - though of a later date - in Jellinek's beth haMidrash

(6 vols.), passim. A critical review of the literature of the subject

would here be out of place.

APPENDIX II.

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA AND RABBINIC THEOLOGY.

(See vol. i. pp. 42, 45, 47, 53).

(Ad. vol. i. p. 42, note 4.) In comparing the allegorical Canons of

Philo with those of Jewish traditionalism, we think first of all of

the seven exegetical canons which are ascribed to Hillel. These bear

chiefly the character of logical deductions, and as such were largely

applied in the Halakhah. These seven canons were next expanded by R.

Ishmael (in the first century) into thirteen, by the analysis of one

of them (the 5th) into six, and the addition of this sound exegetical

rule, that where two verses seem to be contradictory, their

conciliation must be sought in a third passage. The real rules for the

Haggadah - if such there were - were the thirty-two canons of R. José

the Galilean (in the second century). It is here that we meet so much

that is kindred in form to the allegorical canons of Philo.[6317]6317

Only they are not rationalising, and far more brilliant in their

application. Most taking results - at least to a certain class of

minds - might be reached by finding in each consonant of a word the

initial letter of another (Notariqon). Thus, the word MiSBeaCH (altar)

was resolved into these four words, beginning respectively with M, S,

B, CH: Forgiveness, Merit, Blessing, Life. Then there was Gematria, by

which every letter in a word was resolved into its arithmetical

equivalent. Thus, the two words Gog and Magog = 70, which was the

supposed number of all the heathen nations. Again, in Athbash the

letters of the Hebrew alphabet were transposed (the first for the last

of the alphabet, and so on), so that SHeSHaKH(Jer. xxv. 26; li. 41)

became BaBeL, while in Albam, the twenty-two Hebrew letters were

divided into two rows, which might be exchanged (L for A, M for B,

&c.).

In other respects also the Palestinian had the advantage of the

Alexandrian mode of interpretation. There was at least ingenuity, if

not always truth, in explaining a word by resolving it into two

others,[6318]6318 or in discussing the import of exclusive particles

(such as 'only,' 'but,' 'from,'), and inclusives (such as 'also,'

'with,' 'all,') or in discovering shades of meaning from the

derivation of a word, as in the eight synonyms for 'poor' - of which

one (Ani), indicated simply 'the poor;' another (Ebhyon, from abhah),

one who felt both need and desire; a third (misken), one humiliated; a

fourth (rash from rush), one who had been emptied of his property; a

fifth (dal), one who property had become exhausted; a sixth (dakh),

one who felt broken down; a seventh (makh), one who had come down; and

the eighth (chelekh), one who was wretched - or in discussing such

differences as between amar, to speak gently, and dabhar, to speak

strongly - and many others.[6319]6319 Here intimate knowledge of the

language and tradition might be of real use. At other times striking

thoughts were suggested, as when it was pointed out that all mankind

was made to spring from one man, in order to show the power of God,

since all coins struck from the same machine were precisely the same,

while in man, whatever the resemblance, there was still a difference

in each.

2. (Ad vol. i. p. 45, and note 3.) The distinction between the

unapproachable God and God as manifest and manifesting Himself, which

lies at the foundation of so much in the theology of Philo in regard

to the 'intermediary beings' - 'Potencies' - and the Logos, occurs

equally in Rabbinic theology,[6320]6320 though there it is probably

derived from a different source. Indeed, we regard this as explaining

the marked and striking avoidance of all anthropomorphisms in the

Targumim. It also accounts for the designation of God by two classes

of terms, of which in our view, the first expresses the idea of God as

revealed, the other that of God as revealing Himself; or, to put it

otherwise, which indicate, the one a state, the other an act on the

part of God. The first of these classes of designations embraces two

terms: yeqara, the excellent glory, and Shekhinah, or Shekhintha, the

abiding Presence.[6321]6321 On the other hand, God, as in the act of

revealing himself, is described by the term Memra, the 'Logos,' 'the

word.' A distinction of ideas also obtains between the terms Yeqara

and Shekhinah. The former indicates, as we think, the inward and

upward, the latter the outward and downward, aspect of the revealed

God. This distinction will appear by comparing the use of the two

words in the Targumim, and even by the consideration of passages in

which the two are placed side by side (as for ex., in the Targum

Onkelos on Ex. xvii. 16; Numb. xiv. 14; in Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. xvi.

13, 14; in the Jerusalem Targum, Ex. xix. 18; and in the Targum

Jonathan, Is. vi. 1, 3; Hagg. i. 8). Thus, also, the allusion in 2

Pet. i. 17, to 'the voice from the excellent glory' (t_v megaloprepo_v

d_xjv) must have been the Yeqara.[6322]6322 The varied use of the

terms Shekhinah and Yeqara, and then Memra, in the Targum of Is. vi.,

is very remarkable. In ver. 1 it is the Yeqara, and its train - the

heavenward glory - which fills the Heavenly Temple. In ver. 3 we hear

the Trishagion in connection with the dwelling of His Shekhintha,

while the splendour (Ziv) of His Yeqara fills the earth - as it were,

falls down to it. In ver. 5 the prophet dreads, because he had seen

the Yeqara of the Shekhinah, while in ver. 6 the coal is taken from

before the Shekhintha (which is) upon the throne of the Yeqara (a

remarkable expression, which occurs often; so especially in ix. xvii.

16). Finally, in ver. 8, the prophet hears the voice of the Memra of

Jehovah speaking the words of vv. 9, 10. It is intensely interesting

to notice that in St. John xii. 40, these words are prophetically

applied in connection with Christ. Thus St. John applies to the Logos

what the Targum understands of the Memra of Jehovah.

But, theologically, by far the most interesting and important point,

with reference not only to the Logos of Philo, but to the term Logos

as employed in the Fourth Gospel, is to ascertain the precise import

of the equivalent expression Memra in the Targumim. As stated in the

text of this book (vol. i. p. 47), the term Memra as applied to God,

occurs 176 times in the Targum Onkelos, 99 times in the Jerusalem

Targum, and 321 times in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. We subjoin the

list of these passages, arranged in three classes. Those in Class I.

mark where the term does not apply to this, or where it is at least

doubtful; those in Class II. where the fair interpretation of a

passage shows; and Class III. where it is undoubted and

unquestionable, that the expression Memra refers to God as revealing

Himself, that is the Logos.

Classified List of all the Passages in which the term 'Memra' occurs

in the Targum Onkelos.

(The term occurs 176 times. Class III., which consists of those

passages in which the term Memra bears undoubted application to the

Divine Personality as revealing Himself, comprises 79

passages).[6323]6323

CLASS I. Inapplicable or Doubtful: Gen. xxvi. 5; Ex. ii. 25; v. 2; vi.

8; xv. 8, 10, 26; xvi. 8; xvii. 1; xxiii. 21, 22; xxv. 22; xxxii. 13;

Lev. xviii. 30; xxii. 9; xxvi. 14, 18, 21, 27; Num. iii. 39, 51; iv.

37, 41, 45, 49; ix. 18 (bis), 19, 20 (bis), 23 quat; x. 13; xiii. 3;

xiv. 11, 22, 30, 35; xx. 12, 24; xxiii. 19; xxiv. 4;16; xxvii. 14;

xxxiii. 2, 38; xxxvi. 5; Deut. i. 26; iv. 30; viii. 3, 20; xiii. 5, 19

(in our Version 4, 18); xv. 5; xxvi. 15, 18; xxvii. 10; xxviii. 1, 2,

15, 45, 62; xxx. 2, 8, 10, 20.

An examination of these passages would show that, for caution's sake,

we have sometimes put down as 'inapplicable' or 'doubtful' what,

viewed in connection with other passages in which the word is used,

appears scarcely doubtful. It would take too much space to explain why

some passages are put in the next class, although the term Memra seems

to be used in a manner parallel to that in Class I. Lastly, the reason

why some passages appear in Class III., when others, somewhat similar

are placed in Class II., must be sought in the context and connection

of a verse. We must ask the reader to believe that each passage had

been carefully studied by itself, and that our conclusions have been

determined by careful consideration, and by the fair meaning to be put

on the language of Onkelos.

CLASS II. Fair: Gen. vii. 16; xx. 3; xxxi. 3, 24; Ex. xix. 5; Lev.

viii. 35; xxvi. 23; Numb. xi. 20; 23; xiv. 41; xxii. 9, 18, 20; xxiii.

3, 4, 16; xxvii. 21; xxxvi. 2; Deut. i. 32; iv 24, 33, 36; v. 24, 25,

26; ix 23 (bis) ; xxxi. 23; xxxiv. 5.

CLASS III. Undoubted: Gen iii. 8, 10; vi. 6 (bis), 7; viii. 21; ix.

12, 13, 15,16, 17; xv. 1, 6; xvii. 2, 7, 10, 11; xxi. 20, 22, 23;

xxii. 16; xxiv. 3; xxvi. 3, 24, 28; xxviii. 15, 20 21; xxxi. 49, 50;

xxxv. 3; xxxix, 2, 3, 21, 23; x1viii. 21; xlix. 24, 25; Ex. iii. 12;

iv. 12, 15; x. 10; xiv. 31; xv. 2; xviii. 19; xix. 17; xxix. 42, 43;

xxx. 6; xxxi. 13, 17; xxxiii. 22, Lev. xx. 23; xxiv. 12; xxvi 9; 11,

30, 46; Numb. xiv. 9 (bis), 43; xvii. 19 (in our Version v. 4); xxi.

5; xxiii. 21; Deut. i. 30; ii. 7; iii. 22; iv. 37; v. 5; ix. 3; xviii.

16, 19, xx. 1; xxiii. 15; xxxi. 6, 8; xxxii. 51; xxxiii. 3, 27.

Of most special interest is the rendering of Onkelos of Deut. xxxiii.

27, where instead of 'underneath are the everlasting arms,' Onkelos

has it: 'And by His Memra was the world made,' exactly as in St. John

i. 10. This divergence of Onkelos from the Hebrew text is utterly

unaccountable, nor has any explanation of it, as far as I know, been

attempted. Winer, whose inaugural dissertation 'De Onkeloso ejusque

Paraphrasi chaldaica' (Lips. 1820), most modern writers have simply

followed (with some amplifications, chiefly from Luzatto's

'Philoxenus,' {hebrew} makes no reference to this passage, nor do his

successors, so far as I know. It is curious that, as our present

Hebrew text has three words, so has the rendering of Onkelos, and that

both end with the same word.

In classifying the passages in which the word Memra occurs in the

Jerusalem Targum and the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, we have reversed the

previous order, and Class I. represents the passages in which the term

undoubtedly applies to the Personal manifestation of God; Class II.,

in which this is the fair interpretation; Class III., in which

application is, to say the most, doubtful.

Classified List of Passages (according to the above scheme) in which

the term 'Memra' occurs in the Targum Jerushalmi on the Pentateuch.

Class I. Of undoubted application to a Personal Manifestation of God:

Gen. i. 27; iii. 9, 22; v. 24; vi. 3; viii. 16; xv. 1; xvi. 3; xix.

24; xxi. 33; xxii 8,14; xxviii. 10; xxx. 22 (bis); xxxi. 9; xxxv. 9

(quat.); xxxviii. 25; xl. 23; exod. iii. 14; vi. 3; xii. 42 (quat.);

xiii. 18; xiv. 15, 24, 25; xv. 12, 25 (bis); xix. 5, 7, 8, 9 (bis);

xx. 1, 24; xxv. 4; xxvii. 16; Deut. i. 1; iii. 2; iv. 34; xxvi. 3, 14,

17, 18; xxviii. 27, 68; xxxiii. 15, 39, 51; xxxiii. 2, 7; xxxiv. 9,

10, 11.

Class II. Where such application is fair: Gen. v. 24; xxi. 33; Ex. vi.

3; xv. 1; Lev. i. 1; Numb. xxiii. 15, 21; xxiv. 4, 16; Deut. xxxii. 1,

40.

Class III. Where such application is doubtful: Gen. vi. 6; xviii. 1,

17; xxii. 14 (bis); xxx. 22; xl. 23; xlix. 18; Ex. xiii. 19; xv. 2,

26; xvii. 19; xix. 3; Deut. i. 1; xxxii. 18; xxxiv. 4, 5.

Classified List of Passages in which the term 'Memra' occurs in the

Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on the Pentateuch.

Class I. Undoubted: Gen. ii. 8, 10, 24; iv. 26; v. 2; vii. 16; ix. 12,

13, 15, 16, 17; xi. 8; xii. 17; xv. 1; xvii. 2, 7, 10, 11; xviii. 5;

xix. 24 (bis); xx. 6, 18: xxi. 22; 22, 23, 33; xxii. 1; xxiv, 3; xxvi.

3, 24, 28; xxvii. 28, 31; xxviii. 10, 15, 20; xxix. 12; xxxi. 3, 50;

xxxv. 3, 9; xxxix. 2, 3, 21, 23; xli.1; xlvi. 4; xlviii. 9, 21; xlix.

25; 1. 20; Exod. i. 21; ii. 5; iii. 12; vii. 25; x. 10; xii. 23, 29;

xiii. 8, 15, 17; xiv. 25, 31; xv. 25; xvii. 13, 15, 16 (bis); xviii.

19; xx. 7; xxvi. 28; xxix. 42, 43; xxx. 6, 36; xxxi. 13, 17; xxxii.

35; xxxiii. 9, 19; xxxiv. 5; xxxvi. 33; Lev. i. 1 (bis); vi. 2; viii.

35; ix. 23; xx. 23; xxiv. 12 (bis); xxvi. 11, 12, 30, 44, 46; Numb.

iii. 16, 39, 51; iv. 37, 41, 45, 49; ix. 18 (bis), 19, 20, (bis), 23

(ter); x. 13, 35, 36; xiv. 9, 41, 43; xvi. 11, 26; xvii. 4; xxi. 5, 6,

8, 9, 34; xxii. 18, 19, 28; xxiii. 3, 4, 8 (bis), 16, 20, 21; xxiv.

13; xxvii. 16; xxxi. 8; xxxiii. 4; Deut. i. 10, 30, 43; ii. 7, 21;

iii. 22; iv. 3, 7, (bis) 20, 24, 33, 36; v. 5 (bis), 11, 22, 23, 24

(bis), 25, 26; vi. 13, 21, 22; ix. 3;xi. 23; xii. 5, 11; xviii. 19;

xx. 1; xxi. 20; xxiv. 18, 19; xxvi. 5, 14, 18; xxviii. 7,9, 11, 13,

20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 35, 48, 49, 59, 61, 63, 68; xxix. 2, 4; xxx.

3, 4, 5, 7; xxxi. 5, 8, 23; xxxii. 6, 9, 12, 36; xxxiii. 29; xxxiv. 1,

5, 10, 11.

Class II. Fair: Gen. v. 24; xv. 6; xvi. 1, 13; xviii. 17; xxii. 16;

xxix. 31; xxx. 22; xlvi. 4; Ex. ii. 23; iii. 8, 17, 19; iv. 12; vi. 8,

xii. 27; xiii. 5, 17; xxxii. 13; xxxiii. 12, 22; Lev. xxvi. 44; Numb.

xiv. 30; xx. 12, 21; xxii. 9, 20; xxiv. 4, 16, 23; Deut. viii. 3; xi.

12; xxix. 23; xxxi. 2, 7; xxxii. 18, 23, 26,38, 39, 43, 48, 50, 51;

xxxiii. 3, 27; xxxiv. 6.

Class III. Doubtful: Gen. iv. 3, 6 (bis); viii. 1, 21; xxii. 18; xxvi.

5 (bis); Ex. iv. 15; v. 2; ix. 20, 21; x. 29; xiv. 7; xv. 2, 8; xix.

5; xxv. 22; Lev. xviii. 30; xxii. 9; xxvi. 40; Numb. vi. 27; ix. 8;

xii. 6; xiv. 11, 22, 35;xv. 34; xx. 24; xxiii. 19; xxvii. 14; xxxiii.

2. 38; xxxvi. 5; Deut. i. 26, 32; iv. 30; v. 5; viii. 20; ix. 23; xi.

1; xiii. 18; xv. 5; xix. 15; xxv. 18; xxvi. 17; xxvii. 10; xxviii. 1,

15, 45, 62; xxx. 2, 8, 9, 10; xxxi. 12; xxxiii. 9.

(Ad vol. i. p. 53, note 4.) Only one illustration of Philo's peculiar

method of interpreting the Old Testament can here be given. It will at

the same time show how he found confirmation for his philosophical

speculations in the Old Testament, and further illustrate his system

of moral theology in its most interesting, but also most difficult,

point. The question is, how the soul was to pass from its state of

sensuousness and sin to one of devotion to reason, which was religion

and righteousness. It will be remarked that the change from the one

state to the other is said to be accomplished in one of three ways: by

study, by practice, or through a good natural disposition (m_qjsiv,

_skjsiv, e_fu_a) exactly as Aristotle put it. But Philo found a symbol

for each, and for a preparatory state in each, in Scripture. The three

Patriarchs represented this threefold mode of reaching the

supersensuous: Abraham, study; Jacob, practice; Isaac, a good

disposition; while Enos, Enoch, and Noah, represented the respective

preparatory stages. Enos (hope), the first real ancestor of our race,

represented the mind awakening to the existence of a better life.

Abraham (study) received command to leave 'the land' (sensuousness).

But all study was threefold. It was, first, physical - Abram in the

land of Ur, contemplating the starry sky, but not knowing God. Next to

the physical was that 'intermediate' (m_sj) study, which embraced the

ordinary 'cycle of knowledge' (_gk_kliov paide_a). This was Abram

after he left Haran, and that knowledge was symbolised by his union

with Hagar, who tarried (intermediately) between Kadesh and Bered. But

this stage also was insufficient, and the soul must reach the third

and highest stage, that of Divine philosophy (truly, the love of

wisdom, filosof_a) where eternal truth was the subject of

contemplation. Accordingly, Abram left Lot, he became Abraham, and he

was truly united to Sarah, no longer Sarai. Onwards and ever upwards

would the soul now rise to the knowledge of virtue. of heavenly

realities, nay, of the nature of God Himself.

But there was yet another method than 'study,' by which the soul might

rise - that of askesis, discipline, practice, of which Scripture

speaks in Enoch and Jacob. Enoch - whom 'God took, and he was not'

(Gen. v. 24) - meant the soul turning from the lower to the higher, so

that it was no longer found in its former place of evil. From Enoch,

as the preparatory stage, we advance to Jacob, first merely fleeing

from sensuous entanglements (from Laban), then contending with the

affections, ridding himself of five of the seventy-five souls with

which he had entered Egypt (Deut. x.22, comp. with Gen. xlvi. 27),

often nearly misled by the Sophists (Dinah and Hamor), often nearly

failing and faint in the conflict (Jacob's wrestling), but holpen by

God, and finally victorious, when Jacob became Israel.

But the highest of all was the spiritual life which came neither from

study nor discipline, but through a good disposition. Here we have,

first of all, Noah, who symbolises only the commencement of virtue,

since we read not of any special virtue in him. Rather is he rest - as

the name implies - good, relatively to those around. It was otherwise

with Isaac, who was perfect before his birth (and hence chosen), even

as Rebekah meant constancy in virtue. In that state the soul enjoyed

true rest (the Sabbath, Jerusalem) and joy, which Isaac's name

implied. But true virtue, which was also true wisdom, was Paradise,

whence issued the one stream (goodness), which again divided into four

branches (the four Stoic virtues): - Pison, 'prudence' (fr_njsiv);

Gihon, 'fortitude' (_ndr_a); Tigris, 'desire' (_piqum_a), and

Euphrates, 'justice' (dikaios_nj). And yet, though these be the Stoic

virtues, they all spring from Paradise, the Garden of God - and all

that is good, and all help to it, comes to us ultimately from God

Himself, and is in God.

APPENDIX III.

RABBINIC VIEWS AS TO THE LAWFULNESS OF IMAGES, PICTORIAL

REPRESENTATIONS ON COINS, ETC.

(See vol. i. p. 89, note 3.)

On this point, especially as regarded images, statues, and coins, the

views of the Rabbis underwent (as stated in the text) changes and

modifications according to the outward circumstances of the people.

The earlier and strictest opinions, which absolutely forbade any

representation, were relaxed in the Mishnah, and still further in the

Talmud.

In tracing this development, we mark as a first stage that a

distinction was made between having such pictorial representations and

making use of them, in the sense of selling or bartering them; and

again between making and finding them. The Mishnah forbids only such

representations of human beings as carry in their hand some symbol of

power, such as a staff, bird, globe, or as the Talmud adds, a sword,

or even a signet-ring (Ab. Z. iii. 1). The Commentaries explain that

this must refer to the making use of them, since their possession was,

at any rate, prohibited. The Talmud adds (Ab. Z. 40 b, 41 a) that

these were generally representations of kings, that they were used for

purposes of worship, and that their prohibition applied only to

villages, not to towns, where they were used for ornament. Similarly

the Mishnah directs that everything bearing a representation of sun or

moon, or of a dragon, was to be thrown into the Dead Sea (Ab. Z. iii.

3). On the other hand, the Talmud quotes (Ab. Z. 42 b) a proposition

(Boraita), to the effect that all representations of the planets were

allowed, except those of the sun and moon,[6324]6324 likewise all

statues except those of man, and all pictures except those of a

dragon, the discussion leading to the conclusion that in two, if not

in all the cases mentioned, the Talmudic directions refer to finding,

not making such. So stringent, indeed, was the law as regarded

signet-rings, that it was forbidden to have raised work on them, and

only such figures were allowed as were sunk beneath the surface,

although even then they were not to be used for sealing (Ab. Z. 43 b).

But this already marks a concession, accorded apparently to a

celebrated Rabbi, who had such a ring. Still further in the same

direction is the excuse, framed at a later period, for the Rabbis who

worshipped in a Synagogue that had a statue of a king to the effect

that they could not be suspected of idolatory, since the place, and

hence their conduct, was under the inspection of all men. This more

liberal tendency had, indeed, appeared at a much earlier period, in

the case of the Nasi Gamaliel II., who made use of a public bath at

Acco in which there was a statue of Aphrodite. The Mishnah (Ab. Z.

iii. 4) puts this twofold plea into his mouth, that he had not gone

into the domain of the idol, but the idol came into his, and that the

statue was there for ornament, not for worship. The Talmud endorses,

indeed, these arguments, but in a manner showing that the conduct of

the great Gamaliel was not really approved of (Ab. Z. 44 b). But a

statue used for idolatrous purposes was not only to be pulverized, but

the dust cast to the winds or into the sea, lest it might possible

serve as manure to the soul! (Ab. Z. iii. 3.) This may explain how

Josephus ventured even to blame King Solomon for the figures on the

Brazen sea and on his throne (Ant. viii. 7. 5), and how he could

excite a fanatical rabble at Tiberias, to destroy the palace of Herod

Antipas because it contained 'figures of living creatures' (Life

12).[6325]6325

APPENDIX IV.

AN ABSTRACT OF JEWISH HISTORY FROM THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER THE

GREAT TO

THE ACCESSION OF HEROD

(See Book I. ch. viii.)

The political connection of the Grecian world, and, with it, the

conflict with Hellenism, may be said to have connected with the

victorious progress of Alexander the Great through the then known

world (333 b.c.).[6326]6326 It was not only that his destruction of

the Persian empire put an end to the easy and peaceful allegiance

which Judæa had owned to it for about two centuries, but that the

establishment of such a vast Hellenic empire. as was the aim of

Alexander, introduced a new element into the world of Asia. Everywhere

the old civilisation gave way before the new. So early as the

commencement of the second century before Christ, Palestine was

already surrounded, north, east, and west, with a girdle of Hellenic

cities, while in the interior of the land itself Grecianism had its

foothold in Galilee and was dominant in Samaria. But this is not all.

After continuing the frequent object of contention between the rulers

of Egypt and Syria, Palestine ultimately passed from Egyptian to

Syrian domination during the reign of Seleucus IV. (187-175 b.c.). His

successor was that Antiochus IV., Epiphanes (175-164), whose reckless

determination to exterminate Judaism, and in its place to substitute

Hellenism, led to the Maccabean rising. Mad as this attempt seems, it

could scarcely have been made had there not been in Palestine itself a

party to favour his plans. In truth, Grecianism, in its worst form,

had long before made its way, slowly but surely, into the highest

quarters. For the proper understanding of this history its progress

must be briefly indicated.

After the death of Alexander, Palestine passed first under Egyptian

domination. Although the Ptolemies were generally favourable to the

Jews (at least of their own country), those of Palestine at times felt

the heavy hand of the conqueror (Jos. Ant. xii. 1. 1). Then followed

the contests between Syria and Egypt for its possession, in which the

county must have severely suffered. As Josephus aptly remarks (Ant.

xii. 3. 3), whichever partly gained, Palestine was 'like a ship in a

storm which is tossed by the waves on both sides.' Otherwise it was a

happy time, because one of the comparative independence. The secular

and spiritual power was vested in the hereditary High-Priests, who

paid for their appointment (probably annually) the sum of twenty

(presumably Syrian) talents, amounting to five ordinary talents, or

rather less than 1,200l.[6327]6327 Besides this personal, the country

paid a general tribute, its revenues being let to the highest bidder.

The sum levied on Judæa itself has computed at 81,900l. (350 ordinary

talents). Although this tribute appears by no means excessive, bearing

in mind that in later times the dues from the balsam-district around

Jericho were reckoned at upwards of 46,800l. (200 talents), the

hardship lay in the mode of levying it by strangers, often unjustly,

and always harshly, and in the charges connected with its collection.

This cause of complaint was indeed, removed in the course of time, but

only by that which led to far more serious evils.

The succession of the High-Priests, as given in Nehem. xii. 10, 11,

22, furnishes the following names: Jeshua. Joiakin, Eliashib, Joiada,

Johanan,[6328]6328 Jonathan, and Jaddua, who was the contemporary of

Alexander the Great. After the death of Jaddua, we have the following

list:[6329]6329 Onias I. (Jos. Ant. xi, 8. 7), Simon I. the

Just[6330]6330 (Ant. xii. 2. 5), Eleazar, Manasseh (Ant. xii. 4. 1),

Onias II., Simon II. (Ant. xii. 4. 10), Onias III., Jason (Ant. xii.

5. 1), Menelaus, and Alcimus (Ant. xii. 9. 7), with whom the series of

the Pontiffs is brought down to the Maccabees. Internal peace and

happiness ceased after the death of Simon the Just (in the beginning

of the third century b.c.), one of the last links in that somewhat

mysterious chain of personages, to which tradition has given the name

of 'the Great Assemblage,' or 'Great Synagogue.'[6331]6331

Jewish legend has much that is miraculous to tell of Simon the Just,

and connects him alike with events both long anterior and long

posterior to his Pontificate. Many of these traditions read like the

outcome of loving, longing remembrance of a happy past which was never

to return. Such a venerable form would never again be seen in the

Sanctuary (Ecclus. 1. 1-4), nor would such miraculous attestation be

given to any other ministrations[6332]6332 (Yoma 39 a and b; Jer. Yoma

v. 2; vi. 3). All this seems to point to the close of a period when

the High-Priesthood was purely Jewish in spirit, just as the hints

about dissensions among his sons (Jer. Yoma 43 d, at top) sound like

faint reminiscences of the family - and public troubles which

followed. In point of fact he was succeeded not by his Onias[6333]6333

who was under age, but by his brother Eleazar, and he, after a

Ponficate of twenty years, by his brother Manasseh. It was only

twenty-seven years later, after the death of Manasseh, that Onias II.

became High-Priest. If Eleazar, and especially Manasseh, owned their

position, or at least strengthened it, by courting the favour of the

ruler of Egypt, it was almost natural that Onias should have taken the

opposite or Syrian part. His refusal to pay the High-Priestly tribute

to Egypt could scarcely have been wholly due to avarice, as Josephus

suggests. The anger and threats of the king were appeased by the

High-Priest's nephew Joseph, who claimed descent from the line of

David. He knew how to ingratiate himself at the court of Alexandria,

and obtained the lease of the taxes of Coele-Syria (which included

Judæa), by offering for it double sum previously paid. The removal of

the foreign tax-gatherer was very grateful to the Jews, but the

authority obtained by Joseph became a new source of danger, especially

in the hands of his ambitious son, Hyrcanus. Thus we already mark the

existence of three parties: the Egyptian, the Syrian, and that of the

'sons of Tobias' (Ant. xii. 5. 1), as the adherents of Joseph were

called, after his father. If the Egyptian party ceased when Palestine

passed under Syrian rule in the reign of Antiochis III. the Great

(223-187 b.c.), and ultimately became wholly subject to it under

Seleucus IV. (187-173), the Syrian, and especially the Tobias-party,

had already become Grecianised. In truth, the contest now became one

for power and wealth in which each sought to outbid the other by

bribery and subserviency to the foreigner. As the submission of the

people could only be secured by the virtual extinction of Judaism,

this aim was steadily kept in view by the degenerate priesthood.

The storm did not, indeed, break under the Pontificate of Simon II.,

the son and successor of Onias II., but the times were becoming more

and more troublous. Although the Syrian rulers occasionally showed

favour to the Jews, Palestine was now covered with a network of Syrian

officials, into whose hands the temporal power mainly passed. The

taxation also sensibly increased, and, besides crown-money, consisted

of a poll-tax, the third of the field-crops, the half of the produce

of trees, a royal monopoly of salt and of the forests, and even a tax

on the Levitical tithes and on all revenues of the Temple.[6334]6334

Matters became much more worse under the Pontificate of Onias II., the

son and successor of Simon II. A dispute between him and one Simon, a

priest, and captain of the temple-guard,[6335]6335 apparently provoked

by the unprincipled covetousness of the latter, induced Simon to

appeal to the cupidity of the Syrians by referring to the untold

treasures which he described as deposited in the Temple. His motive

may have been partly a desire for revenge, partly the hope of

attaining the office of Onias. It was ascribed to a super-natural

apparition, but probably it was only superstition which arrested the

Syrian general at that time. But a dangerous lesson had been learned

alike by Jew and Gentile.

Seleucus IV. was succeeded by his brother Antiochus IV., Epiphanes

(175-164). Whatever psychological explanation may be offered of his

bearing - whether his conduct was that of a madman, or of a despot

intoxicated to absolute forgetfulness of every consideration beyond

his own caprice by the fancied possession of power uncontrolled and

unlimited - cruelty and recklessness of tyranny were as prominently

his characterisitics as revengefulness and unbounded devotion to

superstition. Under such a reign the precedent which Simon, the

Captain of the Temple, had set, was successfully followed up by no

less a person than the brother of the High-Priest himself. The promise

of a yearly increase of 360 talents in the taxes of the country,

besides a payment of 80 talents from another revenue (2 Macc. iv. 8,

9), purchased the deposition of Onias III. - the first event of that

kind recorded in Jewish history - and the substitution of his brother

Joshua, Jesus, or Jason (as he loved to Grecianise his name), in the

Pontificate.[6336]6336 But this was not all. The necessities, if not

the inclinations, of the new High-Priest, and his relations to the

Syrian king, prescribed a Grecian policy at home. It seems almost

incredible, and yet it is quite in accordance with the circumstances,

that Jason should have actually paid to Antiochus a sum of 150 talents

for permission to erect a Gymnasium in Jerusalem, that he entered

citizens of Antioch on the registers of Jerusalem, and that on one

occasion he went so far as to send a deputation to attend the games at

Tyre, with money for purchasing offerings to Heracles! And in

Jerusalem, and throughout the land, there was a strong and increasing

party to support Jason in his plans, and to follow his lead (2 Macc.

iv. 9, 19). Thus far had Grecianism already swept over the country, as

not only to threaten the introduction of views, manners, and

institutions wholly incompatible with the religion of the Old

Testament, but even the abolition of the bodily mark which

distinguished its professors (1 Macc. i. 15; Jos. Ant. xii.5. 1).

But the favor which Antiochus showed Jason was not of long duration.

One even more unscrupulous than he, Menelaus (or, according to his

Jewish name, Onias), the brother of that Simon who had first excited

the Syrian cupidity about the Temple treasure, outbade Jason with

Antichus by a promise of 300 talents in addition tho the tribute which

Jason had paid. Accordingly, Menelaus was appointed High-Priest. In

the expressive language of the time: 'he came, bringing nothing worthy

of the High-Priesthood, but having the fury of a cruel tyrant and the

rage of a savage beast' (2 Macc. iv. 25). In the conflict for the

Pontificate, which now ensued, Menelaus conquered by the help of the

Syrians. A terrible period of internal misrule and external troubles

followed. Menelaus and his associates cast off every restraint, and

even plundered the Temple of some of its precious vessels. Antiochus,

who had regarded the resistance to his nominee as rebellion against

himself, took fearful vengeance by slaughter of the inhabitants of

Jerusalem and pillage of the Temple. But this was not all. When

checked in his advance against Egypt, by the peremptory mandate of

Rome, Antiochus made up for his disappointment by an expedition

against Judæa, of which the avowed object was to crush the people and

to sweep away Judaism. The horrors which now ensued are equally

recorded in the Books of the Maccabees, by Josephus, and in Jewish

tradition.[6337]6337 All sacrifices, the service of the Temple, and

the observance of the Sabbath and of feast-days were prohibited; the

Temple at Jerusalem was dedicated to Jupiter Olympius; the Holy

Scriptures were searched for and destroyed; the Jews forced to take

part in heathen rites; a small heathen altar was reared on the great

altar of burnt-offering - in short, every insult was heaped on the

religion of the Jews, and its every trace was to be swept away. The

date of the final profanation of the Temple was the 25th Chislev

(corresponding to our December) - the same on which, after its

purification by Judas Maccabee,[6338]6338 its services were restored,

the same on which the Christian Church celebrates the dedication of a

better Temple, that of the Holy Ghost in the Incarnation of Jesus

Christ.

But the relentless persecution, which searched for its victims in

every part of the land, also called forth a deliverer in the person of

Mattathias. The story of the glorious rising and final deliverance of

the country under the Maccabees or Asmonæans, as they are always

called in Jewish writings,[6339]6339 is sufficiently known. Only the

briefest outline of it can here be attempted. Mattathias died before

it came to any actual engagement with the Syrians, but victory after

victory attended the arms of his son, Judas the Maccabee, till at last

the Temple could be purified and its services restored, exactly three

years after its desecration (25 Chislev, 165 b.c). The rule of the

Jewish hero lasted other five years, which can scarcely be described

as equally successful with the beginning of his administration. The

first two years were occupied in fortifying strong positions and

chastising those hostile heathen border-tribes which harassed Judæa.

Towards the close of the year 164 Antiochus Epiphanes died. But his

successor, or rather Lysias, who administered the kingdom during his

minority, was not content to surrender Palestine without a further

contest. No deeds of heroism, however great, could compensate for the

inferiority of the forces under Judas' command.[6340]6340 The prospect

was becoming hopeless, when troubles at home recalled the Syrian army,

and led to a treaty of peace in which the Jews acknowledged Syrian

supremacy, but were secured liberty of conscience and worship.

But the truce was of short duration. As we have seen there were

already in Palestine two parties - that which, from its character and

aims, may generally be designated as the Grecian, and the Chasidim

(Assideans). There can be little doubt that the latter name originally

in the designation Chasidim, applied to the pious in Israel in such

passages as Ps. xxx. 5 (4 in our A.V.); xxxi. 23 (A.V.24; xxxvii. 28).

Jewish tradition distinguishes between the 'earlier' and the 'later'

Chasidim (Ber. v. 1 and 32 b; Men. 40 b). The descriptions of the

former are of so late a date, that the characteristics of the party

are given in accordance with views and practices which belong to a

much further development of Rabbinical piety. Their fundamental views

may, however, be gathered from the four opening sentences of the

Mishnic Tractate 'Abhoth,'[6341]6341 of which the last are ascribed to

Jose the son of Joezer, and Jose the son of Jochanan, who, as we know,

still belonged to the 'earlier Chasidim.' These flourished about 140

b.c., and later. This date throws considerable light upon the relation

between the 'earlier' and 'later' Chasidim, and the origin of the

sects of the Pharisees and Saducees. Comparing the sentences of the

earlier Chasidim (Ab. i. 2-4) with those which follow, we notice a

marked simplicity about them, while the others either indicate a rapid

development of Rabbinism, or are echoes of the political relations

subsisting, or else seems to allude to present difficulties or

controversies. We infer that the 'earlier' Chasidim represented the

'pious' in Israel - of course, according to the then standpoint - who,

in opposition to the Grecian party, rallied around Judas Maccabee and

his successor, Jonathan. The assumption of the High-Priestly dignity

by Jonathan the Maccabee, on the nomination of the Syrian king (about

152), was a step which the ultraorthodox party never forgave the

Asmonæans. From that period, therefore, we date the alienation of the

Chasidim - or rather the cessation of the 'earlier' Chasidim.

Henceforth, the party, as such, degenerated, or, to speak more

correctly, ran into extreme religious views, which made them the most

advanced section of the Pharisees.[6342]6342 The latter and the

Saducees henceforth represented the people in its twofold religious

direction. With this view agrees the statement of Josephus (Ant.

xiii.5. 9), who first mentions the existence of Pharisees and Saducees

in the time of Jonathan, and even the confused notice in Aboth de

Rabbi Nathan 5, which ascribes the origin of the Saducees to the first

or second generation of Zadok's disciples, himself a disciple of

Antigonus of Socho, which would bring the date to nearly the same time

as Josephus.

From this digression, necessary for the proper understanding of the

internal relations in Judæa, we return to the political history. There

was another change on the throne of Syria. Demetrius, the new king

readily listened to the complaints of a Jewish deputation, and

appointed their leader, Alcimus (Jakim or Eljakim) High-Priest. At

first the Chasidin were disposed to support him, as having formerly

filled a high post in the priesthood, and as the nephew of José the

son of Jazer, one of their leaders. But they suffered terribly for

their rashness. Aided by the Syrians, Alcimus seized the Pontificate.

But Judas once more raised the national standard against the intruder

and the allies. At first victory seemed to incline to the national

side, and the day of the final defeat and slaughter of the Syrian army

and of Nicanor their general was enrolled in the Jewish Calendar as

one on which fasting and mourning were prohibited (the 13th Adar, or

March). Still, the prospect was far from reassuring, the more so as

division had already appeared in the ranks of the Jews. In these

circumstances Judas directed his eyes towards the new Western power

which was beginning to overshadow the East. It was a fatal step - the

beginning of all future troubles - and, even politically, a grave

mistake, to enter into a defensive and offensive alliance with Rome.

But before even more temporary advantage could be derived from this

measure, Judas the Maccabee had already succumbed to superior numbers,

and heroically fallen in battle against the Syrians.

The war of liberation had lasted seven years, and yet when the small

remnant of the Asmonæan party chose Jonathan, the youngest brother of

Judas, as his successor, their cause seemed more hopeless than almost

at any previous period. The Grecian party were dominant in Judæa, the

Syrian host occupied the land and Jonathan and his adherents were

obliged to retire to the other side Jordan. The only hope, if such it

may be called, lay in the circumstances that after the death of

Alcimus the Pontificate was not filled by another Syrian nominee, but

remained vacant for two years. During this time the nationalists must

have gained strength, since the Grecian party now once more sought and

obtained Syrian help against them. But the almost passive resistance

which Jonathan successfully offered wearied out the Syrian general and

led to a treaty of peace (1 Macc. ix. 58-73).In the period which

followed, the Asmonæan party steadily increased, so that when a rival

king claimed the Syrian crown, both pretenders bade for the support of

Jonathan. He took the side of the new monarch, Alexander Balas, who

sent him a crown of gold and a purple mantle, and appointed him

High-Priest, a dignity which Jonathan at once accepted.[6343]6343 The

Jewish Pontiff was faithful to his patron even against a new claimant

to the crown of Syria.[6344]6344 And such was his influence, that the

latter, on gaining possession of the throne, not only forgave the

resistance of Jonathan, but confirmed him in the Pontificate, and even

remitted the taxation of Palestine on a tribute (probably annual) of

300 talents. But the faithlessness and ingratitude of the Syrian king

led Jonathan soon afterwards to take the side of another Syrian

pretender, an infant, whose claims were ostensibly defended by his

general Trypho. In the end, however, Jonathan's resistance to Trypho's

schemes for obtaining the crown for himself led to the murder of the

Jewish High-Priest by treachery.

The government of Judæa could not, in these difficult times, have

developed upon one more fitted for it than Simon, an elder brother of

Judas Maccabee. His father had, when making his dying disposition,

already designated him 'as the man of counsel' among his sons (1 Macc.

ii. 65). Simon's policy lay chiefly in turning to good account the

disputes in Syria, and in consolidating such rule as he had acquired

(143-135 b.c). After the murder of his brother by Trypho, he took part

of the Syrian claimant (Demetrius) to whom Trypho was opposed.

Demetrius was glad to purchase his support by a remission of all

taxation for all time to come. This was the first great success, and

the Jews perpetuated its memory by enrolling its anniversary (the 27th

Iyar, or May) in their Calendar. An even more important date, alike in

the 'Calendar' (Meg. Taan. Per. 2) and in Jewish history (1 Macc.

xiii. 51), was the 23rd Iyar, when the work of clearing the country of

the foreigner was completed by the Syrian party. The next measures of

Simon were directed to the suppression of the Grecian party in Judæa,

and the establishments of peace and security to his own adherents. To

the popular mind this 'Golden Age' described in glowing language in 1

Macc. xiv. 8-14, seemed to culimnate in an event by which the national

vanity was gratified and the future safety of their country apparently

ensured. This was the arrival of a Roman embassy in Judæa to renew the

league which had already been made both by Judas Maccabee and by

Jonathan. Simon replied by sending a Jewish embassy to Rome, which

brought a valuable shield of gold in token of gratitude. In their

intoxication the Jews passed a decree, and engraved it on tables of

brass, making Simon 'their High-Priest and a Governor forever, until

there should arise a faithful prophet;' in other words, appointing him

to the twofold office of spiritual and secular chief, and declaring it

hereditary (1 Macc. xiv. 41-45). The fact that he should have been

appointed to dignities which both he and his predecessor had already

held, and that offices which in themselves were hereditary should now

be declared such in the family of Simon, as well as the significant

limitation: 'until there should arise a faithful prophet,'

sufficiently indicate that there were dissensions among the people and

opposition to the Asmonæans. In truth, as the Chasidim had already had

been alienated, so there was a growing party among the Pharisees,

their successors, whose hostility to the Asmonæans increased till it

developed into positive hatred. This antagonism was, however, not

grounded on their possession of the secular power, but on their

occupancy of the Pontificate, perhaps on their combination of the two

offices. How far their enmity went, will appear in the sequel. For a

time it was repressed by the critical state of affairs. For, the

contest with the Syrians had to be once more renewed, and although

Simon, or rather his sons, obtained the victory, the aged High-Priest

and two of his sons, Mattathias and Judas, fell by the treachery of

Ptolomæus, Simon's son-in-law.

The Pontificate and the government now developed upon the only one of

Simon's sons still left, known as John Hyranus I. (Jochanan

Horkenos,[6345]6345 Jannai[6346]6346), 135-105 b.c. His first desire

naturally was to set free his mother, who was still in the power of

Ptolomæus, and to chastise him for his crimes. But in this he failed.

Ptolemy purchased immunity by threatening to kill his captive, and

afterwards treacherously slew her. Soon after this a Syrian army

besieged Jerusalem. The City was reduced to great straits. But when at

the Feast of Tabernacles the Syrian king not only granted a truce to

the besieged, but actually provided them with what was needed for the

services of the Temple, Hyrcanus sought and obtained peace, although

the Syrian councillors urged their king to use the opportunity for

exterminating Jerusalem. The conditions, though hard, were not

unreasonable in the circumstances. But fresh troubles in Syria gave a

more favourable turn to affairs in Judæa. First, Hyrcanus subjected

Samaria, and then conquered Idumæa, whose inhabitants he made

proselytes by giving them the alternative of circumcision or exile.

Next, the treaty with the Romans was renewed, and finally Hyrcanus

availed himself of the rapid decay of the Syrian monarchy to throw off

his allegiance to the foreigner. Jewish exclusiveness was further

gratified by the utter destruction of Samaria, of which the

memorial-day (the 25th Marcheshvan, November) was inserted in the

festive 'Calendar' (Meg. Taan. Per. 8).[6347]6347 Nor was this the

only date which his successors added to the calendar of national

feasts.[6348]6348

But his reign is of the deepest importance in our history as marking

the first public contest between the great parties, the Pharisees and

the Saducees, and also as the turning-point in the history of the

Maccabees. Even the coins of that period are instructive. They bear

the inscription: 'Jochanan, the High-Priest, and the Chebher of the

Jews; 'or else, 'Jochanan the High-Priest, Chief, and the Chebher of

the Jews.'[6349]6349 The term Chebher, which on the coins occurs only

in connection with 'High-Priest,' unquestionably refers, not to the

Jewish people generally, but to them in their ecclesiastical

organisation, and points therefore to the acknowledgment of an

'Eldership,' or representative body, which presided over affairs along

with and under the 'High-Priest' as 'Chief.'[6350]6350 In this respect

the presence or absence of the word 'Chebher,' or even mention of the

Jews, might afford hints as to the relationship of a Maccabee chief to

the ecclesiastical leaders of the people. It has already been

explained that the Chasidim, viewed as the National party, had ceased,

and that the leaders were now divided into Pharisees and Sadducees. By

tradition and necessity Hyrcanus belonged to the former, by tendency

and. probably, inclination to the later. His interference in religious

affairs was by no means to the liking of the Pharisees, still less to

that of their extreme sectaries, the Chasidim. Tradition ascribes to

Hyrcanus no less than nine innovations, of which only five were

afterwards continued as legal ordinances. First, the payment of tithes

(both of the Levitical and the so-called 'poor's tithe') was declared

no longer obligatory on a seller, if he were one of the Am ha-Arets,

or country people, but on the buyer.[6351]6351 Complaints had long

been made that this heavy impost was not paid by the majority of the

common people, and it was deemed better to devote the responsibility

on the buyer, unless the seller were what was called 'neeman,'

trusted; i.e., one who had solemnly bound himself to pay tithes. In

connection with this, secondly, the declaration ordered in Deut.

xxvi.3-10 was abrogated as no longer applicable. Thirdly, all work

that caused noise was forbidden during the days intermediate between

the first and the last great festive days of the Passover and of the

Feast of Tabernacles. Fourthly, the formula: 'Awake, why sleepest

Thou, O Lord' (Ps. xliv. 23), with which, since the Syrian

persecution, the morning service in the Temple had commenced, was

abolished. Fifthly, the cruel custom of wounding the sacrificial

animals on the head was prohibited and rings fastened in the pavement

to which the animals were attached (Jer. Maas. Sh. v. 9; Jer. Sot. ix.

11; Tos. Sot. 13; Sotah 48 a). The four ordinances of Hyrcanus which

were abolished referred to the introduction in official documents,

after the title of the High-Priest, of the expression 'El Elyon' - the

Most High God; to the attempt to declare the Syrian and Samaritan

towns liable to tithes (implying their virtual incorporation) while

according to an old principle, this obligation only applied when a

place could be reached from Judea without passing over heathen soil;

to the abrogation by Hyrcanus of a former enactment by Jose ben

Joezer, which discouraged emigration by declaring all heathen soil

defiled, and which rendered social intercourse with Gentiles

impossible by declaring vessels of glass capable of contracting

Levitical defilement (Jer. Shabb. 1. 4; Shabb.14 b) - and which was

re-enacted; and, lastly, to the easy terms on which the King had

admitted the Idumæans into the Jewish community.

From all this it is not difficult to from an idea of the relations

between Hyrcanus and the Pharisees. If Hyrcanus had not otherwise

known of the growing aversion of the Pharisees, a Sadducean friend and

councillor kept him informed, and turned it to account for his party.

The story of the public breach between Hyrcanus and the Pharisees is

told by Josephus (Ant. xiii. 10. 5, 6), and in the Talmud (Kidd. 66

a), with only variations of names and details. Whether from a

challenge thrown out to the Pharisees (according to the Talmud), or in

answer to a somewhat strange request by Hyrcanus, to point out any

part of his conduct which was not in accordance with the law (so

Josephus), one of the extreme section of the Pharisees,[6352]6352 at a

feast given to the party, called upon Hyrcanus to be content with

secular power, and to resign the Pontificate, on the ground that he

was disqualified for it, because his mother had been a captive of war.

Even the Talmud admits that this report was calumnious, while it

offered a gratuitous insult to the memory of a really noble heroic

woman, all the more unwarrantable that the Pontificate had, by public

decree, been made the case if the charge now brought had been other

than a pretext to cover the hostility of the Chasidim. The rash avowal

was avenged on the whole party. In the opinion of Hyrcanus they all

proved themselves accomplishes, when, on being questioned, they

declared the offender only guilty of 'stripes and bonds.' Hyrcanus now

joined the Sadducees, and although the statement of the Talmud about

the slaughter of the leading Pharisees is incorrect, there can be no

doubt that they were removed from power and exposed to persecution.

The Talmud adds this, which, although chronologically incorrect, is

significant, 'Jochanan the High-Priest served in the Pontificate

eighty years, and at the end of them he became a Sadducee.' But this

was only the beginning of troubles to the Pharisaic party, which

revenged itself by most bitter hatred - the beginning, also of the

decline of the Maccabbes.

Hycranus left five sons. To the oldest of them, Aristobulus (in Hebew

Jehudah),he bequeathed the Pontificate, but appointed his own widow to

succeed him in the secular government. But Aristobulus cast his mother

into prison, where she soon afterwards perished - as the story went,

by hunger. The only one of his brothers whom he had left at large, and

who, indeed, was his favourite, soon fell also a victim to his jealous

suspicions. Happily his reign lasted only one year (105-104 b.c.). He

is described as openly favouring the Grecian party, although, on

conquering Ituræa, a district east of Lake of Galilee,[6353]6353 he

obliged its inhabitants to submit to circumcision.

On the death of Aristobulus. I., his widow, Alexandra Salome, released

his brothers from prison, and apparently married the eldest of them,

Alexander Jannæus (or in Hebrew Jonathan), who succeeded both to the

Pontificate and the secular government. The three periods of his reign

(104-78 b.c.) seem indicated in the varying inscriptions on his

coins.[6354]6354 The first period, which lasted eight or ten years,

was that in which Jannai was engaged in those wars of conquest, which

added the cities on the maritime coast to his possessions.[6355]6355

During the time Salome seems to have managed internal affairs. As she

was devoted to the Pharisaic party - indeed one of their leaders,

Simeon ben Shetach, is said to have been her brother (Ber.18 a) - this

was the time of their ascendency. Accordingly, the coins of that

period bear the inscription, 'Jonathan the High-Priest and the Chebher

of the Jews.' But on his return to Jerusalem he found the arrogance of

the Pharisaic party ill accordant with his own views and tastes. The

king now joined the Sadducees, and Simeon ben Shetach had to seek

safety in flight (Jer. Ber. vii. 2 p. 11 b). But others of his party

met a worse fate. A terrible tragedy was enacted in the Temple itself.

At the Feast of Tabernacles Jannai, officiating as High-Priest, set

the Pharisaic custom at open defiance by pouring the water out of the

sacred vessel on the ground instead of upon the altar. Such a

high-handed breach of what was regarded as most sacred, excited the

feelings of the worshippers to the highest pitch of frenzy. They

pelted him with the festive Ethrogs (citrons), which they carried in

their hands, and loudly reproached him with his descent from 'a

captive.' The king called in his foreign mercenaries, and no fewer

than 6,000 of the people fell under their swords. This was an injury

which could neither be forgiven nor atoned for by conquests. One

insurrection followed after the other, and 5,000 of the people are

said to have fallen in these contests. Weary of the strife, Jannai

asked the Pharisaic party to name their conditions of peace, to which

they caustically replied, 'Thy death' (Jos. Ant. xiii. 13. 5). Indeed,

such was the embitterment that they actually called in, and joined the

Syrians against him. But the success of the foreigner produced a

popular revulsion in his favour, of which Jannai profited to take

terrible vengeance of his opponents. No fewer than 800 of them were

nailed to the cross, their sufferings being intensified by seeing

their wives and children butchered before their eyes, while the

degenerate Pontiff lay feasting with abandoned women. A general flight

of the Pharisees ensued. This closes the second period of his reign,

marked on the coin by the significant absence of the words 'Chebher of

the Jews.' the words being on one side in Hebrew, 'Jonathan the king,'

and on the other in Greek, 'Alexander the King.'

The third period is marked by coins which bear the inscription

'Jehonathan the High-Priest and the Jews.' It was a period of outward

military success, and of reconciliation with the Pharisees, or at

least of their recall - notable of Simeon ben Shetach, and then of his

friends - probably at the instigation of the queen (Ber. 48 a; Jer.

vii. 2). Jannai died in his fiftieth year, after a reign of

twenty-seven years, bequeathing the government to his wife Salome. On

his death-bed he is said to have advised her to promote the Pharisees,

or rather such of them as made not their religiousness a mere pretext

intrigue: 'Be not afraid of the Pharisees, nor of those of Zimri, and

seek the reward of Phinehas' (Sot. 22 b). But of chief interest to us

is, that this period of the recall of the Pharisees marks a great

internal change, indicated even in the coins. For the first time we

now meet the designation 'Sanhedrin.' The Chebher, or eldership, had

ceased as a ruling power, and become transformed into a Sanhedrin, or

ecclesiastical authority although the latter endeavoured, with more or

less success, to arrogate to itself civil jurisdiction, at least in

ecclesiastical matters.[6356]6356

The nine years of Queen Alexandra's (in Hebrew Salome) reign were the

Golden Age of the Pharisees, when heaven itself smiled on a land that

was wholly subject to their religious sway. In the extravagant

language of the Talmud (Tann. 23 a, second line from top): 'In the

days of Simeon ben Shetach, the rains came down in the nights of

fourth days,[6357]6357 and on those of the Sabbaths, so that the

grains of corn became like kidneys, those of barley the stones of

olives, and lentils like gold dinars, and they preserved a specimen

(dogma) of them for future generations to show them what disastrous

result may follow upon sin.' That period of miraculous blessing was

compared to the equally miraculous dispensation of heaven during the

time that the Temple of Herod was building, when rain only fell at

night, while the morning wind and heat dried all, so that the builders

could continue their work without delay.[6358]6358 Queen Salome had

appointed her eldest son, Hyrcanus II., a weak prince, to the

Poltificate. But, as Josephus puts it (Am. xiii. 16. 2), although

Salome had the title, the Pharisees held the real rule of the country,

and they administered it with the harshness, insolence, and

recklessness of a fanatical religious party which suddenly obtains

unlimited power. The lead was, of course, taken by Simeon ben Shetach,

whom even the Talmud characterises as having 'hot hands' (Jer. Sanh.

vi. 5,[6359]6359 p. 23 b). First, all who were suspected of Sadducean

leaning were removed by intrigue or violence form the Sanhedrin. Next,

previous ordinances differing from Pharisaical views were abrogated,

and others breathing their spirit substituted. So sweeping and

thorough was the change wrought, that the Sadducees never recovered

the blow, and whatever they might teach, yet those in office were

obligated in all time coming to conform to Pharisaic practice (Jos.

Ant. xviii. 1.4; Tos Yoma i. 8).

But the Pharisaic party were not content with dogmatical victories,

even though they celebrated each of them by the insertion in the

Calendar of a commemorative feast-day. Partly, 'to discourage the

Sadducees,' partly from the supposed 'necessities of the time, and to

teach others' (to make an example; Siphré on Deut.), they carried

their principles even beyond their utmost inferences, and were guilty

of such injustice and cruelty, that, according to tradition, Simeon

even condemned his own innocent son to death, for the sake of logical

consistency.[6360]6360 On the other hand, the Pharisaic party knew how

to flatter the queen, by introducing a series of ordinances which

protected the rights of married women and rendered divorce more

difficult.[6361]6361 The only ordinance of Simeon ben Shetach, which

deserves permanent record, is that which enjoined regular school

attendance by all children, although it may have been primarily

intended to place the education of the country in the hands of the

Pharisees. The general discontent caused by the tyranny of the

Pharisees must have rallied most of the higher classes to the party of

the Sadducees. It led at last to remonstrance with the queen, and was

probably the first occasion of that revolt of Aristobulus, the younger

son of Salome, which darkened the last days of her reign.

Salome died (in the beginning of 69 b.c.) before the measures proposed

against Aristobulus could be carried out. Although Hyrcanus II. now

united the royal office with the Pontificate, his claims were disputed

by his brother Aristobulus II., who conquered, and obliged his brother

to abdicate in his favour his twofold dignity. To cement their

reconciliation, Alexander the son of Arisobulus married Alexandra the

daughter of Hycranus. They little thought how ill-fated that union

would prove. For already another power was intriguing to interpose in

Jewish affairs, with which it was henceforth to be identified.

Alexander Hannai had appointed one Antipas, or Antipater - of whose

origin the most divergent accounts are given[6362]6362 - to the

governorship of Idumæa. He was succeeded by a son of the same name.

The dissension between the two Asmonæans seemed to offer the

opportunity for realising his ambitious schemes. Of course, he took

the part of the weak Hyrcanus as against the warlike Aristobulus, and

persuaded the former that he was in danger of his life. Ultimately he

prevailed on him to fly to Aretas, King of Arabia, who, in

consideration of liberal promises, undertook to reinstate Hycranus in

the government. The Arab army proved successful, and was joined by a

large proportion of the troops of Aristobulus, who was not shut up

within the fortified Temple-buildings. To add to the horrors of war, a

long famine desolated the land. It was during its prevalence that

Onias, reputed for his omnipotence in prayer, achieved what procured

for him the designation 'hammeaggel' - the 'circle drawer.'[6363]6363

When his prayer for rain remained unanswered, he drew a circle around

him, declaring his determination not to leave it till the Almighty had

granted rain, and that not in drops, nor yet in desolating floods

(which successively happened), but in copious, refreshing showers. It

could serve no good purpose to reproduce the realistic manner in which

this supposed power of the Rabbi with God is described (Taan. 23 a).

But it were difficult to say whether this is more repugnant to

feelings of reverence, or the reported reproof of Simeon ben Shetach,

who forbore to pronounce the ban upon him because he was like a spoilt

child who might ask anything of his father, and would obtain it. But

this supposed power ultimately proved fatal to Onias during the siege

of Jerusalem by Hyrcanus and Aretas.[6364]6364 Refusing to intercede

either for one or the other of the rival brothers, he was stoned to

death (Ant. xiv. 2. 1).

But already another power had appeared on the scene. Pompey was on his

victorious march through Asia when both parties appeal to him for

help. Scaurus, whom Pompey detached to Syria, was, indeed, bought by

Aristobulus, and Aretas was ordered to raise the siege of Jerusalem.

But Pompey quickly discovered that Hycranus might, under the tutelage

of the cunning Idumæan, Antipater, prove an instrument more likely to

serve his ulterior purposes than Aristobulus. Three deputations

appeared before Pompey at Damascus - those of the two brothers, and

one independent of both, which craved the abolition of the Asmonæan

rule and the restoration of the former mode of government, as we

understand it, by the 'Chebher' or Eldership under the presidency of

the High-Priest. It need scarcely be said that such a demand would

find no response. The consideration of the rival claims of the

Asmonæans Pompey postponed. The conduct of Aristobulus not only

confirmed the unfavourable impression which the insolent bearing of

his deputies had made on Pompey, but sealed his own fate and that of

the Jewish people. Pompey laid siege to Jerusalem. The adherents of

Hyrcanus surrendered the City, but those of Aristobulus retired into

the Temple. At last the sacred precincts were taken by storm amidst

fearful carnage. The priests, who were engaged in their sacred

functions,[6365]6365 and who continued them during this terrible

scene, were cut down at the altar. No fewer than 12,000 Jews are said

to have perished.

With the taking of Jerusalem by Pompey (63 b.c.) the history of the

Maccabees as a reigning family, and, indeed, that of the real

independence of Palestine, came to an end. So truly did Jewish

tradition realise this, that it has left us not a single notice either

of this capture of Jerusalem or of all the subsequent sad events to

the time of Herod. It is as if their silence meant that for them

Judæa, in its then state, had no further history. Still, the Roman

conquerer had as yet dealt gently with his prostrate victim. Pompey

had, indeed, penetrated into the most Holy Place in contemptuous

outrage of the most sacred feelings of Israel; but he left the

treasure of the Temple untouched, and even made provision for the

continuance of its services. Those who had caused the resistance of

Jerusalem were executed, and the country made tributary to Rome. But

Judæa not only became subject to the Roman Governor of Syria, its

boundaries were also narrowed. All the Grecian cities had their

independence restored; Samaria was freed from Jewish supremacy; and

the districts comprised within the so-called Decapolis (or 'ten

cities') again obtained self-government. It was a sadly curtailed land

over which Hyrcanus II., as High-Priest, was left Governor, without

being allowed to wear the diadem (Ant. xx. 10). Aristobulus II. had to

adorn as captive the triumphal entry of the conquerer into

Rome.[6366]6366

The civil rule of Hycranus as Ethnarch must from the first have been

very limited. It was still more contracted when, during the

Proconsulate of Ganinius (57-55 b.c.),[6367]6367 Alexander, a son of

Aristobulus, who had escaped from captivity, tried to possess himself

of the government of Judæa (Ant. xiv. 5. 2-4). The office of Hyrcanus

was now limited to the Temple, and the Jewish territory, divided into

five districts, was apportioned among five principal cities, ruled by

a council of local notables (_ristoi). Thus, for a short time,

monarchical gave place to aristocratic government in Palestine. The

renewed attempts of Aristobulus or of his family to recover power only

led to fresh troubles, which were sadly diversified by the rapacity

and severity of the Romans. The Triumvir Crassus, who succeeded

Gabinius (55-53 b.c.), plundered the Temple not only of its treasures

but of its precious vessels. A new but not much happier era began with

Julius Cæsar. If Aristobulus and his son Alexander had not fallen

victims to the party of Pompey, the prospects of Hyrcanus and

Antipater might now have been very unpromising. But their death and

that of Pompey (whom they had supported) changed the aspect of

matters. Antipater not only espoused the cause of the victor of

Pharsalus, but made himself eminently useful to Cæsar. In reward,

Hyrcanus was confirmed as Pontiff and Ethnarch of Judæa, while

Antipater was made a Roman citizen and nominated Epitrophos, or

(Roman) administrator of the country. Of course, the real power was in

the hands of the Idumæan, who continued to hold it, despite the

attempts of Antigonus, the only surviving son of Aristobulus. And from

henceforth Cæsar made it part of his policy to favour the Jews (comp.

the decrees in their favour, Ant. xiv. 10).

Meantime Antipater had, in pursuance of his ambitious plans, appointed

his son Phasael Governor of Jerusalem, and Herod Governor of Galilee.

The latter, although only twenty-five years of age, soon displayed the

vigour and sternness which characterised his after-career. He quelled

what probably was a 'nationalist' rising in Galilee, in the blood of

Ezekias, its leader, and of his chief associates. This indeed secured

him the favour of Sextus Cæsar, the Governor of Syria, a relative of

the great Imperator. But in Jerusalem, and among the extreme Pharisaic

party, it excited the utmost indignation. They foresaw the advent of a

foe most dangerous to their interests and liberty, and vainly sought

to rid themselves of him. It was argued that the government of the

country was in the hands of the High-Priest, and that Herod, as

Governor of Galilee, appointed by a foreign administrator, had no

right to pronounce capital punishment without a sentence of the

Sanhedrin. Hycranus yielded to the clamour; but Herod appeared before

the Sanhedrin, not as a criminal, but arrayed in purple, surrounded by

a body-guard, and supported by the express command of Sextus Cæsar to

acquit him. The story which is related, though in different version,

and with different names, in the Talmud (Sanh. 19 a), and by Josephus

(Ant. xiv. 9. 3-5), presents a vivid picture of what passed in the

Sanhedrin. The appearance of Herod had so terrified that learned body

that none ventured to speak, till their president, Shemajah (Sameas),

by his bold speech, rallied their courage. Most truly did he foretell

the fate which overtook them ten years later, when Herod ruled in the

Holy City. But Hyrcanus adjourned the meeting of the Sanhedrin, and

persuaded Herod to withdraw from Jerusalem. His was, however, only a

temporary humiliation. Sextus Cæsar named Herod Governor of

Coele-Syria, and he soon appeared with an army before Jerusalem, to

take vengeance on Hycranus and the Sanhedrin. The entreaties of his

father and brother induced him, indeed, to desist for the time, but

ten years later alike Hyrcanus and the members of the Sanhedrin fell

victims to his revenge.

Another turn of affairs seemed imminent when Cæsar fell under the

daggers of the conspirators (15 March, 44), and Cassius occupied

Syria. But Antipater and Herod proved as willing and able to serve him

as formerly Cæsar. Antipater, indeed, perished through a court - or

perhaps a 'Nationalist' plot, but his murderers soon experienced the

same fate at the hands of those whom Herod had hired for the purpose.

And still the star of Herod seemed in the ascendant. Not only did he

repel attempted inroads by Antigonus, but when Antonius and Octavianus

(in 42 b.c.) took the place of Brutus and Cassius, he succeeded once

more in ingratiating himself with the former, on whom the government

of Asis devolved. The accusations made by Jewish deputation had no

influence on Antony. Indeed, he went beyond his predecessors in

appointing Phasael and Herod tetrarchs of Judæa. Thus the civil power

was now nominally as well as really in their hands. But the restless

Antigonus was determined not to forego his claim. When the power of

Antony was fast waning, in consequence of his reckless indulgences,

Antigonus seized the opportunity of the incursion of the Parthians

into Asia Minor to attend the great object of his ambition. In

Jerusalem the adherents of the two parties were engaged in daily

conflicts, when a Parthian division appeared. By treachery Phasael and

Hycranus were lured into the Parthian camp, and finally handed over to

Antigonus. Herod, warned in time, had escaped from Jerusalem with his

family and armed adherents. Of his other opponents Antigonus made

sure. To unfit Hyrcanus for the Pontificate his ears were cut off,

while Phasael destroyed himself in prison. Antigonus was now

undisputed High-Priest and king. His brief reign of three years (40-37

b.c.) is marked by coins which bear in Hebrew the device: Matthatjah

the High-Priest, and in Greek: King Antigonus.

The only hope of Herod lay in Roman help. He found Antony in Rome.

What difficulties there were, were removed by gold, and when Octavian

gave his consent, a decree of the Senate declared Antigonus the enemy

of Rome, and at the same time appointed Herod King of Judæa (40 b.c.).

Early in the year 39 b.c. Herod was in Palestine to conquer his new

kingdom by help of the Romans. But their aid was at first tardy and

reluctant, and it was 38, or more probably 37, before Herod could gain

possession of Jerusalem itself. Before that he had wedded the

beautiful and unhappy Mariamme, the daughter of Alexander and

granddaughter of Hyrcanus, to whom he had been betrothed five years

before. His conquered capital was desolate indeed, and its people

impoverished by exactions. But Herod had reached the goal of his

ambition. All opposition was put down, all rivalry rendered

impossible. Antigonus was beheaded, as Herod had wished; the feeble

and aged Hyrcanus was permanently disqualified for the Pontificate;

and any youthful descendants of the Maccabees left were absolutely in

the conqueror's power. The long struggle for power had ended, and the

Asmonæan family was virtually destroyed. Their sway had lasted about

130 years.

Looking back on the rapid rise and decline of the Maccabees, on their

speedy degeneration, on the deeds of cruelty with which their history

soon became stained, on the selfishness and reckless ambition which

characterized them, and especially on the profoundly anti-nationalist

and anti-Pharisaic, we had almost said anti-Jewish, tendency which

marked their sway, we can understand the bitter hatred with which

Jewish tradition had followed their memory. The mention of them is of

the scantiest. No universal acclamation glorifies even the deeds of

Judas the Maccabee; no Talmudic tractate is devoted to that 'feast of

the dedication' which celebrated the purging of the Temple and the

restoration of Jewish worship. In fact such was the feeling, that the

priestly course of Joiarib - to which the Asmonæans belonged - is said

to have been on service when the first and the second Temple were

destroyed, because 'guilt was to be punished on the guilty.' More than

that, 'R. Levi saith: Yehoyaribh ["Jehovah will contend"], the man

[the name of the man or family]; Meron ["rebellion," evidently a play

upon Modin, the birthplace of the Maccabees], the town; Mesarbey ["the

rebels," evidently a play upon Makkabey] - (masar beitha) He hath

given up the Temple to the enemies.' Rabbi Berachjah saith: 'Yah

heribh [Jehoiarib], God contended with His children, because they

revolted and rebelled against Him' (Jer. Taan. iv. 8, p. 68 d, line 35

from bottom).[6368]6368 Indeed, the opprobrious designation of

rebellion, and Sarbaney El, rebels against God, became in course of

time so identified with the Maccabees. that it was used when its

meaning was no longer understood. Thus Origen (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi.

25) speaks of the (Apocryphal) books of the Maccabees as 'inscribed

Sarbeth Sarbane El' (={hebrew}), the disobedience, or rebellion

(resistance) of the disobedient, or rebels, against God.[6369]6369 So

thoroughly had these terms become identified in popular parlance, that

even the tyranny and cruelty of a Herod could not procure a milder

judgment on the sway of the Asmonæans.

APPENDIX V.

RABBINIC THEOLOGY AND LITERATURE

(Vol. i. Book I. ch. viii.)

1. The Traditional Law. - The brief account given in vol. i. p. 100,

of the character and authority claimed for the traditional law may

here be supplemented by a chronological arrangement of the Halakhoth

in the order of their supposed introduction or promulgation.

In the first class, or 'Halakhoth of Moses from Sinai,' tradition

enumerates fifty-five,[6370]6370 which may be thus designated:

religio-agrarian, four;[6371]6371 ritual, including questions about

'clean and unclean,' twenty-three;[6372]6372 concerning women and

intercourse between the sexes, three;[6373]6373 concerning formalities

to be observed in the copying, fastening, &c., of the Law and the

phylacteries, eighteen;[6374]6374 exegetical, four;[6375]6375 purely

superstitious, one;[6376]6376 not otherwise included, two.[6377]6377

Eighteen ordinances are ascribed to Joshua, of which only one is

ritual, the other seventeen being agrarian and police

regulations.[6378]6378 The other traditions can only be briefly noted.

Boaz, or else 'the tribunal of Samuel,' fixed, that Deut. xxiii. 3 did

not apply to alliances with Ammonite and Moabite women. Two ordinances

are ascribed to David, two to Solomon, one to Jehoshaphat, and one to

Jehoida. The period of Isaiah and of Hezekiah is described as of

immense Rabbinic activity. To the prophets at Jerusalem three ritual

ordinances are ascribed. Daniel is represented as having prohibited

the bread, wine and oil of the heathen (Dan. i. 5). Two ritual

determinations are ascribed to the prophets of the Exile.

After the return from Babylon traditionalism rapidly expanded, and its

peculiar character more and more clearly developed. No fewer than

twelve traditions are traced back to the three prophets who flourished

at that period, while four other important legal determinations are

attributed to the prophet Haggai individually. It will readily be

understood that Ezra occupied a high place in tradition. Fifteen

ordinances are ascribed to him, of which some are titual. Three of his

supposed ordinances have a general interest. They enjoin the general

education of children, and the exclusion of Samaritans from admission

into the Synagogue and from social intercourse. If only one legal

determination is assigned to Nehemiah, 'the men of the great

Synagogue' are credited with fifteen, of which six bear on important

critical and exegetical points connected with the text of the

Scriptures, the others chiefly on questions connected with ritual and

worship. Among the 'pairs' (Zugoth) which succeeded the 'Great

Synagogue,' three 'alleviating' ordinances (of a very punctilious

character) are ascribed to Jose, the son of Joezer,[6379]6379 and two,

intended render all contact with heathens impossible, to him and his

colleague. Under the Maccabees the feast of the dedication of the

Temple was introduced. To Joshua the son of Perachya, one punctilious

legal determination is ascribed. Of the decrees of the Maccabean

High-Priest Jochanan we have already spoken in another place;

similarly, of those of Simon the son of Shetach and of his learned

colleague. Four legal determinations of their successors Shemayah and

Abhtalion are mentioned. Next in order comes the prohibition of Greek

during the war between the Maccabean brothers Hyrcanus and

Aristobulus. This brings us to the time of Hillel and Shammai, that

is, to the period of Jesus, to which further reference will have to be

made in another place.

2. The Canon of Scripture. - Reference has been made in the text (vol.

i. p. 107) to the position taken by Traditionalism in reference to the

written as compared with what was regarded as the oral Revelation.

Still, nominally, the Scriptures were appealed to by the Palestinians

as of supreme authority. The views which Josephus expresses in this

respect, although in a popular and Grecianised form, were

substantially those entertained by the Rabbis and by his countrymen

generally (comp. Ag. Apion, i. 7, 8).[6380]6380 A sharp distinction

was made between canonical and non-canonical books. The test of the

former was inspiration, which had ceased in the time of Artaxerxes,

that is, with the prophet Malachi. Accordingly, the work of the elder

Jesus the son of Sirach (Jeshua ben Sira, ben Eliezer) was excluded

from the Canon, although it is not unfrequently referred to by

Rabbinic authorities in terms with which ordinarily only Biblical

quotations are introduced.[6381]6381 According to the view propounded

by Josephus, not only were the very words inspired in which a

prediction was uttered, but the prophets were unconscious and passive

vehicles of the Divine message (Ant. iv. 6. 5, comp generally, Ant ii.

8. 1; vi. 8, 2; viii. 13, 3; ix. 3, 2, 8, 6; x. 2, 2; 4, 3). Although

pre-eminence in this respect was assigned to Moses (Ant. iv. 8, 49),

yet Divine authority equally attached to the sayings of the prophets,

and even, though perhaps in a still inferior degree, to the 'Hymns,'

as the Hagiographa generally were called from the circumstance that

the Psalter stood at the head of them (comp. Philo, De Vita contempl.,

ed. Mangey, voi. ii. p. 475; St. Luke xxiv. 44). Thus the division of

the Bible into three sections - the Law, the Prophets, and the other

'Writings' - which already occurs in the prologue to the work of Jesus

the son of Sirach,[6382]6382 seems to have been current at the time.

And here it is of great interest, in connection with modern

controversies, that Josephus seems to attach special importance to the

prophecies of Daniel as still awaiting fulfilment (Ant. x 10. 4; 11.

7).

That the Rabbis entertained the same views of inspiration, appears not

only from the distinctive name of 'Holy Writings' given to the

Scriptures, but also from the directions that their touch defiled the

hands,[6383]6383 and that it was duty on the Sabbath to save them from

conflagration, and to gather them up if accidentally scattered, and

that it was not lawful for heirs to make division of a sacred roll

(Comp. Shabb. xvi. 1; Erub. x. 3; Kel. xv. 6; Yad. iii. 2-5; iv. 5

[where special reference is made to Daniel 6]). From what we know of

the state of feeling, we might have inferred, even if direct evidence

had not existed that a distinctive and superior place would be

ascribed to the Books of Moses. In point of fact, the other books of

Scripture, alike the Prophets and the Hagiographa,[6384]6384 are only

designated as Qabbalah ('received,' handed down, tradition), which is

also the name given to oral tradition.[6385]6385 It was said that the

Torah was given to Moses (Jer. Sheq. vi. 1) 'in (letters of) white

fire graven upon black fire,' although it was matter of despute

whether he received it volume by volume or complete as a whole (Gitt.

60 a). But on the question of its inspiration not the smallest doubt

could be tolerated. Thus, to admit generally, that 'the Torah as a

whole was from heaven, except this (one) verse, which the Holy One,

blessed be He, did not speak, but Moses of himself' was to become an

infidel and a blasphemer (Sanh. 99 a).[6386]6386 Even the concluding

verses in Deuteronomy had been dictated by God to Moses, and he wrote

them down - not repeating them, however, as before, but weeping as he

wrote. It will readily be understood in what extravagant terms Moses

himself was spoken of. It is not only that the expression 'man of God'

was supposed to imply, that while as regarded the lower part of his

nature Moses was man, as regarded the higher he was Divine, but that

his glorification and exaltation amount to blasphemy.[6387]6387 So far

as inspiration or 'revelation' is concerned, it was said that Moses

'saw in a clear glass, the prophets in a dark one' - or, to put it

otherwise: 'he saw through one glass, they through seven.' Indeed,

although the opening words of Ps. lxxv. showed, that the Psalms were

as much revelation as the Law, yet, 'if Israel had not sinned, they

would have only received the Pentateuch, and the Book of Joshua,' and,

in the time to come, of all Scripture the Pentateuch alone would

retain its place. It was somewhat contemptuously remarked, that the

Prophets uttered nothing as regarded practice that had not already

been told in the Pentateuch (Taan. 9 a). It was but natural for

Rabbinism to declare that the Law alone fully explained its meaning

(at least according to their interpretation of it), while the Prophets

left much in obscurity.[6388]6388 To mark the distinction, it was

forbidden to put the Law in the same wrapper with the Prophets, so as

not to place perhaps the latter on the top of the former (Tos. Meg.

iv. 20). Among the Prophets themselves there was a considerable

difference, not only in style and training but even in substance

(Sanh. 89 a), although all of them had certain common qualifications

(comp. Ab. de R. Nathan, 37). Of all the prophets Isaiah was greatest,

and stood next to Moses. Ezekiel saw all that Isaiah saw - but the

former was like a villager, the latter like a townsman who saw the

king (Chag. 13 b). Jeremiah and Amos were, so to speak, scolding,

owing to the violence of their temperament, while Isaiah's was the

book of consolation, especially in response to Jeremiah.

The Hagiographa or 'Kethubhim' also bear in the Talmud the general

designation of 'Chokhmah,' wisdom. It has been asserted that, as the

Prophetic Books, so the Hagiographa, were distinguished into

'anterior' (Psalms, Proverbs, Job) and 'posterior,' or else into

'great' and 'small.' But the statement rests on quite insufficient

evidence.[6389]6389 Certain, however, it is , that the Hagiographa, as

we possess them, formed part of the Canon in the time of Jesus the son

of Sirach - that is, even of the latest computation of his

authorship,[6390]6390 about the year 130 b.c.[6391]6391 Even so, it

would not be easy to vindicate, on historical grounds, the so-called

Maccabean authorship of the Book of Daniel, which would fix its date

about 105 b.c. For, if other considerations did not interfere, few

students of Jewish history would be disposed to assert that a book,

which dated from 104 b.c., could have found a place in the Jewish

Canon.[6392]6392 But, as explained in vol. i. p. 26, we would assign a

much earlier date to the Book of Sirach. The whole question in its

bearing on the New Testament is so important, that one or two further

remarks may be allowed. Leaving aside most serious critical

objections, and the unquestionable fact, that no amount of ingenuity

can conciliate the Maccabean application of Dan. ix. 24-27 with the

chronology of that period,[6393]6393 while the Messianic

interpretation fits in with it,[6394]6394 other, and seemingly

insuperable difficulties are in the way of the theory impugned. It

implies, that the Book of Daniel was not an Appocryphal, but a

Pseudepigraphic work; that of all such works it alone has come down to

us in its Hebrew or Chaldee original; that a Pseudepigraphic work,

nearly contemporary with the oldest portion of the Book of Enoch,

should not only be so different from it, but that it should find

admission into the Canon, while Enoch was excluded; that a

Pseudepigraphon younger that Jesus the Son of Sirach should have been

on the Khethubhim; and, finally, that it should have passed the

repeated revision of different Rabbinic 'Colleges' - and that at times

of considerable theological activity - without the suspicion being

even raised that its authorship dated fromso late a period as a

century an a half before Christ. And we have evidence that since the

Babylonish exile, at least four revisions of the Canon took place

within periods sufficiently distant from each other.

The question hitherto treated has been exclusively of the date of the

composition of the Book of Daniel, without reference to who may have

been its author, whether its present is exactly the same as its

original form, and finally, whether it ever belonged to those books

whose right to canonicity, though nor their age,was in controversy,

that is, whether it belonged, so to speak, to the Old Testament

_ntileg_mena. As this is not the place for a detailed discussion of

the canonicity of the Book of Daniel - or, indeed, of any other in the

Old Testament canon - we shall only add, to prevent misunderstanding,

that no opinion is here expressed as to possible, greater or less,

interpolations on the Book of Daniel, or in any other part of the Old

Testament. We must here bear in mind that the moral view taken of such

interpolations, as we would call them, was entirely different in those

times from ours; and it may perhaps be an historically and critically

no unwarranted proposition, that such interpolations were, to speak

moderately, not all unusual in ancient documents. In each case the

question must be separately critically examined in the light of

internal and (if possible) external evidence. But it would be a very

different thing to suggest that there may be an interpolation, or, it

may be, a re-arrangement in a document (although at present we make no

assertions on the subject, one way or the other), and to pronounce a

whole document a fabrication dating from a much later period. The one

would, at any rate, be quite in the spirit of those times; the other

implies, beside insuperable critical difficulties, a deliberate

religious fraud, to which no unprejudiced student could seriously

regard the so-called Pseudepigrapha as forming any real analogon.

But as regards the Book of Daniel, it is an important fact that the

right of the Book of Daniel to canonicity was never called in question

in the ancient Synagogue. The fact that it was distinguish as

'visions' (Chezyonoth) from the other 'prophecies' has, of course, no

bearing on the question, any more than the circumstance that later

Rabbinism, which, naturally enough, could not find its way through the

Messianic prophecies of the book, declare that even Daniel was

mistaken in, and could not make anything of the predictions concerning

the 'latter days' (Ber. R. 98).[6395]6395 On the other hand, Daniel

was elevated to almost the same pinnacle as Moses, while it was said

that, as compared with heathen sages, if they were all placed in one

scale, and Daniel in the other, he would outweigh them all. We can

readily understand that, in times of national sorrow or excitement,

these prophecies would be eagerly resorted to, as pointing to a

glorious future.

But although the Book of Daniel was not among the Antilegomena, doubts

were raised, not indeed about the age, but about the right to

canonicity of certain other portions of the Bible. Thus, certain

expressions in the prophecies of Ezekiel were questioned as apparently

incompatible with statements in the Pentateuch[6396]6396 (Men. 45 a),

and although a celebrated Rabbi, Chananyah, the son of Chizkuyah, the

son of Garon (about the time of Christ), with immense labour, sought

to conncilate them, and thus preserved the Book of Ezekiel (or, at

least, part of it) from being relegated among the Appocrypha, it was

deemed safest to leave the final exposition of the meaning of Ezekiel,

'till Elijah come,' as the restorer of all things.

The other objections to canonicity apply exculsively to the third

division of the Old Testament, the Kethubhim or Hagiorgrapha. Here

even the Book of Proverbs seems at one time to have been called in

question (Ab. R. Nathan 1), partly on the ground of its secular

contents, and partly as containing 'supposed contradictory

statements'[6397]6397 (Shabb. 30 b). Very strong doubts were raised on

the Book of Ecclesiastes (Yad. iii. 5; Eduy. v. 3), first, on that

ground of its contradiction to some of the Psalms[6398]6398 (Shabb. 30

a); secondly, on that of its inconsistencies[6399]6399 (Shabb. 30 b);

and thirdly, because ot seemed to countenance the denial of another

life, and, as in Eccl. xi 1, 3, 9, other heretical views (Vayyikra R.

28, at the beginning).[6400]6400 But these objections were finally

answered by great ingenuity, while an appeal to Eccl. xii. 12, 13, was

regarded as removing the difficulty about another life and future

rewards and punishments. And as the contradictions in Ecclesiastes had

been conciliated, it hopefully argued deeper study would equally

remove those in the Book of Proverbs (Shabb. 30 b).[6401]6401 Still,

the controversy about the canonicity of Ecclesiastes continue so late

as the second century of our era (comp. Yad. iii. 5). That grave

doubts also existed about the Song of Solomon, appears even from the

terms in which its canonicity is insisted upon (Yad. u. s.), not to

speak of express statements in opposition to it (Ab. de. R. Nathan 1).

Even when by an allegorical interpretation it was shown to be the

'wisdom of all wisdom,' the most precious gem, the holy of holies,

tradition still ascribed its composition to to the early years of

Solomon (Shir haSh. R. 1). It had been his first work, and was

followed by Proverbs, and finally by Ecclesiastes.[6402]6402 But

perhaps the greatest objections were those taken to the Book of Esther

(Meg. 7 a). It excited the enmity of other nations against Israel, and

it was outside the canon. Grave doubts prevailed whether it was

canonical or inspired by the Holy Spirit (Meg. u. s.; Yoma 29 a). The

books of Ezra and Nehemiah were anciently regarded as one - the name

of the latter author being kept back on account of his tendency to

self-exaltation (Sanh. 93 b). Lastly, the genealogical parts of the

Book of Chronicles were made the subject of very elaborate secret

commentation (Pes. 62 b).

Two points still require brief mention. Even from a comparison of the

LXX. Version with our Hebrew text, it is evident that there were not

only many variations, but that spurious additions (as Daniel) were

eliminated. This critical activity, which commenced with Ezra, whose

copy of the Pentateuch was, according to tradition, placed in the

Temple, that the people might correct their copies by it, must have

continued for many centuries.[6403]6403 There is abundant evidence of

frequent divergences - though perhaps minute - and although later

Rabbinsim laid down the most painfully minute directions about the

mode of writing and copying the rolls of the Law, there is such

discrepancy, even where least it might be expected,[6404]6404 as to

show that the purification of the text was by no means settled.

Considering the want of exegetical knowledge and historical

conscientiousness, and keeping in view how often the Rabbis, for

Haggadic puroposes, alter letters, and thus change the meaning of

words, we may well doubt the satisfactory character of their critical

labours. Lastly, as certain omissions were made, and as the Canon

underwent (as will be shown) repeated revision, it may have been

certain portions were added as well as left out, and words changed as

well as restored.

For, ancient tradition ascribes a peculiar activity to certain

'Colleges' - as they are termed - in regard to the Canon. In general,

the well-known Baraita (Baba B. 14 b, 15 a) bears, that Moses wrote

the Pentateuch, the book (Prophecies?) of Balaam, and Job; Joshua the

work that bears his name, and the last eight verses of

Deuteronomy;[6405]6405 Samuel the corresponding books, Judges and

Ruth; David with the 'ten Elders,' Adam, Melchisedek, Abraham, Moses,

Heman, Jeduthun, Asaph, and the three sons of Korah, the Psalter;

Jeremiah wrote his prophecies, Lamentations, and Kings; King Hezekiah

and his Sanhedrin compiled, or edited, the Prophecies of Isaiah,

Proverbs, the Song, and Ecclesiastes; and the men of the 'Great

Synagogue' the Prophecies of Ezekiel, of the twelve Minor Prophets,

and the books of Daniel and Esther; Ezra wrote his own book and

Chronicles, the work being completed by Nehemiah, the son of

Chakaliah. The last verse of Joshua were written by Eleazar and

Phinehas; the last chapters of Samuel by Gad and Nathan.[6406]6406

Loose and uncritical as these statements may appear, they so far help

our investigations as to show that, according to tradition, certain

portions of Scripture were compiled or edited by one or another

Rabbinic 'College,' and that there were several 'Colleges' which

successively busied themselves with the codification and revision of

the Canon. By these 'Colleges,' we are not to understand gatherings of

certain members, who discussed and decided a question at one or more

of their meetings. They rather indicate the learned activity of the

authorities during a certain period, which are respectively designed

by the generic names of 'the Sanhedrin of Hezekiah,' 'The men of the

Synagogue,' the 'Legal Court of the Maccabees,' and finally,

'Chananayah and his College,' We have thus somewhat firmer historical

ground. If in Prov. xxv. 1, we read of the activity about the Canon of

'the Men of Hezekiah,' and bear in mind the Scriptural account of the

religious revival of that reign (for ex. 2 Chron. xxix. 25-30; 2

Chron. xxx. 1), we scarely required the frequent and elaborate

glorification of tradition to lead us to infer that, if the collection

of the Book of Proverbs was due to their activity, they must have

equally collated the other portions of Scripture then existing, and

fixed the Canon as their time. Again, if we are to credit the

statement that they equally collected and edited the Prophecies of

Isaiah, we are obliged to infer that the continuance of that College

was not limited to the life of Hazekiah, since the latter died before

Isaiah (Tos. Baba Bathra; Yeb. 49 b).

What has just been indicated is fully confirmated by what we know of

the activity of Ezra (Ezra vii. 6, 10), and of his successors in the

great Synagogue. If we are to attach credit to the notice in 2 Macc.

ii. 13,[6407]6407 it points to such literary activity as tradition

indicates. That the revision and determination of the Canon must have

been among the main occupations of Ezra and his successors of 'the

Great Synagogue' - whatever precise meaning may be attached to that

institution - seems scarcely to requre proof. The same remark applies

to another period of religious reformation, that of the so-called

Asmonæan College. Even if we had not the evidence of their exclusion

of such works as those of Ben Sirach and others, there could be no

rational doubt that in their time the Canon, as presently existing,

was firmly fixed, and that no work of comparatively late date could

have found admission into it. The period of their activity is

sufficiently known, and too near what may be called the historical

times of Rabbinism, for any attempt in that direction, without leaving

traces of it. Lastly, we come to the indications of a critical

revision of the text by 'Chananyah and his College,'[6408]6408 shortly

before the time of our Lord. Thus we have, in all, a record of four

critical revisions of the Canon up to time of Christ.

3. Any attempt to set forth in this place a detailed exposition of the

Exegetical Canon of the Rabbis, or of their application, would

manifestly be impossible. It would require almost a treatise of its

own; and a cursory survey would neither be satisfactory to the writer

nor instructive to the general reader. Besides, on all subjects

connected with Rabbinic exagesis, a sufficient number of learned

treatises exists, which are easily accessible to students, while the

general reader can only be interested in such general results as have

been frequently indicated throughout these volumes. Lastly, the

treatment of certain branches of the subject, such as a criticism of

the Targumim, really belongs to what is known as the science of

'Introduction,' either to the Old Testament, in manuals of which, as

well as in special treaties, all such subjects are fully discussed.

Besides these the student may be referred, for a general summary, to

the labours of Dr. Hamburger (Real-Encycl.). Special works on various

branches of the subject cannot here be named, since this would involve

an analysis and critical disquisition. But for aknowledge of the

Rabbinic statements in regard to the Codices and the text of the Old

Testement, reference may here be made to the short but masterly

analysis of Professor Strack (Prolegomena Critica), in which, first,

the various codices of the Old Testament, and then the text as

existing in Talmudical times, are discussed, and the literature of the

subject fully and cirtically given. The various passage are also

mentioned in which the Biblical quotations in the Mishanah and Gemara

differ from our present text.[6409]6409 Most of them are, however, of

no exegetical importance. On the exegesis of the Rabbis generally, I

would take leave to refer to sketch of it given in the 'History of the

Jewish Nation,' ch. xi., and especially in App. V., on 'Rabbinical

Exegesis,' where all its canons are enumerated. Some brief notices

connected with Rabbinic Commentaries quoted in this work will be found

at the beginning of vol. i.

4 Somewhat similar observations must be made in regard to the mystical

Theology of the Synagogue, or the so-called Kabbalah. Its commencement

must certainly be traced to, and before, the times described in these

volumes. For a discussion of its origin and doctrines I must once more

take leave to refer to the account given in the 'History of the Jewish

Nation' (pp. 435, &c.). The whole modern literature of the subject,

besides much illustrative matter, is given in the Italian text annexed

to David Castelli's edition of Sabbatai Donnolo's Hebrew Commentary on

the Book Yetsirah, or the Book of Creation. For, the Kabbalah busies

itself with these two subjects: the History of the Creation (Yetsirah,

perhaps rather 'formation' than Creation), and the 'Merkabhah,' or the

Divine apparition as described by Ezekiel. Both refer to the great

question, underlying all theosophic speculation: that of God's

connection with His creature. They treat of the mystery of Nature and

of Providence, with especial bearing on Revelation; and the question,

how the Infinite God can have any connection or intercourse with

finite creatures, is attempted to be answered. Of the two points

raised, that of Creation is of course the first in the order of

thinking as well as of time - and the book Yetsirah is the oldest

Kabbalistic document.

The Sepher Yetsirah is properly a monologue on the part of Abraham, in

which, by the contemplation of all that is around him, he ultimately

arrives at the conviction of the Unity of God.

'We distinguish the substance and the fom of creation; that which is,

and the mode in which it is. We have already indicated that the

original of all that exists is Divine. 1st, We have God; 2nd, God

manifest, or the Divine entering into form; 3rd, That Divine in its

form, from which in turn all original realities are afterwards

derived. In the Sepher Yetsirah, these Divine realities (the

substance) are represented by the ten numerals, and their form by the

twenty-two letters which constitute the Hebrew alphabet - language

being viewed as the medium of connection between the spiritual and the

material; as the form in which the spiritual appears. At the same

time, number and language indicate also the arrangement and the mode

of creation, and, in general, its boundaries. "By thirty-two

wounderful paths," so begins the Sepher Yetsirah, "the Eternal, the

Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel, the Living God, the King of the

World, the merciful and gracious God, the glorious One, He that

inhabiteth eternity, Whose Name is high and holy, has created the

world." But these ten numerals are in reality the ten Sephiroth, or

Divine emanations, arranged in triads, each tirad consisting of two

opposites (flowing or emanating from a superior triad until the Divine

Unity is reached), and being reconciled in a middle point of

connection. These ten Sephiroth, in the above arrangement, recur

everywhere, and the sacred number ten is that of prefection. Each of

these Sephiroth flows from its predecessor, and in this manner the

Divine gradually evolves. This emanation of the ten Sephiroth then

constitutes the substance of word; we may add, it constitutes

everything else. In God, in the world, in man, everywhere we meet

these ten Sephiroth, at the head of which is God manifest, or the

Memra (Logos, the Word). If the ten Sephiroth give the Substance, the

twenty-two letters are the form of creation and of revelation. "By

giving them form and shape,. and by interchanging them, God has made

the soul ofeverything that has been made, or shall be made." "Upon

those letters, also, has the Holy One, Whose Name be praised, founded

His holy and glorious Name." These letters are next subdivided, and

their application in all the departments of nature is shown. In the

unit creation, the triad; world, time and man are found. Above all

these is the Lord. Such is a very brief outline of the rational

exposition of theCreation, attempted by the Sepher

Yetsirah.'[6410]6410

We subjoin a translation of the book Yetsirah, only adding that much,

not only as regards the meaning of the expressions but even their

translation, is in controversy. Hence, not unfrequently, our rendering

must be regarded rather as our interpertation of the mysterious

original.

THE BOOK YETSIRAH

Pereq. I.

Mishnah 1. In thirty-two wonderful paths of wisdom, Jah, Jehovah

Tsebhaoth, the God of Israel, the Living God, and King of the World,

God merciful and gracious, High and Exalted, Who dwelleth to Eternity,

high and holy is His Name, hath ordered [established, created?] (the

world) by three Sepharim [books]: by Sepher [the written Word], Sephar

[number, numeral] and Sippur [spoken word]. Others, pointing the

worlds differently, render these mysterious terms: Number, Word,

Writing; others Number, Numberer, Numbered; while still other see in

it a reference to the threefold division of the letters of the Hebrew

alphabet, of which more afterwards.

Mishnah 2. Ten Sephiroth [emanations] belimah[6411]6411 [without

anything, i.e. before these, the sole elements out of which all else

evolved], twenty-two letters of foundation (these constitute the

Hebrew Alphabet, and the meaning seems that the Sephiroth manifest

themselves in that which is uttered): three mothers (Aleph, the first

letter of Avveyr, air; Mem, the first letter of Mayim, water; and

Shin, the last letter of Esh, fire - although this may represent only

one mystical aspect of themeaning of the term 'mothers,' as applied to

these letters), seven duplex[6412]6412 (Prounced 'soft' or 'hard,'

viz. Beth, Gimel, Daleth, Kaph, Pe, Resh, Tau, which are, or where in

Hebrew capable of modification by a Dagesh - but this also must be

mystically understood) and twelve simple ones[6413]6413 (the simple

letters of the Hebrew Alphabet).

Mishnah 3. Ten Sephiorth belimah (the analogy is now further traced in

God and in man), the number of the ten fingers, five against five, and

the covenant of the One Only (God) placed between them (the coventant

relationship between God and man in the midst, even as it is

symbolised in the person of man which is between the twice five

fingers) by the word of the tongue (this, the relation Godward) and by

the word of sexualness [nuditas] (the relation earthwards - the one

has become dual.)

Mishnah 4. Ten Sephiroth belimah - ten and not nine, ten and not

eleven - be informed in wisdom, and be wise in information; examine in

them, search out from them, and put the thing in its reality

(certitude, proper state?), and place again the Creator in His place.

Mishnah 5. Ten Sephiroth belimah - their measurement ten, which have

no end (limitation): depth of beginning (past) and depth of ending

(future), depth of good and depth of evil, depth of height and depth

of profundity (or, above and beneath), depth of east and depth of

west, depth of north and depth of south - One only Lord, God, the true

(approved) King, Who reigneth over all from His holy dwelling and unto

all eternity.

Mishnah 6. Ten Sephiroth belimah - their appearance like the sheen of

lightning (reference here to Ezek. i. 14), and their outgoings (goal)

that they have no end, His word is in them (the Logos manifest in the

Sephiroth), in running and in returning, and at His word like

storm-wind they pursue (follow), and before His throne they bend (in

worship).

Mishnah 7. Ten Sephiroth belimah - their end is joined to their

beginning, like the flame that is bound up with the coal, for the Lord

is One only, and there is no second to Him, and before him what

countest thou?

Mishnah 8. Ten Sephiroth belimah - shut thy mouth, that is speak not,

and thy heart, that it think not, and if thy heart run away, bring it

back to its place, for on this account is it said (Ezek. i. 14) 'they

run and return,' and on this condition has the Covenant been made.

Mishnah 9 and 10. Ten Sephiroth belimah - One: the Spirit of the

living God, blessed and again blessed be the Name of Him Who liveth

for ever - Voice and Spirit and Word, and this is the Holy Ghost.

Two: Wind (air, spirit?) from (out of) Spirit - thereby ordered and

hewed He the twenty-two letters of foundation, three mothers, and 7

duplicate, and 12 simple ones, and one Spirit from (among) them.

Three: Water from beneath (wind), He designed and hewed in them tohu

vavohu, slime and dung - designed them like a bed (a garden bed),

hewed them like a wall, covered them like pavement. Four: Fire from

water, He designed it and hewed in it the throne of glory, the Ophanim

and Seraphim, the sacred living creatures, and the angels of service,

and of these three He founded His dwelling place, as it is said, He

maketh His angels breaths (winds), and His ministers a flaming fire.

Mishnah 11. Five: Three letters from out the simple ones: He sealed

spirit on the three, and fastened them in His Great Name {hebrew}

(Jehovah, of which these three letters are the abbreviation; what

follows shows how the permutation of these three letters makes the

varied relationship of God to creation in time and space, and at the

same time, so to speak, the immance of His manifestation in it). And

He sealed with them six outgoings (ends, terminations): He turned

upwards, and He sealed it with {hebrew}. Six: He sealed below, turned

downwards, and sealed it with {hebrew}. Seven: He sealed eastward, He

turned in front of Him, and sealed it with {hebrew}. Eight: He sealed

westward, and turned behind, and sealed it with {hebrew}. Nine: He

sealed southward, and turned to His right, and sealed it with

{hebrew}. Ten: He sealed northward, and turned to His left, and sealed

it with {hebrew}.

Mishnah 12. These are the Sephiroth belimah - one: Spirit of the

living God, and wind (air, spirit? the word ruach means all these),

water, and fire; and height above and below, east and west, north and

south.

Pereq II.

Mishnah 1. Twenty-and-two letters of foundation: three mothers, seven

duplex, and twelve simple ones - three mothers {hebrew}, their

foundation the scale of merit and the scale of guilt, and the tongue

of statute trembling (deciding) between them. (This, to be mystically

carried out, in its development, and application to all things: the

elements, man, &c.)

Mishnah 2. Twenty-two letters of foundation: He drew them, hewed them,

weighed them, and interchanged them, melted them together (showing how

in the permutation of letters all words - viewed mystically as the

designation of things - arose), He formed by them the nephesh of all

that is formed (created), and the nephesh of everything that is to be

formed (created).

Mishnah 3. Two-and-twenty letters of foundation: drawn in the voice,

hewn in the wind (air, spirit?) fastened on the mouth in five places:

{hebrew} (the gutturals among the Hebrew letters), {hebrew} (the

labials), {hebrew} (the palatals),{hebrew} (the linguals), {hebrew}

(the dentals).

Mishnah 4. Twenty-two letters of foundation, fastened in a circle in

231 gates (marking how these letters are capbale of forming, by the

permutation of two of them, in all 231 permutations); and the circle

turns forwards and backwards, and this is the indication of the

matter: as regards what is good, there is nothing higher than {hebrew}

(oneg), 'delight,' and nothing lower than {hebrew} (negah), 'plague'

(stroke). In such manner He weighed them and combined them, with them

all, and them all with {hebrew} with them all, and them all with

{hebrew}, and thus the rest, so that it is found that all that is

formed and all that is spoken proceeds from one Name (the name of God

being, as it were, the fundamental origin of everything).

Mishnah 5. He formed from Tohu that which has substance, and made that

which is not into being, and hewed great pillars from the air, which

cannot be handled; and this is the indication: beholding and speaking

He made all that is formed and all words by one Name - and the

indication of the matter: twenty-two numbers and one body.

Pereq III.

Mishnah 1. Three mothers - {hebrew}: their foundation, the scale of

guilt and the scale of merit, and the tongue of the statue trembling

(deciding) between them.

Mishnah 2. Three mothers - {hebrew} - a great mystery, marvellous and

hidden, and sealed with six signets, and from them go forth fire and

water, and divide themselves into male and female. Three mothers,

{hebrew} their foundation, and from them were born the fathers (rerum

naturæ semina), from which everything is created (fire is regarded as

the male principle, water as the female principle, and air as

combining the two: {hebrew} is the first letter of the Hebrew word for

air, {hebrew} for that of water, {hebrew} the last for that of fire).

Mishnah 3. Three letters, {hebrew} - in the world: air, water, fire;

the heavens were created in the beginning from fire, and the earth was

created from water, and the air trembles (the same word as that in

regard to the tongue between the scales of the balance, indicating the

intermediate, inclining to the one or the other) between the fire and

the water.

Mishnah 4. Three mothers, {hebrew} - in the year: fire, and water, and

wind. Heat is created from fire, cold from water, and moderate from

the wind (air) that is intermediate between them. Three mothers,

{hebrew} - in the nephesh: fire, water, and wind. The head was created

from fire, and the belly from water, and the body from wind that is

intermediate between them.

Mishnah 5. Three mothers, {hebrew} - He drew them, and hewed them, and

melted them together, and sealed with them the three mothers in the

world, the three mothers in the year, and three mothers in the nephesh

- male and female.

(Now follows a further mystical development and application.) The

letter {hebrew} He made King in the Spirit, and bound upon him the

crown (this refers to farther mystical signs indicated in the

Kabbalistic figure drawn on p. 438 of the 'History of the Jewish

Nation'), and melted them one with the other, and sealed with them: in

the world the air, in the soul life, and in the nephesh (living thing)

body - the male with {hebrew}, the female with {hebrew}. {hebrew} He

made King in the waters, and bound on it the crown, and melted them

one with the other, and sealed: in the world earth, and in the year

cold, and in the nephesh the belly - male and feamle, male in

{hebrew}, and female in {hebrew}. {hebrew} He made King in the fire,

and bound on it the crown, and melted them one with the other, and

sealed with it: in the upper world the heavens, in the year heat, in

the nephesh the head - male and female.

Pereq IV.

Mishnah 1. Seven duplex letters, {hebrew} (it will here be noticed

that we now proceed from the numeral 3 to the further mystic numeral

7), accustomed (habituated, adapted, fitted) for two languages

(correlate ideas); life, and peace, and wisdom, and riches, grace, and

seed, and government (the mystic number 7 will here he noted), and

accustomed (fitted) for two tongues (modes of pronunciation) {hebrew},

- the formation of soft and hard, the formation of strong and weak

(the dual principle will here be observed); duplicate, because they

are opposites: the opposites - life and death; the opposites - peace

and evil; the opposites - wisdom and folly; the opposites - riches and

poverty; the opposites - grace and ugliness; the opposites - fertility

and desolation; the opposites - rule and servitude.

Mishnah 2. Seven duplex letters, {hebrew}; corresponding to the seven

out goings; from them seven outgoings: above and below, east and

west, north and south, and the holy Temple in the middle, and it

upbears the whole.

Mishnah 3. Seven duplex, {hebrew}; He drew them, and hewed them, and

melted them, and from them, in the world the stars (the planets), in

the year the days, in the nephesh the issues, and with them He drew

seven firmaments, and seven earths, and seven Sabbaths, therefore He

loves the seventh under all heavens.

Mishnah 4. Two letters build two houses (here the number of possible

permutations are indicated). Three letters build six houses, four

build twenty-four houses, five build 120 houses, six build 720 houses,

and from thence go onward and think what the mouth is not able to

speak, and the ear not able to hear. And these are the in the world -

seven: the Sun, Venus, Mercury, the Moon, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars. And

these are the days in the year; the seven days of creation; and the

seven gates of issue in the nephesh: two eyes, two ears, and a mouth,

and the two nostrils. And with them were drawn the seven above all

that is delight under the heavens.

Pereq V.

Mishnah 1. The properties of the twelve simple letters (or their

attributes) - {hebrew} - their foundation: sight, hearing, smell,

speech, eating, concubitus, working, walking, anger, laughter,

thinking, sleep. Their measurement twelve boundaries in the

hypothenuse (points in transverse lines), the boundary N. E., the

boundary S. E., the boundary E. upwards, the boundary E. downwards;

the boundary N. upwards, the boundary N. downwards, the boundary S.

W., the boundary N. W., the boundary W. upwards, the boundary W.

downwards, the boundary S. upwards, the boundary S. downwards, and

they extended and go on into the eternal (boundless space), and they

are the arms of the world.

Mishnah 2. Twelve simple letters, {hebrew}. He drew them, and melted

them, and formed of them the twelve constellations in the world (sign

of the Zodiac): Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra,

Scorpio, Sagattarius,Capricornus, Aquarius, Pisces (these are

expressed in the original in an abbreviated, contracted form). These

are the twelve months of the year: Nisan, Iyar, Sivan, Tammuz, Abh,

Elul, Tishri, Marcheshvan, Kislev, Tebheth, Shebhat, Adar (thus the

number twelve is marked, first in the functions of man, then in the

points of the compass, then in the starry skies, and then in the

year). And these are the twelve leaders in nephesh (living beings):

two hands, and two feet, and two kidneys, the spleen, the liver, the

gall, the intestine, the upper stomach, the lower stomach (perhaps

gullet, stomach, and intestine - at any rate, three organs connected

with deglutition and digestion). He made them like a land (province),

and set them in order like war, and also - this as against that,

ordered God. Three mothers, which are three fathers, because from them

issue fire, wind, and water. Three mothers, and seven duplicate, and

twelve simple ones.

Mishnah 3. These are the twenty-two letters with which the Holy One

has founded (all), blessed be He, Jah, Jehovah Tsebhaoth, the living

God of Israel, high and lifted up, dwelling eternally, and holy is His

Name, exalted and holy is He.

Pereq VI.

Mishnah 1. Three fathers and their generations, seven subduers and

their hosts (planets?), seven boundaries of hypothenuse - and the

proof of matter: faithful witnesses are the world, the year, and the

nephesh. The law (statute, settled order) of the twelve, and of the

seven, and of the three, and they are appointed over the heavenly

dragon, and the cycle, and the heart. Three: fire, and water, and wind

(air); the fire above, the water below, and the wind (air) the statute

intermediate between them. And the demonstration of the matter: the

fire bears the water, {hebrew} is silent, {hebrew} hisses, and

{hebrew} is the statute intermediate between them (all these have

further mystic meaning and application in connection with words and

ideas).

Mishnah 2. The dragon is in the world like a king on his throne; the

cycle is in the year like a king in his land; the heart is in the

nephesh like a king in war. Also in all that is pursued God has made

the one against the other (opposite poles and their reconciliation):

the good against the evil; good from good, and evil from evil; the

good trying the evil, and the evil trying the good the good is kept

for the good, and the evil is kept for the evil.

Mishnah 3. Three are one, that standeth alone; seven are divided,

there as against three, and the statute intermediate between them.

Twelve are in war: three loving, three hating, three giving life,

three giving death. The three loving ones: the heart, the ears, and

the mouth; the three hating ones: the liver, the gall, and the tongue

- and God a faithful king reigning over all: one (is) over three,

three over seven, seven over twelve, and they are all joined together,

the one with the other.

Mishnah 4. And when Abraham our father had beheld, and considered, and

seen, and drawn, and hewn, and obtained it, then the Lord of all

revealed Himself to him, and called him His friend, and made a

covenant with him and with his seed: and he believed in Jehovah, and

it was imputed to him for righteousness. He made with him a covenant

between the ten toes, and that is circumcision; between the ten

fingers of his hand, and that is the tongue; and He bound

two-and-twenty letters on his tongue, and showed him their foundation.

He drew them with water, He kindled them with fire, He breathed them

with (air); He burnt them in seven; He poured them forth in the twelve

constellations.

The views expressed in the Book Yetsirah are repeatedly referred to in

the Mishnah and in other of the most ancient Jewish writings. They

represent, as stated at the outset, a direction long anterior to the

Mishnah, and of which the first beginnings and ultimate principles are

of deepest interest to the Christian student. The reader who wishes to

see the application to Christian metaphysics and theology of the

Kabbalah, of which Yetsirah is but the first word, is referred to a

deeply interesting and profound work, strangely unknown to English

scholars: Molitor, Philosophie d. Gesch. oder uber d. Tradition, 4

vols. English readers will find much to interest them in the now

somewhat rare work of the Rev. John Oxley: The Christian Doctrine of

the Trinity and Incarnation (London, 1815, 2 vols.)

The principles laid down in the Book Yetsirah are further carried out

and receive their fullest (often most remarkable) development and

application in thebook Zohar ('Splendour' - the edition used by us is

the 8vo. edition, Amsterdam, 1805, in 3 vols, with the Amsterdam

edition of the Tikkune Zohar; other Kabbalistic books used by us need

not here be mentioned). The main portion of the Zohar is in the form

of a Commentary on the Pentateuch, but other tractates are

interspersed throughout the volumes.

5. Dogmatic Theology. - This is fully treated of in the text of these

volumes.

6. Historic Theology. - To describe and criticise the various works

which come under this designation would require the expansion of this

Appendix into a Tractate. Some of these compositions have been

referred to in the text of these volumes. For a general account and

criticism of them I must again refer to the 'History of the Jewish

Nation' (see especially the chapters on 'The Progress of Arts and

Sciences among the Jews,' and 'Theological Science and Religious

Belief in Palestine'). For the historical and critical account of

Rabbinic historical works the student is referred to Zunz, Gottesd.

Vortr. d. Juden, ch. viii. The only thing which we shall here attempt

is a translation of the so-called Megillath Taanith, or 'Roll of

Fast;' rather, a Calendar of the days on which fasting and mourning

was prohibited. The oldest part of the document (referred to in the

Mishnah, Taan. ii. 8) dates from the beginning of the second century

of our era, and contains elements of even much greater antiquity. That

which has come down of it is here given in translation:[6414]6414 -

MEGILLATH TAANITH, OR ROLL OF FASTS.

These are the days on which it is not lawful to fast, and during some

of them mourning must also be intermitted.

I. Nisan.

1. From the 1st day of the month Nisan, and to the 8th of it, it was

settled about the daily sacrifice (that it should be paid out of the

Temple-treasury) - mourning is prohibited.

2. And from the 8th to the end of the Feast (the 27th) the Feast of

Weeks was re-established - mourning is interdicted.

II. Iyar.

1. On the 7th Iyar the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem - mourning

is prohibited.

2. On the 14th is the day of the little (the second) Passover -

mourning is prohibited.

3. On the 23rd the sons of Acra[6415]6415 issued from Jerusalem.

4. On the 27th the imposts were removed from Judæa and Jerusalem.

III. Sivan.

1. On the 17th Sivan the tower of Zur was taken.

2. On the15th and 16th men of Bethshean and of the plain were exiled.

3. On the 25th the tax-gatherers were withdrawn from Judah and

Jerusalem.

IV. Tammuz.

1. On the 14th Tammuz the Book of Decisions ('aggravating ordinances')

was abrogated - mourning is prohibited.

V. Abh.

1. On the 15th Abh the season of wood-offerings (for the Temple use)

of priests (comp. Jos. War ii. 17. 6) - mourning is prohibited.

2. On the 24th we returned to our Law.

VI. Elul.

1. On the 7th of Elul the day of the Dedication of Jerusalem -

mourning prohibited.

2. On the 17th the Romans withdrew from Judæa and Jerusalem.

3. On the 22nd we returned to kill the apostates.

VII. Tisri.

1. ON the 3rd Tishri the mention of the Divine Name was removed from

public deeds.

VIII. Marcheshvan.

1. On the 23rd Marcheshvan the Sorigah (a partition-wall in the

Temple, supposed to have been erected by the heathen, comp. 1 Macc.

iv. 43-46) was removed from the Temple-court.

2. On the 25th the wall of Samaria was taken.

3. On the 27th the meat offering was again brought on the altar.

IX. Kislev.

1. On the 3rd the Simavatha (another heathen structure) was removed

from the court or the Temple,

2. On the 7th is a feast day.

3. On the 21st is the day of Mount Garizim - mourning is prohibited.

4. On the 25th the eight days of the Feast of Lights (Chanukah) begin

- mourning is prohibited.

X. Tebheth.

1. On the 28th the congregation was re-established according to the

Law. (This seems to refer to the restoration of the Sanhedrin after

the Sadducean members were removed, under the rule of Queen Salome.

See the historical notes in Appendix IV.)

XI. Shebhat.

1. On the 2nd a feast day[6416]6416 - mourning is prohibited.

2. On the 22nd the work, of which the enemy said that it was to be in

the Temple, was destroyed - mourning is interdicted. (This seems to

refer to the time of Caligula, when, on the resistance of the Jews,

the statute of the Emperor was at last not allowed to be in the

Temple.)

3. On the 28th King Antiochus was removed from Jerusalem (supposed to

refer to the day of the death of Antiochus, son of Antiochus

Epiphanes, in his expedition against the Parthians).

XII. Adar.

1. On the 8th and the 9th, days of joy on account of rain-fall.

2. On the 12th is the day of Trajan.

3. On the 13th is the day of Nicanor (his defeat).

4. On the 14th and on the 15th are the days of Purim (Feast of Esther)

- mourning is prohibited.

5. On the 16th was begun the building the wall of Jerusalem - mourning

is prohibited.

6. On the 17th rose the heathens against the remnant of the Scribes in

the country of Chalcis and of the Zabedaeans, and Israel was

delivered.

7. On the 20th the people fasted for rain, and it was granted to them.

8. On the 28th the Jews received good tidings that they would no

longer be hindered from the sayings of the Law - mourning is

prohibited.

On these days every one who has before made a vow of fasting is to

give himself to prayer.

(In extenuation of the apparent harshness and literality of our

renderings, it should be stated, that both the Sepher Yetsirah and the

Megillath Taanith are here for the first time translated into

English.)

APPENDIX VI.

List of the Maccabees, of the Family of Herod, of the High-Priests,

the Roman Procurators of Judæa, and Roman Govenors of Syria

[figa6a.jpg]

Figure A6a.

[figa6b.jpg]

Figure A6b.

[figa6c.jpg]

Figure A6c.

[figa6d.jpg]

Figure A6d.

[figa6e.jpg]

Figure A6e.

APPENDIX VII.

ON THE DATE OF THE NATIVITY OF OUR LORD

(Vol. i. Book II. ch. iii. and other passages).

So much, that is generally accessible, has of late been written on

this subject, and such accord exists on the general question, that

only the briefest statement seems requisite in this place, the space

at our command being necessarily reserved for subjects which have

either not been treated of by previous writers, or in a manner or form

that seemed to make a fresh investigation desirable.

At the outset it must be admitted, that absolute certainty is

impossible as to the exact date of Christ's Nativity - the precise

year even, and still more the month and the day. But in regard to the

year, we possess such data as to invest it with such probability, as

almost to amount to certainty.

1. The first and most certain date is that of the death of Herod the

Great. Our Lord was born before the death of Herod, and, as we judge

from the Gospel-history, very shortly before that event. Now the year

of Herod's death has been ascertained with, we may say, absolute

certainty, as shortly before the Passover of the year 750 A.U.C.,

which corresponds to about the 12th of April of the year 4 before

Christ, according to our common reckoning. More particularly, shortly

before the death of Herod there was a lunar eclipse (Jos. Ant. xvii.

6. 4), which, it is astronomically ascertained, occurred on the night

from the 12th to the 13th of March of the year 4 before Christ. Thus

the death of Herod must have taken place between the 12th of March and

the 12th of April - or, say, about the end of March (comp. Ant. xvii.

8. 1). Again, the Gospel-history necessitates an interval of, at the

least, seven or eight weeks before that date for the birth of Christ

(we have to insert the purification of the Virgin - at the earliest,

six weeks after the Birth - The Visit of the Magi, and the murder of

the children at Bethlehem, and, at any rate, some days more before the

death of Herod). Thus the Birth of Christ could not have possibly

occurred after the beginning of February 4 b.c., and most likely

several weeks earlier. This brings us close to the ecclesiastical

date, the 25th of December, in confirmation of which we refer to what

has been stated in vol. i. p. 187, see especially note 3. At any rate,

the often repeated, but very superficial objection, as to the

impossibility of shepherds tending flocks in the open at that season,

must now be dismissed as utterly untenable, not only for the reasons

stated in vol. i. p. 187, but even for this, that if the question is

to be decided on the ground of rain-fall, the probabilities are in

favour of December as compared with February - later than which it is

impossible to place the birth of Christ.

2. No certain inference can, of course, be drawn from the appearance

of 'the star' that guided the Magi. That, and on what grounds, our

investigations have pointed to a confirmation of the date of the

Nativity, as given above, has been fully explained in vol. i. ch.

vi... (see specially p. 213).

3. On the taxing of Quirinius, see vol. i. pp. 181, 182.

4. The next historical datum furnished by the Gospels is that of the

beginning of St. John the Baptist's ministry, which, according to St.

Luke, was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, and when Jesus was 'about

thirty years old' (St. Luke iii. 23). The accord of this with our

reckoning of the date of the Nativity has been shown in vol. i. p.

264.

5. A similar conclusion would be reached by following the somewhat

vague and general indication furnished in St. John ii. 20.

6. Lastly, we reach the same goal if we follow the historically

somewhat uncertain guidance of the date of the Birth of the Baptist,

as furnished in this notice (St. Luke i. 5) of his annunication to his

father, that Zacharias officiated in the Temple as on of 'the course

of Abia' (see here vol. i. p. 135). In Taan. 29 a we have the notice,

with which that of Josephus agrees (War vi. 4. 1. 5), that at the time

of the destruction of the Temple 'the course of Jehoiarib,' which was

the first of the priestly courses, was on duty. That was on the 9-10

Ab of the year 823 A.U.C., or the 5th August of the year 70 of our

era. If this calculation be correct (of which, however, we cannot feel

quite sure), then counting 'the courses' of priests backwards, the

course of Abia would, in the year 748 A.U.C. (the year before the

birth of Christ) have been on duty from the 2nd to the 9th of October.

This also would place the birth of Christ in the end of December of

the following year (749), taking the expression 'sixth month' in St.

Luke i. 26, 36, in the sense of the running month (from the 5th to the

6th month, comp. St. Luke i. 24). But we repeat that absolute reliance

cannot be placed on such calculations, at least so far as regards

month and day. (Comp. here generally Wieseler, Synopse, and his

Beiträge.)

APPENDIX VIII.

RABBINIC TRADITIONS ABOUT ELIJAH, THE FORERUNNER OF THE MESSIAH

(Vol. i. Book II. ch. iii. p. 143.)

To complete the evidence, presented in the text, as to the essential

difference between the teaching of the ancient Synagogue about 'the

Forerunner of the Messiah' and the history and mission of John the

Baptist, as described in the New Testaments, we subjoin a full, though

condensed, account of the earlier Rabbinic traditions about Elijah.

Opinions differ as to the descent and birthplace of Elijah. According

to some, he was from the land of Gilead (Bemid. R. 14), and of the

tribe of Gad (Tanch. on Gen. xlix. 19). Others describe him as a

Benjamite, from Jerusalem, one of those 'who sat in the Hall of Hewn

Stones' (Tanch. on Ex. xxxi. 2), or else as paternally descended from

Gad and maternally from Benjamin.[6417]6417 Yet a third opinion, and

to which apparently most weight attaches, represents him as a Levite,

and a Priest - nay, as the great High-Priest of Messianic days. This

is expressly stated in the Targum Pseudo-Jon. on Ex. xl. 10, where it

also seems implied that he was to anoint the Messiah with the sacred

oil, the composition of which was among the things unknown in the

second Temple, but to be restored by Elijah (Tanch. on Ex. xxiii. 20,

ed. Warsh. p. 91 a, lines 4 and 5 from the top). Another curious

tradition identifies Elijah with Phinehas (Targum Pseudo-Jon. on Ex.

vi.18). The same expression as in the Targum ('Phinehas - that is

Elijah') occurs in that great storehouse of Rabbinic tradition, Yalkut

(vol. i. p. 245 b, last two lines, and col. c). From the pointed

manner in which reference is made to the parallelism between the zeal

of Phinehas and that of Elijah, and between their work in reconciling

God and Israel, and bringing the latter to repentance, we may gather

alike the origin of this tradition and its deeper meaning.[6418]6418

For (as fully explained in Book II. ch. v.) it is one of the

principles frequently expressed by the ancient Synagogue, in its

deeper perception of the unity and import of the Old Testament, that

the miraculous events and Divine interpositions of Israel's earlier

history would be re-enacted, only with wider application, in Messianic

days. If this idea underlay the parallelism between Phinehas and

Elijah, it is still more fully carried out in that between Elijah and

Moses. On comparing the Scriptural account of these two messengers of

God we are struck with the close correspondence between the details of

their history. The Synagogue is careful to trace this analogy step by

step (Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 32 d) the final deliverance of Israel of

Egypt, so would the final deliverance by Elijah for ever break the

yoke of all foreign rule. The allusion here is to the part which

Elijah was expected to take in the furture 'wars of Gog and Magog'

(Seder Olam R. c. xvii.) Indeed, this parallelism is carried so far,

that tradition has it, that, when Moses was commissioned by God to go

to Pharoah, he pleaded that God should rather send by him whom He

designed to send for the far greater deliverance in the latter days.

On this it was told him that Elijah's mission would be to Israel,

while he(Moses) was sent to Pharaoh (Pirqé de R. Eliez. 40).[6419]6419

Similarly, it is asserted that the cave from which Moses beheld the

Divine Presence passing before him (Ex. xxxiii. 22) was the same as

that in which Elijah stood under similar circumstances - that cave

having been created with the rest of the world, but specially on the

eve of the world's first Sabbath (Siphré on Deut. ed. Friedmann, p.

147 a, last line). Considering this paralelism between them, the

occurrence of the somewhat difficult expression will scarcely surprise

us, that in the days of the Messiah Moses and Elijah would come

together - 'as one' (Debar. R. 3, at the end).[6420]6420

It has been noted in the text that the activity of Elijah, from the

time of his appearance in the days of Ahab to that of his return as

the forerunner of the Messiah, is represented in Jewish tradition as

continuous, and that he is almost constantly introduced on the scene,

either as in converse with some Rabbi, or else as busy about Israel's

welfare, and connected with it. Thus Elijah chronicles in heaven the

deeds of man (Seder Olam R. xvii.), or else writes down the

observances of the commandments by men, and then the Messiah and God

seal it (Midrast on Ruth ii. 14, last line, ed. Warsh. p. 43 b). In

general, he is ever interested in all that concerns Israel's present

state or their future deliverance (Sanh. 98 a). Indeed, he is

connected with the initiatory rite of the covenant, in acknowledgement

of his zeal[6421]6421 in the restoration of circumcision, when,

according to tradition, it had been abrogated by the ten tribes after

their separation from Judah. God accordingly had declared: 'Israel

shall not make the covenant of circumcision, but thou shalt see it,'

and the sages decreed that (at circumcision) a seat of honour shall be

placed for the Angel of the Covenant (Mal. iii. 2; Pirqé de R. Eliez.

29, end). Tradition goes even further. Not only was he the only

ambassador to whom God had delegated His three special 'keys:' of

birth, of the rainfall, and of waking the dead (Yalkut, vol. ii. 32

c), but his working was almost Divine (Tanch. Bereshith 7; ed. Warsh.

p. 6 b, last line, and 7 a).

We purposely pass over the activity of Elijah in connection with

Israel, and especially its Rabbis and saints, during the interval

between the Prophet's death and his return as the Forerunner of the

Messiah, such as Jewish legend describes it. No good purpose could be

served by repeating what so frequently sounds not only utterly foolish

and superstitious, but profane. In Jewish legend Elijah is always

introduced as the guardian of the interests of Israel, whether

theologically or personally - as it were the constant living medium

between God and his people, the link that binds the Israel of the

present - with its pursuits, wants, difficulties and interests - to

the bright Messianic future of which he is the harbinger. This

probably is the idea underlying the many, often grotesque, legends

about his sayings and doings. Sometimes he is represented as, in his

well-meant zeal, going so far as to bear false witness in order to

free Rabbis from danger and difficulty (Berach. 58 a). In general, he

is always ready to instruct, to comfort, or to heal, condescending

even to so slight a malady as the toothache (Ber. R. 96, end). But

most frequently is he the adviser an friend of the Rabbis, in whose

meetings and studies he delighteth. Thus he was a frequent attendant

in Rabh's Academy - and his indiscretion in divulging to his friends

the secrets of heaven had once procured for him in heaven the

punishment of fiery stripes (Babha Mets. 85 b). But it is usesless to

do more than indicate all this. Our object is to describe the activity

of Elijah in connection with the coming of the Messiah.

When, at length, the time of Israel's redemption arrived - then would

Elijah return. Of two things only are we sure in connection with it.

Elijah will not 'come yesterday' - that is, he will be revealed the

same day that he comes - and he will not come on the eve of either a

Sabbath or feast-day, in order not to interrupt the festive rest, nor

to break the festive laws (Erub. 43 b, Shabb. 33 a). Whether he came

one day (Er. 43 b) or three days before the Messiah (Yalkut, vol. ii.

p. 53 c, about the middle) his advent would be close to that of that

Messiah (Yalkut, vol. i. p. 310 a, line 21 from bottom).[6422]6422 The

account given of the three days between the advent of Elijah and of

the Messiah is peculiar (Yalkut, vol. ii. p.53 c). Commenting on Is.

lii. 7, it is explained, that on the first of those three days Elijah

would stand on the mountains of Israel, lamenting the desolateness of

the land, his voice being heard from one end of the world to the

other, after which he would proclaim: 'Peace' cometh to the world;

'peace' cometh to the world! Similarly on the second day he would

proclaim, 'Good' cometh to the world; 'good' cometh to the world!

Lastly, on the third day, he would, in the same manner as the two

previous days, make proclamation: 'Jeshuah[6423]6423 (salvation)

cometh to the world; Jeshuah (salvation) cometh to the world,' which,

in order to mark the difference between Israel and the Gentiles, would

be further explained by this addition: 'Saying unto Zion - Thy King

cometh!'

The period of Elijah's advent would, according to one opinion (Pirqé

de R. Eliez. 43), be a time of genuine repentance by Israel, although

it is not stated that this change would be brought about by his

ministry. On the other hand, his peculiar activity would consist in

settling ceremonial and ritual questions, doubts, and difficulties, in

making peace, in restoring those who by violence had been wrongfully

excluded from the congregation and excluding those who by violence had

been wrongfully introduced (Bab. Mets. i. 8; ii. 8; iii. 4, 5; Eduy.

vii. 7). He would also restore to Israel these three things which had

been lost: the golden pot of Manna (Ex. xvi. 33), the vessel

containing the anointing oil, and that with the waters of purification

- according to some, also Aaron's rod that budded and bore

fruit.[6424]6424 Again, his activity is likened to that of the Angel

whom God had sent before Israel to drive out and to vanquish the

hostile nations (Tanch. on Ex. xxiii. 20, § 18 at the close; ed.

Warsh. p. 106 b). For. Elijah was to appear, then to disappear, and to

appear again in the wars of Gog and Magog[6425]6425 (Seder Olam R.

xvii.). But after that time general peace and happiness would prevail,

when Elijah would discharge his peculiar functions. Finally, to the

ministry of Elijah some also ascribed the office of raising the dead

(Sotah ix. 15, closing words).[6426]6426

Such is a summary of ancient Jewish tradition concerning Elijah as the

forerunner of the Messiah. Comparing it with the New Testament

description of John the Baptist, it will at least be admitted that,

from whatever source the sketch of the activity and mission of the

Baptist be derived, it cannot have been from the ideal of the ancient

Synagogue, nor yet from popularly current Jewish views. And, indeed -

could there be a greater contrast than between the Jewish forerunner

of the Messiah and him of the New Testament?

APPENDIX IX.

LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PASSAGES MESSIANICALLY APPLIED IN ANCIENT

RABBINIC WRITINGS

(Vol. i. Book II. ch. v.)

THE following list contains the passages in the Old Testament applied

to the Messiah or to Messianic times in the most ancient Jewish

writings. They amount in all to 456, thus distributed: 75 from the

Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Hagiorgrapha, and

supported by more than 558 separate quotations from Rabbinic writings.

Despite all labour care, it can scarcely be hoped that the list is

quite complete, although, it is hoped, no important passage has been

omitted. The Rabbinic references might have been considerably

increased, but it seemed useless to quote the same application of a

passage in many different books. Similarly, for the sake of space,

only the most important Rabbinic quotations have been translated in

extenso. The Rabbinic works from which quotations have been made are:

the Targumim, the two Talmuds, and the most ancient Midrashim, but

neither the Zohar (as the date of its composition is in dispute), nor

any other Kabbalistic work, nor yet the younger Midrashim, nor, of

course, the writings of later Rabbis. I have, however, frequently

quoted from the well-known work Yalkut, because, although of

comparatively late date, it is really, as its name implies, a

collection and selection from more than fifty older and accredited

writings, and adduces passages now not otherwise accessible to us. And

I have the more readily availed myself of it, as I have been

reluctantly forced to the conclusion that even the Midrashim preserved

to us have occassionally been tampered with for controversial

purposes. I have quoted from the best edition of Yalkut (Frankfort a.

M., 1687), but in the case of the other Midrashim I have been obliged

to content myself with such more recent reprints as I possessed,

instead of the older and more expensive editions. In quoting from the

Midrashim, not only the Parashah, but mostly also the folio, the page,

and frequently even the lines are referred to. Lastly, it only remains

to acknowledge in general that, so far as possible, I have availed

myself of the labours of my predecessors - specially of those of

Schöttgen. Yet, even so, I may, in a sense, claim these references

also as the result of my own labours, since I have not availed myself

of quotations without comparing them with the works from which they

were adduced - a process in which not a few passages quoted had to be

rejected. And if any student should arrive at a different conclusion

from mine in regard to any of the passages hereafter quoted, I can at

least assure him that mine is the result of the most careful and

candid study I could give to the consideration of each passage. With

these prefatory remarks I proceed to give the list of Old Testament

passages Messianically applied in ancient Rabbinic writings.

In Gen. i. 2, the expression, 'Spirit of God,' is explained of 'the

Spirit of the King Messiah,' with reference to Is. xi. 2, and the

'moving on the face of the deep' of 'repentance,' according to Lam.

ii. 19. So in Ber. R. 2, and in regard to the first point also in Ber.

R. 8, in Vayyik. R. 14, and in other places.

Gen. ii. 4: 'These are the generations - {hebrew} - of the heavens and

of the earth,' taken in connection with Gen. iii. 15 and Ruth iv. 18.

Here we note one of the most curious Messianic interperations in Ber.

R. 12 (ed. Warsh. p. 24 b). It is noted that the word 'generations'

({hebrew}) is always written in the Bible without the {hebrew} which

is the equivalent for the numeral 6, except in Gen. ii. 4 and Ruth iv.

18. This to indicate that subsequent to Gen. ii. 4 the Fall took

place, in which Adam lost {hebrew} - six - things: his glorious sheen

(Job xiv. 20); life (Gen. iii. 19)); his stature (Gen. iii. 8 - either

by 100, by 200, by 300, or even by 900 cubits); the fruit of the

ground; the fruits of the trees (Gen. iii. 17); and the heavenly

lights. We have now seen why in Gen. ii. 4 - that is, previous to the

Fall - the {hebrew} is still in {hebrew}, since at that time these six

things were not yet lost. But the {hebrew} reappears in the word

{hebrew} in Ruth iv. 18, because these six things are to be rstored to

man by 'the son of Pharez' - or the Messiah (comp. for each of these

six things: Judg. v. 31 b; Is. lxviii. 22; Lev. xxvi. 13; Zech. viii.

12; Is. xxx. 26). It is added that although - according to the literal

rendering of Ps. xlix. 12 (in Heb. ver. 13) - man did not remain

unfallen one single night, yet, for the sake of the Sabbath, the

heavely lights were not extinguished till after the close of the

Sabbath. When Adam saw the darknes, it is added, he was greatly

afraid, saying: Perhaps he, of whom it is written, 'he shall bruise

thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel,' cometh to molest and attack

me, and he said, 'Surely the darkness shall cover me.' This courious

extract at least shown in what context the Synagogue applied Gen. iii.

15. The same occurs substantially in Shem. R. 30.

Gen iii. 15. This well-known passage is paraphrased, with express

reference to the Messiah, in the Targum Pseudo Jonathan and the

so-called Jerusalem Targum. Schöttgen conjectures that the Talmudic

designation of 'heels of the Messiah' (Sot. 49 b, line 2 from top) in

reference to the near Advent of the Messiah in the description of the

troubles of those days (comp. St. Matt. x. 35, 36) may have been

chosen partly with a view to this passage.

Gen. iv. 25. The language of Eve at the birth of Seth: 'another seed,'

is explained as meaning 'seed which comes from another place,' and

referred to the Messiah in Ber. R. 23 (ed. Warsh. p. 45 b, lines 8, 7

from the bottom). The same explanation occurs twice in the Midrash on

Ruth iv. 19 (in the genealogy of David, ed. Warsh. p. 46 b), the

second time in connection with Ps. xl. 8 ('in the volume of the book

it is written of me' - bim'gillath sepher - Ruth belonging to the

class {hebrew}).

In connection with Gen. v. 1 it is noted in Ber. R. 24, that King

Messiah will not come till all souls predestined for it have appeared

in human bodies on earth.

In Gen. viii. 11 the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan notes that the olive-leaf,

brought by the dove, was taken from the Mount of the Messiah.

Gen. ix. 27. The promise, that Japhet shall dwell in the tents of

Shem, is paraphrased in the Targum Pseudo-Jon. as meaning, that his

descendants should become proselytes, and dwell in the school of Shem

- which seems to refer to Messianic times.

In connection with Gen. xiv. 1, we are reminded in Ber. R. 42, that

when we see the nations warring together, we may expect the coming of

the Messiah.

The promise in Gen. xv. 18 is expected to be finally fulfilled in the

time of Messiah, in Ber. R. 44.

In connection with Gen. xviii. 4, 5 it is noted (Ber. R. 48, ed.

Warsh. p. 87 b) that the words of Abraham to his Angelic guests were

to be returned in blessing to Abraham's descendants, in the

wilderness, in the land of Canaan, and in the latter (Messianic) days.

Referring only to this last point, the words 'let a little water be

fetched,' is paralleled with the 'living waters' in Zech. xiv. 8;

'wash your feet,' with Is.iv. 4 (the washing away of the filth of the

daughters of Zion); 'rest under the tree,' with Is. iv. 6: 'there

shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat;' 'I

will fetch a morsel of bread,' with the provision, Ps. lxxii. 16:

'there shall be a handful of corn in the earth,' &c. So also the

words: 'Abraham ran unto the herd,' are paralleled with Is. vii. 21

(which is most significantly here applied to Messianic times); and

lastly, the words, 'he stood by them,' with Mic. ii. 13: 'the breaker

is come up before them.'[6427]6427 The same interpretation occurs in

Bemid. R. 14 (ed. Warsh. p. 55 a), the references to Messianic days

there being to Is. xiv. 2; xxx. 25; xli. 18; vi. 4; and iv. 6.

The last clause of Gen. xix. 32 is interperted (Ber. R. 51, ed. Warsh.

p. 95 a), as referring, like the words of Eve about Seth, to the

Messiah - the sin of the daughters of Lot being explained on the

ground of their believing that all mankind had been destroyed in the

judgment that overthrew Sodom.

The promise in Gen. xxii. 18 is also explained Messianically in Bemid.

R. 2 (ed. W. P. 5 b), in connection with Num. ii. 32 where it is

somewhat curiously shown in what sense Israel is to be like the sand

of the sea.

Gen. xxxiii. 1. The Midrash conjoins this with Is. lxvi. 7, and notes

that, before the first oppressor was born, the last Redeemer was

already born.

In Gen. xxxv. 21 the Targum Pseudo-Jon. paraphrases 'the tower of

Eder' (at Bethlehem) as the place whence the Messiah would be

revealed.

On Gen. xxxviii. 1, 2 there are very remarkable Messianic comments in

Ber. R. 85.

Gen. xlix. 1. The Targum Pseudo-Jon. notes, that the end for which the

Messhah would come was not revealed to Jacob. A similar statement is

found in the Midrash on the passage (Ber. R. 98, ed. Warsh. p. 173 a),

where it is said of Jacob and Daniel that they saw the end, and yet it

was afterwards hid from them. The passage quoted in the case of Daniel

is Dan. xii. 4.

Gen. xlix. 9. The expression 'lion's whelp,' is explained of the

Messiah in Yalkut 160 (vol. i. p. 49 c), no less than five times;

while the term 'he couched,' is referred to the Messiah in Ber. R. 98.

Gen. xlix. 10. This well-known prediction (on which see the full and

intersting disciussion in Raym. Martini, Pugio Fidei) is in Yalkut, u.

s., applied to the Messiah, with a quotation of Ps. ii. 9. This

expression 'Shiloh' is also applied to the Messiah, with the curious

addition, that in the latter days all nations would bring gifts to

Him. Alike the Targum Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan, and the Jerusalem

Targum, as well as Sanh. 98 b, the Midrash on the passage, and that on

Prov. xix. 21, and on Lam. i. 16, where it is rendered shelo, 'whose

it is,' refer the expression 'Shiloh,' and, indeed, the whole passage,

to the Messiah; the Midrah Ber. R. (99, ed. Warsh. p. 178 b) with

special reference to Is. xi. 10, while the promise with reference to

the ass's colt is brought into connection with Zech. ix. 9, the

fulfilment of this prophecy being expected along with that in Ezek.

xxxvi. 25 ('I will sprinkle clean water'). Another remarkable

statement occurs in the Midrash on the passage (Ber. R. 98, ed. Warsh.

p. 174 b), which applies the verse to the coming of Him of Whom it is

written, Zech. ix. 9. Then He would wash his garment in wine (Gen.

xlix. 11), which is explained as meaning the teaching of the Law to

Israel, and His clothes in the blood of grapes, which is explained as

meaning that He would bring them back from their errors. One of the

Rabbis, however, remarks that Israel would not require to be taught by

the King Messiah in the latter days, since it was written (Is. xi.

10), 'to it shall the Gentiles seek.' If so, then why should the

Messiah. come, and what will He do to the congregation of Israel? He

will redeem Israel, and give them thirty commandments, according to

Zech. xi. 12. The Targum Pseudo-Jon. and the Jer. Targum also apply

verse 11 to the Messiah. Indeed, so general was this interpretation,

that, according popular opinion, to see a palm-tree in one's dreams

was to see the days of the Messiah (Berach. 57 a).

Gen. xlix. 12 is also applied to the Messiah in the Targum Pseudo-Jon.

and the Jerusalem Targum. So also is verse 18, although not in express

words.

In Gen. xlix. 17, last clause, in its connection with ver. 18, the

Midrash (Ber. R. 98) sees a reference to the disappointment of Jacob

in mistaking Samson for the Messiah.

In the prophecy of Gad in Gen. xlix. 19 there is an allusion to

Messianic days, as Elijah was to be of the tribe of Gad (Ber. R. 99,

ed. Warsh. p. 179 a). There is, however, in Ber. R. 71, towards the

close, a dispute whether he was of the tribe of Gad, or of the tribe

of Benjamin, at the close of which Elijah appears, and settles the

dispute in a rather summary manner.

On Gen. l. 10 the Midrash, at the close of Ber. R., remarks that as

they had mourned, so in Messianic days God would turn their mourning

into joy, quoting Jer. xxxi. 13 and Is. li 3.

Ex. iv. 22 is reffered to the Messiah in the Midr. on Ps. ii. 7.

On Exod. xii. 2, 'let this be the beginning of months,' it is remarked

in Shem.R. 15 (ed. Warsh. p. 24 b) that God would make new ten things

in the latter days, these being marked by the following passages: Is

lx. 19; Ezek. xlvii. 9; xlvii. 12; Ezek. xvi. 55; Is liv. 11; Is. xi.

7; Hos. ii. 20; Is. lxv. 19; Is. xxxv. 8; Is. xxxv. 10. Similarly on

Num. xii. 1 we have, in Shem. R. 51, a parallelism between Old

Testament times and their institutions and those of the latter days,

to which Is. xlix. 12 and lx. 8 are suppose to apply.

On Exod. xii. 42 the Jerus. Targum notes that there were 4 remarkable

nights: those of creation, of the covenant with Abraham, of the first

Passover, and of the redemption of the world; and that as Moses came

out of the desert, so would the Messiah come out of Rome.

On Exod. xv. 1. It is noted in Mekhilta (ed. Weiss, p. 41 a) that this

song would be taken up in Messianic days, only with far wide reach, as

explained in Is. lx 5; lviii. 8; xxxv. 5, 6; Jer. xxxi. 13; and

Ps.cxxvi. 2.

Ex. xvi. 25 is applied to the Messiah, it being said that, if Israel

only kept one sabbath according to the commandment, the Messiah would

immediately come (Jer. Taan. 64 a).

Ex. xvi. 33. This manna, it is noted in Mechil. ed. Weiss, p. 59 b,

was to be preserved for the days of the Messiah. Is. xxx. 15 is

similarly explained in Jer. Taan. i. 1.

Ex. xvii. 16 the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan refers to Messianic times.

Exod. xxi. 1. Shem. R. 30, ed Warsh. p. 44. b, 45 a, notes on the word

'judgments' a number of things connected with judgment, showing how

Balaam could not have wished the advent of the future deliverance

(Numb. xxiv. 17), since he was to perish in it; but that Israel should

cleave to the great hope pressed in Gen. xlix. 18; Is. lvi. 1; lix.

16; and especially Zech. ix. 9, of which a different redering is

proposed.

On Exod. xl. 9, 11 there is in the Targum Pesudo-Jon. distinct

reference to the King Messiah, on whose account the anointing oil was

to be used.

The promise (Lev. xxvi. 12) is also referred to the latter, or

Messianic,days in Yalkut 62 (vol. i. p. 17 b).

Lev. xxvi. 13 is applied to Messianic times. See our remarks on Gen.

ii. 4.

The promise of peace in the Aaronic benediction Num. vi. 26 is

referred to the peace of the Kingdom of David, in accordance with Is.

ix. 7 (Siphré on Num. par. 42, ed. Friedmann, p. 12 b).

Num. vii. 12. In connection with this it is marked that the six

blessings which were lost by the Fall are to be restored by the son of

Nahshon, i.e. the Messiah (Bem. R. 13, ed. W. p. 51 a).

In the Jerusalem Targum on Num. xi. 26 the prophecy of Eldad and Medad

is supposed to have been with regard to the war of the later days

against Jerusalem and to the defeat of Gog and Magog by the Messiah.

In Num. xxiii. 21 the term 'King' is expressly referred to the Messiah

in Targum Pseudo-Jon. So also Num. xxiv . 7 in the Jer. Targum.

In Num. xxiv. 17 Balaam's prediction of the Star and Sceptre is

referred to theMessiah in the Targum Onkelos and the Targum

Pessudo-Jonathan, as well as in Jer. Taan. iv. 8; Deb. R. 1; Midr. on

Lament. ii. 2. Similarly verses 20 and 24 of that prophecy are

ascribed in the Targum Pseudo-Jon. to the Messiah.

Num. xxvii. 16. In connection with this verse it is noticed that His

one Spirit is worth as much as all other spirits, according to Is. xi.

1 (Yalkut, vol. i. p. 247 a).

Deut. i. 8 is applied to the days of the Messiah in Sphré, 67 a.

In the comments of Tanchuma on Deut. viii. 1. (ed. Warsh. p. 104 b,

105 a) there are several allusions to Mesianic days.

Deut. xi. 21 is applied in Siphré Par. 47 (ed. Friedmann, p. 83 a) to

the days of the Messiah.

In Deut. xvi. 3 the record of the deliverance from Egypt is supposed

to be carried on to the days of the Messiah, in Spihré, Par. 130 (ed.

Friedmann, p. 101 a). See, also, Ber. i. 5.

On Deut. xix. 8, 9 it is noted, in Siphré on Deut., Par. 185 (ed.

Friedm. p. 108 b), that as three of these cities were in terrtiory

never possessed by Israel, this was to be fulfilled in Messianic

times. See also Jer. Macc. ii. 7.

In Tanchuma on Deut. xx. 10 (Par. 19, ed. Warsh. p. 114 b) the offer

of peace to a hostile city is applied to the future action of Messiah

to the Gentiles, in accordance with Zech. ix, 10; Is. ii. 4; and Ps

lxviii. 32; while, on the other hand, the resistance of a city to the

offer of peace is likened to rebellion against the Messiah, and

consequent judgment, according to Is. xi. 4.

Deut. xxiii. 11 is typically applied to the evening of time, when God

would wash away the filth of the daughters of Zion (Is. iv. 4); and

the words: 'when the sun is down' to when King Messiah would come

(Tanchuma on Par. Ki Thetse 3, ed. Warsh. p. 115 b).

Deut. xxv. 19 and Deut. xxx. 4 are referred by the Targum Pesudo-Jon.

the Messianic times. In the latter passage the gathering of dispersed

Israel by Elijah, and their being brought back by Messiah, are spoken

of. Comp. also Bem. R., last three lines.

On Deut. xxxii. 7 Siphré (Par. 210, ed. Friedm. p. 134 a) makes the

beautiful observation, that in all Israel's afflictions they were to

remember the good and comfortable things which God had promised them

for the furture world, and in connection with this there is special

reference to the time of the Messiah.

On Deut. xxxii. 30 Siphré (p. 138 a) marks its fulfilment in the days

of the Messiah.

On Deut. xxxiii. 5 the Jer. Targum speaks of a king whom the tribes of

Israel shall obey, this being evidently the King Messiah.

Deut. xxxiii. 17. Tanchuma on Gen. i. Par. 1 (ed. Warsh. p. 4 a)

applies this to the Messiah. So also in Benidb. R. 14.

Deut. xxxiii. 12. The expression, 'he shall cover him,' is referred to

this world; 'all the day long,' to the days of the Messiah; and 'he

shall dwell between his shoulders,' to the world to come (Sebach. 118

b).

Judg. v. 31: 'let them that love Him be as the sun when he goeth forth

in his might,' is applied to Messianic times in Ber. R. 12. See our

remarks on Gen. ii. 4.

On Ruth ii. 14: 'come hither at the time of meat,' the Midr. R. Ruth 5

(ed. Warsh. p. 43 a and b), has a very remarkable interpretation.

Besides the application of the word 'eat,' as beyond this present

time, to the days of the Messiah, and again to the world to come,

which is to follow these days, the Midrash applies the whole of it

mystically to the Messiah, viz. 'Come hither,' that is, draw near to

the kingdom, 'and eat of the bread,' that is, the bread of royalty,

'and dip thy morsel in vinegar' - these are the sufferings, as it is

written in Is. liii. 5, 'He was wounded for our transgression.' 'And

she sat beside the reapers' - because His Kingdom would in the further

be put aside from Him for a short time, according to Zech. xiv. 2;

'and he reached her parched corn' - because He will restore it to Him,

according to Is. xi. 4. R. Berachiah, in the name of R. Levi, adds,

that the second Redeemer should be like the first. As the firrst

Redeemer (Moses) appeared, and disappeared, and reappeared after three

months, so the second Redeemer would also appear, and disappear, and

again become manifest, Dan. xii. 11, 12 being brought into connection

with it. Comp. Midr. on Cant. ii. 9; Pesik. 49 a, b. Again, the words,

'she ate, and was sufficed, and left,' are thus interpreted in Shabb.

113 b: she ate - in this world; and was sufficed - in the days of the

Messiah; and left - for the world to come.

Again, the Targum on Ruth i. 1 speaks of the Messiah; and again on

Ruth iii. 15 paraphrases the six measures of barley as referring to

six righteous ones, of which the last was the Messiah, and who were

each to have six special blessings.

Ruth iv. 18. The Messiah is called 'the son of Pharez,' who restores

what had been lost to humanity through the fall of Adam. See our

remarks on Gen. ii. 4.

The Messianic interpretation of Ruth iv. 20 has already been given

under Gen. iv. 25.

1 Sam. ii. 10. The latter clause of this promise is understood by the

Targum (and also is some of the Medrashim) as applying to the Kingdom

of the Messiah.

2 Sam. xxii. 28. In a Talmudic passage (Sanh. 98 a, line 19, &c., from

the bottom), which contains many references to the coming of the

Messiah, His advent is predicted in connection with this passage.

2 Sam. xxiii. 1 is applied by the Targum to the prophecy of David

concerning the latter Messianic days.

2 Sam. xxiii. 3. The 'ruling in the fear of God' is referred in the

Targum to the future raising up of the Messiah.

In 2 Sam. xxiii. 4 the morning light at sunrise is explained in the

Midrash on the passage (par. 29, ed. Lemberg, p, 56 b, lines 7-9 from

the top), as applying to the appearance of the Messiah.

The expression, 1 Kings iv. 33, that Solomon spoke of trees, is

referred in theTargum to his prophecy concerning kings that were to

reign in this age, and in that of the Messiah.

On the name 'Anani,' in 1 Chr. iii. 24, the Targum remarks that this

is the Messiah, the interpretation being that the word anani is

connected with the word similarly written (not punctuated) in Deut.

vii. 13, and there translated 'clouds,' of which the explanation is

given in Tanchuma (Par. Toledoth 14, p. 27 b).

Ps. ii. as might be expected, is treated as full of Messianic

references. To begin with, Ps. ii. 1 is applied to the wars of Gog and

Magog in the Talmud (Berach. 7 b and Abhod. Zarah 3 b), and also in

the Midrash on Ps. ii. Similarly, verse 2 is applied to the Messiah in

Abhod. Zach, u. s., in the Midrash on Ps. xcii. 11 (ed. Warsh. p. 70

b, line 8 from the top); in Pirqué de R. Eliez. c. 28 (ed. Lemberg, p.

33 b, line 9 from top). In Yalkut (vol. ii. par. 620, p. 90 a, line 12

from the bottom), we have the following remarkable simile on the

words, 'against God, and His Messiah,' likening them to a robber who

stands defiantly behind the palace of the king, and says, If I shall

find the son of the king, I shall lay hold on him, and crucify him,

and kill him with a cruel death. But the Holy Spirit mocks at him, 'He

that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh.' On the same verse the

Midrashon Ps. ii. has a curious conceit, intended to show that each

who rose against God and His people thought he was wiser than he who

had preceded him. If Cain had killed his brother while his father was

alive, forgetful that there would be other sons, Esau proposed to wait

till after his father's death. Pharaoh, again, blamed Esau for his

folly in forgetting that in the meantime Jacob would have children,

and hence proposed to kill all the male children, while Haman,

ridiculing Pharaoh's folly in forgetting that there were daughters set

himself to destroy the whole people; and, in turn, Gog and Magog,

ridiculing the shortsightedness of all, who had preceded them, in

taking counsel against Israel so long as they had a Patron in heaven,

resolved first to attack their heavenly Patron, and after that Israel.

To which apply the words, 'against the Lord, and against His

Anointed.'

But to return Ps. ii. 4 is Messianically applied in the Talmud (Abhod.

Z. u. s.). Ps. ii. 6 is applied to the Messiah in the Midrash on 1

Samuel xvi. 1 (Par. 19, ed, Lemberg, p. 45 a and b), where it is said

that of the three measures of sufferings[6428]6428 one goes to the

King Messiah, of whom it is written (Is. liii.) 'He was wounded for

our trangression.' They say to the King Messiah: Where dost Thou seek

to dwell? He answers: Is this question also necessary? In Sion My holy

hill (Ps. ii. 6). (Comp. also Yalkut ii. p. 53 c.)

Ps. ii. 7 is quoted as Messianic in the Talmud, among a number of

other Messianic quotations (Sukk. 52 a). There is a very remarkable

passage in the Midrash on Ps. ii. 7 (ed. Warsh p. 5 a), in which the

unity of Israel and the Messiah in prophetic vision seems clearly

indicated. Tracing the 'decree' through the Law, the Prophets, and the

Hagiograph, the first passage quoted in Exod. iv 22: 'Israel is My

first-born son;' the second, from the Prophets, Is. lii. 13: 'Behold

My servants shall deal prudently,' and Is. xlii. 1: 'Behold My My

servant, whom I uphold;' the third, from the Hagiographa, Ps. cx. 1:

'The Lord said unto my Lord,' and again, Ps. ii. 7: 'The Lord said

unto Me, Thou art My Son,' and yet this other saying (Dan. vii. 13):

'Behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven.' Five

lines further down, the same Midrash, in reference to the words 'Thou

art My Son,' observes that, when that hour comes, God speaks to Him to

make a new convenant, and thus He speaks: 'This day have I begotten

Thee' - this is the hour in which He become His Son.

Ps. ii. 8 is applied in Ber. R. 44 (ed. Warsh. p. 80 a) and in the

Midrash on the passage, to the Messiah, with the curious remark that

there were three of whom it was said 'Ask of Me' - Solomon,

Ahaz,[6429]6429 and the Messiah. In the Talmud (Shukk. 52 a) the same

passage is very curiously applied, it being suggested that, when the

Messiah, the Son of David, saw that the Messiah, the Son of

Joseph,[6430]6430 would be killed, He said to the Almighty, I seek

nothing of Thee except life. To which the reply was: Life before Thou

hadst spoken, as David Thy father prophesied of Thee, Ps. xxi. 4.

Ps. ii. 9 will be referred to in our remarks on Ps. cxx.

Ps. xvi. 5 is discussed in Ber. R. 88, in connection with the cup

which Pharaoh's butler saw in his dream. From this the Midrash

proceeds to speak of the four cups appointed for the Passover night,

and to explain their meaning in various manners, among others,

contrasting the four cups of fury, which God would make the nations

drink, with the four cups of salvation which He would give Israel in

the latter days, viz. Ps. xvi. 5; Ps. cxvi. 13; Ps. xxiii. 5. The

expression, Ps. cxvi. 13, rendered in our A. V. 'the cup of

salvation,' is in the orginal, 'the cup of salvations' - and is

explained as implying on one for the days of the Messiah, and the

other for the days of Gog.

On verse 9, the Midrash on the passage says: 'My glory shall rejoice

in the King Messiah, Who in the furture shall come forth from me, as

it is written in Is. iv. 5: "upon all the glory a covering."' And the

Midrash continues 'my flesh also shall dwell in safety' - i.e. after

death, to teach us that corruption and the worm shall not rule over

it.

Ps. xviii. 31 (in the Heb. verse 32). The Targum explains this in

reference to the works and miracles of the Messiah.

Ps. xviii. 50 is referred in Jer. Talmud (Ber. ii. 4, p. 5 a, line 11

from the top), and in the Midr. on Lam. i. 16, to the Messiah, with

this curious remark, implying the doubt whether He was alive or dead:

'The king Messiah, whether He belong to the living or the dead, His

Name is to be David, according to Ps. xviii. 50.'

Ps. xxi. 1 (2 in the Hebrew) - the King there spoken of is explained

by the Targum to be King Messiah. The Midrash on the passage idenfies

him with Is. xi. 10, on which Rabbi Chanina adds that the object of

the Messiah is to give certain commandments to the Gentiles (not to

Israel, who are to learn from God Himself), according to the passage

in Isaiah above qutoed, adding that the words 'his rest shall be

glorious' mean that God gives to the King Messiah from the glory

above, as it is said: 'In Thy strength shall the king rejoice,' which

strength is a little afterwards explained as the Kingdom (ed. Warsh.

p. 30 a and b).

Verse 3 is Messianically applied in the Midrash on the passage.

Ps. xxi. 3 (4 in the Hebrew). Only a few lines farther down in the

same Midrash, among remarkable Messianic applications, is that of this

vese to the Messiah, where also the expression 'Jehovah is a man of

war,' and 'Jehovah Zidkenu,' are applied to the Messiah.[6431]6431

Comp. also Shemoth R. 8, where it is noted that God will crown Him

with His own crown.

Verse 4 is Messianically applied in Sukk. 52 a.

Ps. xxi. 5 (6 in the Hebrew). The first clause of this verse. Yalkut

on Num. xxvii. 20 (vol. i. p. 248 a, line 10 from the bottom) applies

to the glory of the King Messiah, immediately quoting the second

clause in proof of its Messianic application. This is also done in the

Midrash on the passage. But perhaps one of the most remarkable

applications of it is in Bemidbar R. 15, p. 63 b, where the passage is

applied to the Messiah.

Finally in Ps. xxi. 7 (8 in the Hebrew), the expression 'king' is

applied in the Targum to the Messiah.

On the whole, then, it may be remarked that Ps. xxi. was throughout

regarded as Messianic.

On Ps. xxii. 7 (8 in the Hebrew) a remarkable comment appears in

Yalkut on Is. lx., applying this passage to the Messiah (the second,

or son of Ephraim), and using almost the same words in which the

Evangelists describe the mocking behaviour of the Jews at the Cross.

Ps. xxii. 15 (16 in the Hebrew). There is a similarly remarkable

application to the Messiah of this verse in Yalkut.

The promise in Ps. xxiii. 5 is referred in Benid. R. 21 to the

spreading of the great feast before Israel in the latter days.

Ps. xxxi. 19 (20 in the Hebrew) is in the Midrash applied to the

reward that in the latter days Israel would receive for their

faithfulness. Also in Pesiqta, p. 149 b, to the joy of Israel in the

presence of the Messiah.

The expression in Ps. xxxvi. 9, 'In Thy light shall we see light,' is

applied to the Messiah in Yalkut on Isaiah lx. (vol. ii. p. 56 c, line

22 from the bottom).

The application of Ps. xl. 7 to the Messiah has already been noted in

our remarks on Gen. iv. 25.

Ps. xlv. is throughout regarded as Messianic. To begin with; the

Targum renders verse 2 (3 in the Hebrew): 'Thy beauty, O King Messiah,

is greater than that of the sons of men.'

Verse 3 (4 in the Hebrew) is applied in the Talmud (Shabb 63 a) to the

Messiah, although other interpretations of that verse immediately

follow.

The application of verse 6 (7 in the Hebrew), to the Messiah in a MS.

copy of the Targum has already been referred to in another part of his

book, while the words, 'Thy throne is for ever and ever' are brought

into connection with the promise that the sceptre would not depart

from Judah in Ber. R. 99, ed. Warsh. p. 178 b, line 9 from the bottom.

On verse 7 the Targum though not in the Venice edition (1568), has:

'Thou O King Messiah because Thou lovest righteousness,' &c. Comp.

Levy, Targum. Wörterb. vol. ii. p. 41 a.

The Midrash on the Psalm deals exclusively with the inscription (of

which it has several and significant interpretations) with the opening

words of the Psalm, and with the words (ver. 16), 'Instead of thy

fathers shall be thy children,' but at the same time it clearly

indicates that the Psalm applies to the latter, or Messianic, days.

On Ps. l. 2 Siphré (p. 143 a) notes that four times God would appear,

the last being in the days of King Messiah.

Ps. lx. 7. Bemidbar R. on Num. vii. 48, Parash. 14 (ed. Warsh p. 54 a)

contains some very curious Haggadic discussion on this verse. But it

also broaches the opinion of its reference to the Messiah.

Ps. lxi. 6 (7 in the Hebrew). 'Thou shalt add days to the days of the

king,' is rendered by the Targum: 'Thou shalt add days to the days of

King Messiah.' There is a curious gloss on this in Pirqé d. R. Eliez.

c. 19 (ed. Lemberg, p. 24 b), in which Adam is supposed to have taken

70 of his years, and added them to those of King David. According to

another tradition, this accounts for Adam living 930 years, this is,

70 less than 1,000, which constitute before God one day, and so the

threatening had been literally fulfilled: In the day thou eatest

thereof, thou shalt die.

Ps. lxi. 8 (9 in the Hebrew). The expression, 'that I may daily

perform my vows,' is applied in the Targum to the day in which the

Messiah is anointed King.

Ps. lxviii. 31 (32 in the Hebrew). On the words 'Princes shall come

out of Egypt,' there is a very remarkable comment in the Talmud (Pes.

118 b) and in Shemoth R. on Ex. xxvi. 15, &c. (ed. Warsh. p. 50 b), in

which we are told that in the latter days all nations would bring

gifts to the King Messiah, beginning with Egypt. 'And lest it be

thought that He (Messiah) would not accept it from them, the Holy One

says to the Messiah: Accept from them hospitable entertainment,' or it

might be rendered, 'Accept it from them; they have given hospitable

entertainment to My son.'

Ps. lxxii. This Psalm also was viewed by the ancient Synagogue as

throughout Messianic, as indicated by the fact that the Targum renders

the very first verse: 'Give the sentence of Thy judgment to the King

Messiah, and Thy justice to the Son of David the King,' which is

re-echoed by the Midrash on the passage (ed. Warsh. p. 55 b) which

applies it explicitly to the Messiah, with reference to Is. xi. 1.

Similarly, the Talmud applies ver. 16 to Messianic times (in a very

hyperbolical passage, Shabb. 30 b, line 4 from the bottom). The last

clause of verse 16 is applied, in Keth. 111 b, line 21 from top, and

again in the Midr. on Eccl. i. 9, to the Messiah sending down manna

like Moses.[6432]6432

Verse 17. In Sanh. 98 b; Pes. 54 a; Ned. 39 b, the various names of

the Messiah are discussed, and also in Ber. R. 1; in Midr. on Lam. i.

16, and in Pirqé de R. Eliez. c. 3. One of these is stated to be

Jinnon, according to Ps. lxxii. 17.

Verse 8 is applied in Pirqé de R. El. c. 11, to the Messiah. Yalkut

(vol. ii.).on Is. lv. 8 (p. 54 c), speaks of the 'other Redeemer' as

the Messiah, applying to him Ps. lxxii. 8.

In commenting on the meeting of Jacob and Esau, the Midr. Ber. R. (78,

ed. Warsh. p. 141 b) remarks that all the gifts which Jacob gave to

Esau, the nations of the world would return to the King Messiah -

proving it by a reference to Ps. lxxii. 10; while in Midrash Bemidbar

R. 13 it is remarked that as the nations brought gifts to Solomon, so

they would bring them to the King Messiah.

In the same place, a little higher up, Solomon and the Messiah are

likened as reigning over the whole world, the proof passages being,

besides others, Ps. lxxii. 8, Daniel vii. 13, and ii. 35.

On the application to the Messiah of verse 16 we have already spoken,

as also on that of verse 17.

Ps. lxxx. 17 (in the Hebrew 18). The Targum paraphrases 'the Son of

Man' by 'King Messiah.'

Ps. lxxxix. 22-25 (23-26 in the Hebrew). In Yalkut on Is. lx. 1 (vol.

ii. p. 56 c) this promise is referred to the future deliverance of

Israel by the Messiah.

Again, verse 27 (28 in the Hebrew) is applied in Shemoth R. 19,

towards the end, to the Messiah, special reference being made to Ex.

iv. 22, 'Israel is My first-born son.'

Verse 51 (52 in the Hebrew). There is a remarkable comment on this in

the Midrash on the inscription of Ps. xviii. (ed. Warsh. p. 24 a, line

2 from the bottom), in which it is set forth that as Israel and David

did not sing till the hour of persecution and reproach, so when the

Messiah shall come - 'speedily, in our days' - the song will not be

raised until the Messiah is put to reproach, according to Ps. lxxxix.

52 (51), and till there shall fall before Him the wicked idolaters

referred to in Dan. ii. 42, and the four kingdoms referred to in Zech.

xiv. 2. In that hour shall the song be raised, as it is written Ps.

xcviii. 1.

In the Midr. on Cant. ii. 13 it is said: If you see one generation

after another blaspheming, expect the feet of the King Messiah, as it

is written, Ps. lxxxix. 53.

Ps. xc. 15. The Midr. (ed. Warsh. p. 67 b) remarks: The days wherein

Thou hast afflicted us - that is, the days of the Messiah. Upon which

follows a discussion upon the length of days of the Messiah, R.

Eliezer holding that they are 1,000 years, quoting the words 'as

yesterday,' one day being 1,000 years. R. Joshua holds that they were

2,000 years, the words 'the days' implying that there were two days.

R. Berachiah holds that they were 600 years, appealing to Is. lxv.

22,because the root of the tree perishes in the earth in 600 years. R.

José thinks that they are 60 years, according to Ps. lxxii. 5, the

words 'throughout all generations' (dor dorim) being interpreted: Dor

= 20 years; Dorim = 40 years: 20 + 40 = 60. R. Akiba says: 40 years,

according to the years in the wilderness. The Rabbis say: 354 years,

according to the days in the lunar year. R. Abahu thinks 7,000 years,

reckoning the 7 according to the days of the bridegroom.

On Ps. xc. the Midrash concludes by drawing a contrast between the

Temple which men built, and which was destroyed, and the Temple of the

latter or Messianic days, which God would build, and which would not

be destroyed.

Ps. xcii., verses 8, 11, and 13 (7, 10, and 12 in our A. V.), are

Messianically interpreted in Pirqé de R. El. c. 19. In the Midrash on

verse 13 (12 in our A. V.), among other beautiful applications of the

figure of the Psalm, is that to the Messiah the Son of David. The note

of the Midrash on the expression 'like a cedar of Lebanon,' as applied

to Israel, is very beautiful, likening it to the cedar, which,

although driven and bent by all the winds of heaven, cannot be rooted

up from its place.

Ps. xcv. 7, last clause. In Shem. R. 25 and in the Midrash on Cant. v.

2 (ed. Warsh. p. 26 a), it is noted that, if Israel did penitence only

one day [or else properly observed even one Sabbath], the Messiah the

Son of David would immediately come. [The whole passage from which

this reference is taken is exceedingly interesting. It introduces God

as saying to Israel: My son, open to Me a door of penitence only as

small as a needle's eye, and I will open to you doors through which

carriages and wagons shall come in. It almost seems a counterpart to

the Saviour's words (Rev. iii. 20): 'Behold, I stand at the door and

knock; if any man hear My voice and open the door, I will come in to

Him.'] Substantially the same view is taken in Sanh. 98 a, where the

tokens of the coming of the Messiah are described - and also in Jer.

Taan. 64 a.

Ps. cii. 16 (17 in the Hebrew) is applied in Bereshith R. 56 (ed.

Warsh. p. 104 b) to Messianic times.

Ps. cvi. 44. On this there is in the Midrash a long Messianic

discussion, setting forth the five grounds on which Israel is

redeemed: through the sorrows of Israel through prayer, through the

merits of the patriarchs, through repentance towards God, and in the

time of 'the end.'

Ps. cx. is throughout applied to the Messiah. To begin with, it

evidently underlies the Targumic of ver. 4. Similarly, it is

propounded in the Midr. on Ps. ii. (although there the chief

application of it is to Abraham). But in the Midrash on Ps. xviii. 36

(35 in our A. V.), Ps. cx. verse 1, 'Sit thou at My right hand' is

specially applied to the Messiah, while Abraham is said to be seated

at the left.

Verse 2, 'The rod of Thy strength.' In a very curious mystic

interpretation of the pledges which Tamar had, by the Holy Ghost,

asked of Judah, the seal is interpreted as signifying the Kingdom, the

bracelet as the Sanhedrin, and the staff as the King Messiah, with

special reference to Is. xi. and Ps. cx. 2 (Beresh. R. 85, ed. Warsh.

p. 153 a) Similarly in Bemid. R. 18, last line, the staff of Aaron,

which is said to have been in the hands of every king till the Temple

was destroyed, and since then to have been hid, is to be restored to

King Messiah, according to this verse; and in Yalkut on this Psalm

(vol. ii. Par. 869, p. 124 c) this staff is supposed to be the same as

that of Jacob with which he crossed Jordan, and of Judah, and of

Moses, and of Aaron, and the same which David had in his hand when he

slew Goliath, it being also the same which will be restored to the

Messiah.

Verse 7 is also applied in Yalkut (u. s. col. d) to Messianic times,

when streams of the blood of the wicked should flow out, and birds

come to drink of that flood.

Ps. cxvi. 9 is in Ber. R. 96 supposed to indicate that the dead of

Palestine would live first in the days of the Messiah.

Ps. cxvi. 13 has been already commented upon.

On Ps. cxix. 33 the Midrash remarks that there were three who asked

wisdom of God: David, Solomon, and the King Messiah, the latter

according to Ps. lxxii. 1.

Ps. cxx. 7 is applied to the Messiah in the Midrash (p. 91 a, ed.

Warsh.), the first clause being brought into connection with Is. lvii.

19, with reference to the Messiah's dealings with the Gentiles, the

resistance being described in the second clause, and the result in Ps.

ii. 9.

Ps. cxxi. 1 is applied in Tanchuma (Par. Toledoth 14, ed. Warsh. p. 37

b. See also Yalkut, vol. ii. 878, p. 127 c) to the Messiah, with

special reference to Zech. iv. 7 and Is. lii. 7.

Ps. cxxvi. 2. In Tanchuma on Ex. xv. i. (ed. Warsh. p. 87 a) this

verse is applied to Messianic times in a rapt description, in which

successively Is. lx. 5, Is. lviii. 8, Is. xxxv. 5, 6, Jer. xxxi. 13,

and Ps. cxxvi. 2, are grouped together as all applying to these latter

days.

The promise in Ps. cxxxii. 18 is applied in Pirké de R. El. c. 28 to

Messianic times, and verse 14 in Ber. R. 56.

So is Ps. cxxxiii. 3 in Ber. R. 65 (p. 122 a), closing lines.

The words in Ps. cxlii. 5 are applied in Ber. R. 74 to the

resurrection of Israel in Palestine in the days of Messiah.

The words, 'When thou awakest,' in Prov. vi. 22 are Messianically

applied in Siphré on Deut. (ed. Friedmann, p. 74 b).

In Midr. on Eccl. i. 9 it is shown at great length that the Messiah

would re-enact all the miracles of the past.

The last clause of Eccl. i. 11 is applied to the days of the Messiah

in the Targum.

Eccl. vii. 24 is thus paraphrased in the Targum: 'Behold, it is remote

from the sons of men that they should know what was done from the

beginning of the world, but a mystery is the day of death - and the

day when shall come King Messiah, who can find it out by his wisdom?'

In the Midr. on Eccl. xi. 8 it is noted that, however many years a man

might study, his learning would be empty before the teaching of

Messiah. In the Midr. on Eccl. xii. 1 it is noted that the evil days

are those of the woes of Messiah.

Canticles. Here we have first the Talmudic passage (Sheb. 35 b) in

which the principle is laid down, that whenever throughout that book

Solomon is named, except in chap. viii. 12, it applies, not to

Solomon, but to Him Who was His peace (there is here a play on these

words, and on the name Solomon).

To Cant. i. 8 the Targum makes this addition: 'They shall be nourished

in the captivity, until the time that I shall send to them the King

Messiah, Who will feed them in quietness.'

So also on verse 17 the Targum contrasts the Temple built by Solomon

with the far superior Temple to be built in the days of the Messiah,

of which the beams were to be made of the cedars of Paradise.

Cant. ii. 8, although applied by most authorities to Moses, is by

others referred to the Messiah (Shir haShirim R., ed. Warsh., p. 15 a,

about the middle; Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 47 b). Cant. ii. 9 is

Messianically applied in Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 49, a and b.

The same may be said of verse 10; while in connection with verse 12,

in similar application, Is. lii. 7 is quoted.

In connection with verse 13, in the same Midrash (p. 17 a), Rabbi

Chija bar Abba speaks of a great matter as happening close to the days

of the Messiah, viz., that the wicked should be destroyed, quoting in

regard to it Is. iv. 3.

Cant. iii. 11, 'the day of his espousals.' In Yalkut on the passage

(vol. ii. p. 178 d) this is explained: 'the day of the Messiah,

because the Holy One, blessed be His name, is likened to a bridegroom;

"as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride"' - and 'the day of the

gladness of his heart,' as the day when the Sanctuary is rebuilt, and

Jerusalem is redeemed.

On Cant. iv. 5 the Targum again introduces the twofold Messiah, the

one the son of David, and the other the son of Ephraim.

Cant. iv. 16. According to one opinion in the Midrash (p. 25 b, line

13 from the bottom) this applies to the Messiah, Who comes from the

north, and builds the Temple, which is in the south. See also Bemidbar

R. 13, p. 48 b.

On Cant. v. 10 Yalkut remarks that He is white to Israel, and red to

the Gentiles, according to Isaiah lxiii. 2.

On Cant. vi. 10 Yalkut (vol. ii. p. 184 b) has some beautiful

observations, first, likening Israel in the wilderness, and God's

mighty deeds there, to the morning;and then adding that, according to

another view, this morning-light is the redemption of the Messiah: For

as, when the morning rises, the darkness flees before it, so shall

darkness fall upon the kingdoms of this world when the Messiah comes.

And yet again, as the sun and moon appear, so will the Kingdom of the

Messaih also appear - the commentation going on to trace farther

illustrations.

Cant. vii. 6. The Midrash thus comments on it (among other

explanations): How fair in the world to come, how pleasant in the days

of the Messiah!

On Cant. vii. 13, the Targum has it: 'When it shall please God to

deliver His people from capitivity, then shall it be said to the

Messiah: The time of captivity is past, and the merit of the just

shall be sweet before Me like the odour of balsam.'

Similarly on Cant. viii.1, the Targum has it: 'And at that shall the

King Messiah be revealed to the congragation of Israel, and the

children of Israel shall say to Him, Come and be a brother to us, and

let us go up to Jerusalem, and there suck with thee the meaning of the

Law, as an infant its mother's breast.'

On Cant. viii. 2 the Targum has it : 'I will take Thee, O King

Messiah, and make thee go up into my Temple, there Thou shalt teach me

to tremble before the Lord, and to walk in His ways. There we shall

hold the feast of leviathan, and drink the old wine, which has been

kept in its grapes from the day the world was created, and of the

pomegranates and of the fruits which are prepared for the just in the

Garden of Eden.'

On verse 4 the Targum says: 'The King Messiah shall say: I adjure you,

My people, house of Israel, why should you rise against the Gentiles,

to go out of captivity, and why should you rebel against the might of

Gog and Magog? Wait a little, till those nations are consumed which go

up to fight against Jerusalem, and then shall the Lord of the world

remember you, and it shall be His good will to set you free.'

Chap. viii. 11 is applied Messianically in the Talmud (Shebhu. 35 b),

and so is verse 12 in the Targum.

(It should, however, be remarked that there are many other Messianic

references in the comments on the Song of Solomon.)

Is. i. 25, 26, is thus explained in the Talmud (Sanh. 98 a): 'The Son

of David shall not come till all the judges and rulers in Israel shall

have ceased.'

Similarly Is. ii. 4 is Messianically interpreted in Shabb. 63 a.

Is. iv. 2 the Targum distinctly applies to the times of the Messiah.

Is. iv. 4 has been already commented upon in our remarks on Gen.

xviii. 4, 5, and again on Deut. xxiii. 11.

Verses 5 and 6 are brought into connection with Israel's former

service in contributing to, and making the Tabernacle in the

wilderness, and it is remarked that in the latter days God would

return it to them by covering them with a cloud of glory. This, in

Yalkut (vol. i. p. 99 c), and in the Midrash on Ps. xiii., as also in

that on Ps. xvi. 9.

Is. vi. 13 is referred in the Talmud (Keth. 112 b) to Messianic times.

The reference of Is. vii. 21 to Messianic times has already been

discussed in our notes on Gen. xviii. 7.

Is. viii.14 is also Messianically applied in the Talmud (Sanh. 38 a).

Is. ix. 6 is expressly applied to the Messiah in the Targum, and there

is a very curious comment in Debarim R. 1 (ed. Warsh., p. 4 a) in

connection with a Haggadic discussion of Gen. xliii. 14, which,

however fanciful, makes a Messianic application of this passage - also

in Bemidbar R. 11.

Verse 7, 'Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be

no end,' has already been referred to in our comments on Num. vi. 26.

Is. x. 27 is in the Targum applied to the destruction of the Gentiles

before the Messiah. Is. x. 34, is quoted in the Midrash on Lam. i. 16,

in evidence that somehow the birth of the Messiah was to be connected

with the destruction of the Temple.

Is. xi., as will readily be believed, is Messianically interpreted in

Jewish writings. Thus, to begin with in the Targum on verses 1 and 6;

in the Talmud (Jer. Berach. 5 a and Sanh. 93 b); and in a number of

passages in the Midrashim. Thus, verse 1 in Bereshith R. 85 on Gen.

xxxviii. 18, where also Ps. cx. 2 is quoted, and in Ber. R. 99, ed.

Warsh., p, 178 b. In Yalkut (vol. i. p. 247 d, near the top), where it

is described how God had shown Moses all the spirits of the rulers and

prophets in Israel, from that time forward to the Resurrection, it is

said that all these had one knowledge and one spirit, but that the

Messiah had one spirit which was equal to all the others put together,

according to Is. xi. 1.

On the 2nd verse see our remarks on Gen. i. 2, while in Yalkut on

Prov. iii. 19, 20 (vol. ii. p. 133 a) the verse is quoted in

connection with Messianic times, when by wisdom, understanding, and

knowledge the Temple will be built again. On that verse see also pirq.

d. R. El. 3.

On Is. xi. 3 the Talmud (Sanh. 93 b, lines 21 &c. from the top) has a

curious explanation. After quoting ch. xi. 2 as Messianic, it makes a

play on the words, 'of quick understanding,' or 'scent,' as it might

be rendered, and suggest that this word {hebrew} is intended to teach

us that God has laden Him with commandments and sufferings like

millstones ({hebrew}). Immediately afterwards, from the expression 'He

shall not judge after the sight of His eyes, but reprove with equity

for the meek of the earth,' it is inferred that the Messiah knew the

thoughts of the heart, and it is added that, as Bar Kokhabh was unable

to do this, he was killed.

Verse 4, 'he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth,' is

Messianically applied in the Midrash on Ps. ii. 2, and in that on Ruth

ii. 14 - also in Yalkut on Is. lx.

Verse 7 has been already noticed in connection with Ex. xii. 2.

On verse 10 see our remarks on Gen. xlix. 10 and Ps. xxi. 1.

Verse 11 is Messianically applied in Yalkut (vlo. i. p. 31 b and vol.

ii. 38 a), as also in the Midrash on Ps. cvii. 2.

Verse 12 is Messianically applied in that curious passage in the

Midrash on Lamentations i. 2, where it is indicated that, as the

children of Israel sinned from {hebrew} to {hebrew}, so God would in

the latter days comfort them from {hebrew} to {hebrew} (i.e. through

the whole alphabet), Scripture passages being in each case quoted.

The Messianic application of Is. xii. 3 is sufficiently established by

the ancient symbolic practice of pouring out the water on the Feast of

Tabernacles.

In connection with Is. xi. 5 the Midrash on Ps. cxviii. 23 first speak

of the wonderment of the Egyptians when they saw the change in Israel

from servitude to glory of their Exdous, and then adds, that the words

were intended by his Holy Ghost to apply to the wonders of the latter

days (ed. Warsh. p. 85 b).

On Is. xiv. 2, see our comments on Gen. xviii. 4, 5.

Is. xiv. 29, xv. 2, xvi. 1, and xvi. 5 are Messianically applied in

the Targum.

Is. xviii. 5 is similarly applied in the Talmud (Sanh. 98 a); and Is.

xxiii. 15 in Sanh. 99 a.

Is. xxi. 11, 12 is in Jer. Taan. 64 a, and in Shem. R. 18, applied to

the manifestation of Messiah.

Is. xxiii. 8 the Midr. on Eccl. i. 7 sees a curious reference to the

return of this world's wealth to Israel in Messianic days.

Is. xxiii. 15 is Messianically applied in the Talmud (Sanh 99 a) where

the expression 'a king' is explained as referring to the Messiah.

Is. xxiv. 23 is Messianically applied in the curious passage in

Bemidbar R. quoted under Gen. xxii. 18; also in Bemidbar R. 13 (ed.

Warsh. p. 51 a).

The remarkable promise in Is. xxv. 8 is applied to the times of the

Messiah in the Talmud (Moed Q. 28 b), and in that most ancient

commentary Siphra, (Yalkut i. p. 190 d applies the passage to the

world to come). But the most remarkable interpretation is that which

occurs in connection with Is. lx. 1 (Yalkut ii. 56 c, line 16 from the

bottom), where the passage (Is. xxv. 8) is after an expostulation on

the part of Satan with regard to the Messiah, applied to the casting

into Gehenna of Satan and of the Gentiles. See also our remarks on Ex.

xii. 2. In Debar. R. 2, Isaiah xxv. 8 is applied to the destruction of

the Jetser ha-Ra and the abolishing of death in Messianic days; in

Shem. R. 30 to the time of the Messiah.

Verse 9. Tanchuma on Deuteronomy opens with a record of how God would

work all the miracles, which He had shown in the wilderness, in a

fuller manner for Zion in the latter days, the last passage quoted in

that section being Is. xxv. 9. (Tanchuma on Deut. ed. Warsh. p. 99 a,

line 5 from the bottom).

Of Is. xxvi. 19 there is Messianic application in the Midrash on

Ecclesiates i. 7.

Of Is. xxvii. 10 Shem. R. 1, and Tanchuma on Exod. ii. 5 (ed. Warsh.

p. 64 b) remark that, like Moses, the Messiah, Who would deliver His

own from the worshippers of false gods, should be brought up with the

latter in the land.

Verse 13 is quoted in the Talmud (Rosh. haSh. 11 b) in connection with

the future deliverance. So also in Yalkut, i. p. 217 d, and Pirqé de

R. El. c. 31.

Is. xxviii. 5 is thus paraphrased in the Targum: 'At that time shall

the Messiah of the Lord of hosts be a crown of joy.'

Is. xxviii. 16 the Targum apparently applies to the Messiah. At least,

so Rashi (on the passage) understands it.

Is. xxx. 18 is Messianically applied in Sanh 97 b; verse 15 Jer. Taan.

i. 1.

The expression in Is. xxx. 19, 'he shall be very gracious unto thee,'

is applied to the merits of the Messiah in Yalkut on Zeph. iii. 8 (p.

84 c).

On verse 25 see our remarks on Gen. xviii. 4.

Verse 26 is applied to Messianic times in the Talmud (Pes. 68 a, and

Sanh. 91 b), and similarly in Pirqé de R. El. 51, and Shemoth R. 50.

So also in Ber. R. 12. see our remarkes on Gen. ii. 4.

Is. xxxii. 14, 15. On this passage the Midrash of Lam. iii. 49

significantly remarks that it is one of the three passage in which

mention of the Holy Ghost follows upon mention of redemption, the

other two passages being Is. 22, followed by lxi. 1, and Lam. iii. 49.

Is. xxxii. 20. The first clause is explained by Tanchuma (Par. 1. ed.

Warsh. p. 4 a, first three lines) to apply to the study of the Law,

and the second to the two Messiahs, the son of Joseph being likened to

the ox, and the son of David to the ass, accordingly to Zech. ix. 9;

and similary the verse is Messianically referred to in Deb. R. 6 (ed.

Warsh. Vol. iii. p. 15 b), in a very curious play on the words in

Deut. xxii. 6, 7, where the observance of that commandment is supposed

to hasten the coming of King Messiah.

Is. xxxv. 1. This is one of the passages quoted in Tanchuma on Deut.

i. 1. (ed.Warsh. p. 99 a) as among the miracles which God would do to

redeem Zion in the latter days. So also is verse 2 in this chapter.

Is. xxxv. 5, 6 is repeatedly applied to Messianic times. Thus, in

Yalkut i. 78 c, and 157 a; in Ber. R. 95; and in Midrash on Ps. cxlvi.

Verse 10 is equally applied to Messianic times in the Midrash on Ps.

cvii. 1, while at the same time it is noted that this deliverance will

be accomplished by God Himself, and not either by Elijah, nor by the

King Messiah.[6433]6433 A similar reference occurs in Yalkut (vol. ii.

p. 162 d), at the close of the Commentary on the Book of Chronicles,

where it is remarked that in this world the deliverance of Israel was

accomplished by man, and was followed by fresh captivities, but in the

latter or Messianic days their deliverance would be accomplished by

God, and would no more be followed by captivity. See also Shemoth R.

15 and 23.

Is. xl. 1 is one of the passages referred to in our note on Is. xi.

12, and also on Is. xxxv. 1.

The same remark applies to verses 2 and 3.

Verse 5 is also Messianically applied in Vayyikra R. 1; Yalk. ii. 77 b

about the middle.

On verse 10 Yalkut, in discussing Ex. xxxii. 6 (vol. i. p. 108 c)

broaches the opinion, that in the days of the Messiah Israel would

have a double reward, on account of the calamities which they had

suffered, quoting Is. xl. 10.

Is. xli. 18 has been already noted in our remarks on Gen. xviii. 4, 5.

Verse 25 is Messianically applied in Bem. R. 13, p. 48 b.

The expression 'The first,' in ch. xli. 27, is generally applied to

the Messiah; in the Targum, according to Rashi; in Bereshith R. 63; in

Vayyikra R. 30; and in the Talmud (Pes. 5 a); so also in Pesiqta (ed.

Buber) p. 185 b.

Is. xlii. 1 is applied in the Targum to the Messiah, as also in the

Midrash or Ps. ii.; and in Yalkut ii. p. 104 d. See also our comments

on Ps. ii. 7.

On Is. xliii. 10, the Targum renders 'My servant' by 'My servant the

Messiah.'

The promise in Is. xlv. 22 is also among the future things mentioned

in the Midrash on Lamentations, to which we have referred in our

remarks on Is. xi. 12.

Is. xlix. 8. There is a remarkable comment on this in Yalkut on the

passage, to the effect that the Messiah suffers in every age for the

sins of that generation, but that God would in the day of redemption

repair it all (Yalk. ii. p. 52 b).

Is. xlix. 9 is quoted as the words of the Messiah in Yalkut (vol. ii.

p. 52 b).

Verse 10 is one of the passages referred to in the Midrash on

Lamentations, quoted in connection with Is. xi. 12.

Verse 12 has already been noticed in our remarked on Ex. xii. 2.

From the expression 'comfort' in verse 13, the Messianic title

'Menachem' is derived. Comp. the Midrash on Prov. xix. 21.

Verse 14 is Messianically applied in Yalkut ii. p. 52 c.

Verse 21 is also one of the passages referred to in the Midrash of

Lamentations, quoted under Ps. xi. 12.

On verse 23 it is remarked in Vayyikra R. 27 (ed. Warsh. p. 42 a),

that Messianic blessings were generally prefigured by similar events,

as for example, the passage here quoted in the case of Nebuchadnezzar

and Daniel.

A Messianic application of the same passsage also occurs in Par. 33

and 36, as a contrast to the contempt that Israel experiences in this

world.

The second clause of verse 23 is applied to the Messiah in the Midrash

on Ps. ii. 2, as to be fulfilled when the Gentiles shall see the

terrible judgements.

Verse 26 is similarly applied to the destruction of the Gentiles in

Vayyikra R.33 (end).

Is. li. 12 is one of the passages referred to in the Midrash of

Lamentations, quoted in our comments in Is. xi. 12.

Is. li. 12 and 17 are among the passages referred to in our remarks on

Is. xxv.9

Is. lii. 3 is Messianically applied in the Talmud (Sanh. 97 b), while

the last clause of verse 2 is one of the passages quoted in the

Midrash on Lamentations (see Is. xi. 12).

The well-known Evangelic declaration in Is. lii. 7 is thus commented

upon in Yalkut (vol. ii. p. 53 c): In the hour when the Holy One,

blessed be His Name, redeems Israel, three days before Messiah comes

Elijah, and stands upon the mountains of Israel, and weeps and mourns

for them, and says to them: Behold the land of Israel, how long shall

you stand in a dry and desolate land? And his voice is heard from the

world's end to the world's end, and after that it is said to them:

Peace has come to the world, peace has come to the world, as it is

said: How beautiful upon the mountains, &c. And when the wicked hear

it, they rejoice,and they say one to the other: Peace has come to us.

On the second day he shall stand upon the mountains of Israel, and

shall say: Good has come to the world, good has come to the world, as

it is written: That bringeth good tidings of good. On the third day he

shall come and stand upon the mountains of Israel, and say: Salvation

has come to the world, salvation has come to the world, as it is

written: That publisheth salvation.

Similarly, this passage is quoted in Yalkut on Ps. cxxi. 1. See also

our remarks on Cant. ii. 13.

Verse 8 is one of the passages referred to in the Midrash on

Lamentations quoted above, and frequently in other places as

Messianic.

Verse 12 is Messianically applied in Shemoth R. 15 and 19.

Verse 13 is applied in the Targum expressly to the Messiah. On the

words 'He shall be exalted and extolled' we read in Yalkut ii. (Par.

338, p. 53 c, lines 7 &c. from the bottom): He shall be higher than

Abraham, to whom applies Gen. xiv. 22; higher than Moses, of whom Num.

xi. 12 is predicated; higher than the ministering angels, of whom

Ezek. i. 18 is said. But to Him there applies this in Zech. iv. 7:

'Who art thou, O great mountain?' 'And He was wounded for our

transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities, and the chastisement

of our peace was upon Him, and with His stripes we are healed.' R.

Huma says, in the name of R. Acha: All sufferings are divided into

three parts; one part goes to David and the Patriarchs, another to the

generation of the rebellion (rebellious Israel), and the third to the

King Messiah, as it is written (Ps. ii. 7), 'Yet have I set My King

upon My holy hill of Zion.' Then follows a curious quotation from the

Midrash on Samuel, in which the Messiah indicates that His dwelling is

on Mount Zion, and that guilt is connected with the destruction of its

walls.

In regard to Is. liii. we remember, that the Messianic name of

'Leprous' (Sanh. 98 b) is expressly based upon it. Is. liii. 10 is

applied in the Targum on the passage to the Kingdom of the Messiah.

Verse 5 is Messianically interpreted in the Midrash on Samuel (ed.

Lemberg, p. 45 a, last line), where it is said that all sufferings are

divided into three parts, one of which the Messiah bore - a remark

which is brought into connection with Ruth ii. 14. (See our comments

on that passage.)

Is. liv. 2 is expected to be fulfulled in Messianic times (Vayyikra R.

10).

Is. liv. 5. In Shemoth R. 15 this is expressly applied to Messianic

days.

Is. liv. 11 is repeatedly applied to the Messianic glory, as, for

example, in Shemoth R. 15. (See our comments on Ex. xii. 2.)

So is verse 13, as in Yalkut (vol. i. 78 c); in the Midrash on Ps.

xxi. 1; and in other passages.

Is. lv. 12 is referred to Messianic times, as in the Midrash on Ps.

xiii.

Is. lvi. 1. See our comments on Exod. xxi. 1.

Verse 7 is one of the passages in the Midrash on Lamentations which we

have quoted under Is. xi. 12.

On Is. lvii. 14 Bemidhar R. 15 (ed. Warsh. p. 64 a) expresses a

curious idea about the stumbling-block, as mystically the evil

inclination, and adds that the promise applies to God's removal of it

in the world to come, or else it may be in Messianic days.

Verse 16 receives in the Talmud (Yeb. 62 a and 63 b) and in the Midr.

on Exxl. i. 6 the following curious comment: 'The Son of David shall

not come till all the souls are completed which are in the Guph' -

(i.e. the pre-existence of souls is taught, and that they are kept in

heaven till one after another appears in human form, and that the

Messiah is kept back till all these shall have appeared), proof of

this being derived from Is. lvii. 16.

Similarly chap. lix. 15 is applied to Messianic times in Sanh. 97 a,

and Midr. on Cant. ii. 13; and verse 19 in Sanh. 98 a.

Verse 17 is applied to Messianic times in Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 149

Verse 20 is one of the passages mentioned in the Midrash on

Lamentations quoted above. (See Is. xi. 12.)

Is. lix. 19, 20, is applied to Messianic times in Sanh. 98 a. In

Pesiqta 166 b it is similarly applied, the peculiar form (plene) in

which the word Goel (Redeemer) is written being taken to indicate the

Messiah as the Redeemer in the full sense.

Is. lx. 1. This is applied in the Targum to Messianic times.

Similarly, it is explained in Ber. R. i. with reference to Dan. ii. 2;

in Ber. R. 2; and also in Bemidbar R. 15 and 21. In Yalkut we have

some very interesting remarks on the subject. Thus (vol. i. Par. 363,

p. 99 c), commenting on Exod xxv. 3 &c., in a very curious description

of how God would in the world to come return to Israel the various

things which they had offered for the Tabernacle, the oil is brought

into connection with the Messiah, with reference to Ps. cxxxii. 17 and

Is. lx. 1. Again, on p. 215 c (at the commencement of the Parashah

Behaalothekha) we have, first, a very curious comparison between the

work of the Tabernacle and that of the six days of Creation, after

which the question is put: Why Moses made seven lights, and Solomon

seventy? To this the reply is given, that Moses rooted up seven

nations before Israel, while Solomon reigned over all the seventy

nations which, according to Jewish ideas, constitute the world. Upon

this it is added, that God had promised, that as Israel had lighted

for His glory the lights in theSanctuary, so would He in the latter

days fill Jerusalem with His glory, according to the promise in Is.

lx. 1, and also set up in the midst of it lights, according to Zeph.

i. 12. Still more clearly is the Messianic interpretation of Is. lx.

brought out in the comments in Yalkut on that chapter. One part of it

is so curious that it may here find a place. After explaining that

this light for which Israel is looking is the light of the Messiah,

and that Gen. i. 4 really referred to it, it is added that this is

intended to teach us that God looked forward to the age of the Messiah

and His works before the Creation of the world, and that He hid that

light for the Messiah and His generation under His throne of glory. On

Satan's questioning Him for whom that light was destined, the answer

is: For Him Who in the latter days will conquer thee, and cover thy

face with shame. On which Satan requests to see Him, and when he is

shown Him, falls on his face and says: I confess that this is the

Messiah Who will in the latter days be able to cast me, and all the

Gentiles, into Gehenna, according to Is. xxv. 8. In that hour all the

nations will tremble, and say befire God: Who is this into Whose hand

we fall, what is His Name, and what is His purpose? On which God

replies: This is Ephraim, the Messiah [the second Messiah, the son of

Joseph]; 'My Righteousness is His Name.' And so the commentation goes

on to touch on Ps. lxxxix. 23, 24, and 26, in a manner most deeply

interesting, but which it would be impossible here fully to give

(Yalkut, vol. ii. Par. 359, p. 56 c). In col. d there are farther

remarkable discussions about the Messiah, in connection with the wars

in the days when Messiah should be revealed, and about Israel's final

safety. But the most remarkable passage of all, reminding us almost of

the history of the Temptation, is that which reads as follows (line 22

&c. from the top): It is a tradition from our Rabbis that, in the hour

when King Messiah comes, He stands on the roof of the Temple, and

proclaims to them, that the hour of their deliverance has come, and

that if they believed they would rejoice in the light that had risen

upon them, as it is written (Is. lx. 1), 'Arise, shine, for thy light

is come.' This light would be for them alone, as it is written (ver.

2), 'For darkness shall cover the earth.' In that hour also would God

take the light of the Messiah and of Israel, and all should walk in

the light of Messiah and of Israel, as it is written (ver. 3), 'The

Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy

rising.' And the kings of the nations should lick the dust from under

the feet of the Messiah, and should all fall on their faces before Him

and before Israel, and say: Let us be servants to Thee and to Israel.

And so the passage goes on to describe the glory of the latter days.

Indeed, the whole of this chapter may be said to be full of Messianic

interpretations.

After this it will scarecely be necessary to say that verses 2, 3, and

4 are similarly applied in the Midrashim. But it is interesting to

notice that verse 2 is specifically applied to Messianic times in the

Talmud (Sanh. 99 a), in answer to the question when the Messiah should

come.

On verse 4 the Midrash on Cant. i. 4, on the words 'we will be glad

and rejoice in thee,' has the following beautiful illustration. A

Queen is introduced whose husband and sons and sons-in-law go to a

distant country. Tidings are brought to her: Thy sons are come back.

On which she says: Cause for gladness have I, my daughters-in-law will

rejoice. Next, tidings are brought her that her sons-in-law are

coming, and she is glad that her daughters will rejoice. Lastly,

tidings are brought: The king, thy husband, comes. On which she

replies: This is indeed perfect joy, joy unpon joy. So in the latter

days would the prophets come, and say to Jerusalem: 'Thy sons shall

come from far' (verse 4), and she will say: What gladness is this to

me! - 'and thy daughters shall be nursed at thy side,' and again she

will say: What gladness is this to me! But when they shall say to her

(Zech. ix. 9): 'Behold, thy king cometh unto thee; he is just, and

having salvation,' then shall Zion say: This indeed is perfect joy, as

it is written (Zech. ix. 9), 'Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion,'

and again (Zech. ii. 10), 'Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion.' In

that hour she will say (Is. lxi. 10): 'I will greatly rejoice in the

Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God.'

Verse 7 is Messianically applied in the Talmud (Abod. Sar. 24 a).

Verse 8 is Messianically applied in the Midrash on Ps. xlvii. 13.

In connection with verse 19 we read in Yalkut (vol. i. p. 103 b) that

God said to Israel: In this world you are engaged (or busied) with the

light for the Sanctuary, but in the world to come, for the merit of

this light, I send you the King Messiah, Who is likened to a light,

according to Ps. cxxxii. 17 and Is. lx. 19, 'the Lord shall be unto

thee an everlasting light.'

Verse 21 is thus alluded to in the Talmud (Sanh. 98 a): 'Rabbi

Jochanan said, The Son of David shall not come, until all be either

just or all be unjust:' the former according to Is. lx. 21, the latter

according to Is. lix. 16.

Verse 22 is also Messianically applied in the Talmudic passage above

cited.

Is. lxi. 1 has already been mentioned in our remarks on Is. xxxii. 14,

15.

On verse 5 there is a curious story related (Yalkut, vol. i. Par. 212,

p. 64 a, lines 23-17 from the bottom) in which, in answer to a

question, what was to become of the nations in the days of the

Messiah, the reply is given that every nation and kingdom that had

persecuted and mocked Israel would see, and be confounded, and have no

share in life; but that every nation and kingdom which had not so

dealt with Israel would come and be husbandmen and vinedressers to

Israel in the days of the Messiah. A similar statement to this is

found in the Midrash on Eccl. ii. 7.

Verse 9 is also applied to Messianic times.

Verse 10 is one of the passages referred to in Tanchuma on Deut. i. 1

quoted under Is. xxv. 9. In Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 149 a, the verse is

explained as applying to the glory of Messiah's appearance.

Is. lxii. 10 has already been referred to in our remarks on Is. lvii.

14.

Is. lxiii. is applied to the Messiah, Who comes to the land after

having seen the destruction of the Gentiles, in Pirqé de R. Eliez. c.

30.

Verse 2 has been referred to in our comments on Cant. v. 10. It is

also quoted in reference to Messianic days in Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p.

149 a.

Verse 4 is explained as pointing to the days of the Messiah, which are

supposed to be 365 years, according to the number of the solar days

(Sanh. 99 a); while in other passages of the Midrashim, the

destruction of Rome and the coming of the Messiah are conjoined with

the day of vengeance. See also the Midr. on Eccl. xii. 10.

Is. lxiv. 4 (3 in the Hebrew). In Yalkut on Is. lx. (vol. ii. p. 56 d,

line 6, &c., from the bottom) Messianic application is made of this

passage in a legendary account of the seven tabernacles which God

would make for the Messiah, out of each of which proceed four streams

of wine, milk, honey, and pure balsam. Then God is represented as

speaking of the sufferings which Messiah was to undergo, after which

the verse in question is quoted.

Is. lxv. 17 is quouted in the Midrash on Lamentations, referred to in

our remarks on Is. xi. 12.

Verse 19 is one of the passages referred to in Tanchuma on Deut. i. 1.

See Isaiah xxv. 9.

To verse 25 we have the following curious illustrative reference in

Ber. R. 20 (ed. Warsh. p. 38 b, line 6 from the bottom) in connection

with the Fall: In the latter days everything shall be healed again

(restored again) except the serpent (Is. lxv. 25) and the Gibeonites

(Ezek. xlviii. 19). But a still more strange application of the verse

occurs in the same Midrash (Par. 95, ed. Warsh. p. 170 a), where the

opening clauses of it are quoted with this remark: Come and see all

that the Holy One, blessed be His Name, has smitten in this world, He

will heal in the latter days. Upon which a curious disquisition

follows, to prove that every man would appear after death exactly as

he had been in life, whether blind, dumb, or halting, nay, even in the

same dress, as in the case of Samuel when Saul saw him - but that

afterwards God would heal the diseased.

Is. lxvi. 7 is applied to Messianic times in Vayyikra R. 14 (last

line), and so are some of the following verses in the Midrashim,

notably on Gen. xxxiii. 1.

Is. lxviii. 22 is applied to Messianic times in Ber. R. 12. See our

remarks on Gen. ii. 4.

Jer. iii. 17 is applied to Messianic days in Yalkut on Joshua iii. 9

&c. (vol. ii. p. 3 c, line 17 from the top),and so is verse 18 in the

commentation on the words in Cant. i. 16 'our bed is green,' the

expression being understood of the ten tribes, who had been led

captive beyond the river Sabbayon; but when Judah's deliverance came,

Judah and Benjamin would go to them and bring them back, that they

might be worthly of the days of the Messiah (vol. ii. p., 176 d, line

9 &c. from the bottom).

Jer. v. 19 is mentioned in the Introd. to Echa R. as one of three

passages by which to infer from the apostasy of Israel the near advent

of Messiah.

The expression 'speckled bird' in Jer. xii. 9 is applied to the

Messiah in Pirqé de R. Eliez. c. 28.

The last word in Jer. xvi. 13 is made the basis of the name Chaninah,

given to the Messiah in the Talmud (Sanh. 98 b), and in the Midr. on

Lam. i. 16.

On verse 14 Mechilta has it, that in the latter days the Exodus would

no more be mentioned on account of the greater wonders then

experienced.

On Jer. xxiii. 5, 6, the Targum has it: 'And I will raise up for David

the Messiah the Just.' This is one of the passages from which

according to Rabbinic views, one of the Names of the Messiah is

derived, viz: Jehovah our Righteousness. So in the Talmud (Babba

Bathra 75 b), in the Midrash on Ps. xxi. 1, Prov. xix. 21, and in that

on Lamentations i. 16.

On verse 7 see our remarks on Jer. xvi 14. In the Talmud (Ber. 12 b)

this verse is distinctly applied to Messianic days. Jer. xxx. 9 is

Messianically applied in the Targum on the passage.

Jer. xxx. 21 is applied to the Messiah in the Targum, and also in the

Midrash on Ps. xxi. 7.

On Jer. xxxi. 8, 3rd clause, Yalkut has a Messianic interpretation,

although extremely far-fetched. In general, the following verses are

Messianically interpreted in the Midrashim.

Verse 20 is Messianically applied in Yalkut (ii. p. 66 c, end), where

it is supposed to refer to the Messiah when imprisoned, when all the

nations mock and shake their heads at Him. A more remarkable

interpretation still occurs in the passage on Is. lx. 1, to which we

have already referred. Some farther extracts from it may be

interesting. Thus, when the enemies of the Messiah flee before Him.

God is supposed to make an agreement with the Messiah to this effect:

The sins of those who are hidden with Thee will cause Thee to be put

under an iron yoke, and they will do with Thee as with this calf,

whose eyes are covered, and they will choke Thy spirit under the yoke,

and on account of their sins Thy tongue shall cleave to Thy mouth. On

which the Messiah inquires whether these troubles are to last for many

years, and the Holy replies that He has decreed a week, but that if

His soul were in sorrow, He would immediately dispel these sorrows. On

this the Messiah says: Lord of the world, with gladness and joy of

heart I take it upon Me, on condition that not one of Israel should

perish, and that not only those alone should be saved who are in My

days, but also those who are hid in the dust; and that not only the

dead should be saved who are in My days, but also those who have died

from the days of the first Adam till now; and not those, but also

those who have been prematurely born. And only these, but also those

who have come into Thy knowledge to create them, but have not yet been

created. Thus I agree, and thus I take all upon Me. In the hebdomad

when the Son of David comes, they shall bring beams of iron, and shall

make them a yoke to His neck, until His stature is bent down. But He

cries and weeps, and lifts up His voice on high, and says before Him:

Lord of the world, what is My strength, My spirit, and My soul, and My

members? Am I not flesh and blood? In that honor David (the Son of

David) weeps, and says: 'My strength is dried up like a potsherd.' In

that hour the Holy One, blessed be His Name, says: Ephraim the

Messiah, My righteous one, Thou hast already taken this upon Thee

before the six days of the world, now Thy anguish shall be like My

anguish; for from the time that Nebuchadnezzar, the wicked one, has

come up and destroyed My house, and burned My Sancturary, and I have

sent into captivity My children among the children of the Gentiles, by

My life, and by the life of Thy head, I have not sat down on My

throne. And if Thou wilt not believe Me, see the dew which is on My

head, as it is said (Cant. v. 2) 'My head is filled with dew.' In that

hour the Messiah answers Him: Lord of the world, now I am quieted, for

it is enough for the servant that he is as his Master (his reminding

us of our Lord's saying, St. Matt. x. 25 ). R. Isaac then remarks that

in the year when the King Messiah shall be revealed, all nations shall

rise up against each other (we have already quoted this passage in

another place, as also that about the Messiah standing upon the roof

of the Temple). Then follows this as a tradition of the Rabbis: In the

latter days the Fathers shall stand up in the month of Nisan, and say

to Him: Ephraim, the Messiah, our Righteousness, though we are Thy

Fathers, yet Thou art better than we, because Thou hast borne all the

sins of our sons, and hard and evil measure has passed upon Thee, such

as has not been passed either upon those before or upon those after.

And Thou hast been for laughter and derision to the nations for the

sake of Israel, and Thou hast dwelt in darkness and in mist, and Thine

eyes have not seen light, and Thy light clung to Thee alone, and Thy

body was dried up like wood, and Thine eyes were darkened through

fasting, and Thy strength was dried up like a postsherd. And all this

on account of the sins of our children. Is it Thy pleasure that our

sons should enjoy the good thing which Godhad displayed to Israel? Or

perhaps on account of the anguish which Thou hast suffered for them,

because they have bound Thee in the prison-house, wilt Thou not give

unto them thereof? He says to them: Fathers of the world, whatever I

have done I have done for your sakes, and for the sake of your

children, that they may enjoy that goodness which the Holy One,

blessed be He, has displayed to Israel. Then say to Him the Fathers of

the world: Ephraim, Messiah, our Righteousness, be Thou reconciled to

us, because Thou hast reconciled They Maker and us. R. Simeon, the son

of Pasi, In that hour the Holy One, blessed be His Name, exalts the

Messiah to the heaven of heavens, and spreads over Him the splendour

of His glory, because of the nations of the world, and becauseof the

wicked Persians. Then the Fathers of the world say to Him: Ephraim,

Messiah, our Righteousness, be Thou their judge, and do to them what

Thy soul desireth. For unless mercies had been multipled on Thee, they

would long ago have exterminated Thee suddenly from the world, as it

is written (Jer. xxxi. 20) 'Is Ephraim my dear son?' And why is the

expression: 'I will surely have mercy' [in the Hebrew reduplicated:

'having mercy I will have mercy'], but that the first expression

'mercy' refers to the hour when He was bound in prison, when day by

day they gnashed with their teeth, and winked with their eyes, and

nodded with their heads, and wide-opened their mouths, as it is

written in Ps. xxii. 7 [8 in Hebrew]; while the second expression 'I

will have mercy' refers to the hour when He came out of the

prison-house, when not only one kingdom, not two, came against Him,

but 140 kingdoms came round about Him, and the Holy One, blessed be

His Name, says to Him: Ephraim, Messiah, My righteous one, be not

afraid, for all these shall perish by the breath of Thy mouth, as it

is written (Is. xi. 4). Long as this quotation may be, its interest

seems sufficient to warrant its insertion.

Jer. xxxi. 31, 33, and 34 are applied to Messianic times in Yalkut

(vol. i. p. 196 c; 78 c; and in vol. ii. p. 54 b, and p. 66 d).

Jer. xxxiii. 13. The close of the verse is thus paraphrased in the

Targum: 'The people shall yet learn by the hands of the Messiah,'

while in Yalkut (vol. i. p.105 d) mention is made of a tenfold

gathering of Israel, the last - in connection with this verse - in the

latter days.

On Lam. i. 16 there is in the Midrash R. (ed. Warsh. p. 64 b) the

curious story about the birth of the Messiah in the royal palace of

Bethlehem, which also occurs in the Jer. Talmud.

Lam. ii. 22, first clause. The Targum here remarks: Thou wilt proclaim

liberty to Thy people, the house of Israel, by the hand of the

Messiah.

Lam. iv. 22, first clause. The Targum here remarks: And after these

things thy iniquity shall cease, and thou shalt be set free by the

hands of the Messiah and by the hands of Elijah the Priest

Ezek xi. 19 is applied to the great spiritual change that was to take

place in Messianic days, when the evil desire would be taken out of

the heart (Deb. R. 6, at the end; and also in other Midrashic

passages).

Ezek. xvi. 55 is referred to among the ten things which God would

renew in Messianic days - the rebuilding of ruined cities, inclusive

of Sodom and Gomorrah, being the fourth (Shem. R. 15, ed. Warsh. p. 24

b).

Ezek xvii. 22 and 23 is distinctly and very beautifully referred to

the Messiah in the Targum.

Ezek. xxv. 14 is applied to the destruction of all the nations by

Israel in the days of the Messiah in Bemidbar R. on Num. ii. 32 (Par.

2, ed. Warsh. p. 5 b).

Ezek. xxix. 21 is among the passages applied to the time when the

Messiah should come, in Sanh. 98 a.

So is Ezek. xxxii. 14.

Ezek xxxvi. 25 is applied to Messianic times alike in the Targum and

in Yalkut (vol. i. p. 235 a), as our in the Talmud (Kidd. 72 b).

On verse 27 see our remarks on chap. xi. 19.

Ezek. xxxix. 2 is Messianically applied in Bemidbar R. 13, Warsh. p.

48 b.

Ezek. xlvii. 9 and 12 are quoted as the second and the third things

which God would renew in the latter days (Shem. R. 15) - the second

being, that living waters should go forth out of Jerusalem, and the

third, that trees should bear fruit every month, and the sick be

healed by them.

On Ezek. xlviii. 19 the Talmud (Baba B. 122 a) has the following

curious comment, that the land of Israel would be divided into

thirteenth tribes, the thirteenth belonging to the Prince, and this

verse is quoted as proof.

Dan. ii. 22 is Messianically applied in Ber. R. 1, and in the Midr. on

Lament. i. 16, where it gives rise to another name of the Messiah: the

Lightgiver.

Verse 35 is similarly applied in the Pirqé de R. Eliez. c. 11, and

verse 44 in c. 30.

Dan. vii. 9. This passage was interpreted by R. Akiba as implying that

one throne was set for God, and the other for the Messiah (Chag. 14

a).

Dan. vii. 13 is curiously explained in the Talmud (Sanh. 98 a), where

it is said that, if Israel behaved worthily, the Messiah would come in

the clouds of heaven; if otherwise, humble, and riding upon an ass.

Dan. vii. 27 is applied to Messianic times in Bem. R. 11.

Dan. viii. 13, 14. By a very curious combination these verses are

brought into connection with Gen. iii. 22 ('man has become like one of

us'), and it is argued, that in Messianic days man's primeval

innocence and glory would be restored to him, and he become like one

of the heavenly beings, Ber. R. 21 (ed. Warsh. p. 41 a).

Dan. ix. 24. In Naz. 32 b it is noted as that referred to the time

when the second Temple was to be destroyed. So also in Yalkut, vol.

ii. p. 79 d, lines 16&c. from the bottom.

Dan. xii. 3 is applied to Messianic times in a beautiful passage in

Shem. R. 15 (at the end).

Dan. xii. 11, 12. These two verses receive a peculiar Messianic

interpretation,and that by the authority of the Rabbis. For it is

argued that, as Moses, the first Redeemer, appeared, and was withdrawn

for a time, and then reappeared, so would the second Redeemer; and the

interval between His disappearance and reappearance is calculated at

45 days, arrived at by deducting the 1,290 days of the cessation of

the sacrifice (Dan. xii. 11) from the 1,335 days of Dan. xii. 12

(Midr. on Ruth ii. 14, ed. Warsh. p. 43 b).

Hos. ii. 2 is explained in the Midr. on Ps. xlv. 1 as implying that

Israel's redemption would be when they were at the lowest.

Hos. ii. 13 is one of the three passages referred to on Jer. v. 19.

Hos. ii. 18 is quoted in Shem. R. 15 (on Ex. xii. 2) as the seventh of

the ten things which God would make new in Messianic days.

Hos. iii. 5 is applied to the Messiah in the Targum, and from it the

Jer. Talm.(Ber. 5 a) derives the name David as one of those given to

the Messiah.

Hos. vi. 2 is Messianically applied in the Targum.

Hos. xiii. 14 is applied to the deliverance by the Messiah of those of

Israel who are in Gehinnom, whom He sets free; - the term Zion being

understood of Paradise. See Yalk. on Is. Par. 269, comp. Maas. de R.

Joshua in Jellinek's Beth ha-Midr. ii. p. 50.

Hos. xiv. 7 is Messianically applied in the Targum.

Joel ii. 28 is explained in the Midrashim as referring to the latter

days, when all Israel will be prophets (Bemidbar R. 15; Yalkut i. p.

220 c, and other places).

Joel iii. 18 is similarly applied in the Midrashim, as in that on Ps.

xiii. and in others. The last clause of this verse is explained in the

Midr. on Eccl. i. 9 to imply that the Messiah would cause a fountain

miraculously to spring up, as Moses did in the wilderness.

Amos iv. 7 is in Midr. on Cant. ii. 13 applied to the first of the

seven years before Messiah come.

Amos v. 18 is one of the passages adduced in the Talmud (Sanh. 98 b)

to explain why certain Rabbis did not wish to see the day of the

Messiah.

Amos viii. 11 is applied to Messianic times in Ber. R. 25.

Amos ix. 11 is a notable Messianic passage. Thus, in the Talmud (Sanh.

96 b) where the Messiah is called the 'Son of the Fallen,' the name is

explained by a reference to this passage. Again, in Ber. R. 88, last

three lines (ed. Warsh. p. 157 a) after enumerating the unexpected

deliverances which Israel had formerly experienced, it is added: Who

could have expected that the fallen tabernacle of David should be

raised up by God, as it is written (Amos ix. 11) and who should have

expected that the whole world should become one bundle (be gathered

into one Church)? Yet it is written Zeph. iii. 9. Comp. also the long

discussion in Yalkut on this passage (vol. ii. p. 80 a and b).

Obadiah verses 18 and 21 are applied to the Kingdom and time of the

Messiah in Deb. R. 1.

Micah ii. 13. See our remarks on Gen. xviii. 4, 5. The passage is also

Messianically quoted in the Midrash on Prov. vi. (ed. Lemberg, p. 5 a,

first two lines).

The promise in Micah iv. 3 is applied to the times of the Messiah in

the Talmud (Shabb. 63 a).

So is the prediction in verse 5 in Shemoth R. 15; while verse 8 is

thus commented upon in the Targum: 'And thou Messiah of Israel, Who

shalt be hidden on account of the sins of Zion, to thee shall the

Kingdom come.'

The well-know passage, Micah v. 2, is admittedly Messianic. So in the

Targum, in the Pirqé de R. Eliez. c. 3, and by later Rabbis.

Verse 3 is applied in the Talmud to the fact that the Messiah was not

to come till the hostile kingdom had spread for nine months over the

whole world (Yoma 10 a), or else, over the whole land of Israel (Sanh.

98 b).

Similarly Micah vii. 6 is applied to Messianic times in Sanh. 97 a,

and in Sotah 49 b; also in the Midr. on Cant. ii. 13. And so is verse

15 in Yalkut (vol. ii. p. 112 b.)

In Micah vii. 8, the expression, Jehovah shall be light to me, is

referred to the days of the Messiah in Deb. R. 11, ed. Warsh. vol. v.

p. 22 a.

Nahum ii. 1. See our remarks on Is. lii. 7.

Habakkuk ii. 3. This is applied to Messianic times in a remarkable

passage in Sanh. 97 b, which will be quoted in full at the close of

this Appendix; also in Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 83 b.

Habakkuk iii. 18 is applied to Messianic times in the Targum.

Zephaniah iii. 8. The words rendered in our A.V. 'the day that I rise

up to the prey' are translated 'for testimony' and applied to God's

bearing testimony for the Messiah (Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 84 c, line 6

from the top).

Verse 9 is applied to the voluntary conversion of the Gentiles in the

days of the Messiah in the Talmud (Abhod. Zarah, 24 a); and in Ber. R.

88; and verse 11 in Sanh. 98 a.

Haggai ii. 6 is expressly applied to the coming redemption in Deb. R.

1 (ed. Warsh. p. 4 b, line 15 from the top).

Zech. i. 20. The four carpenters there spoken of are variously

interpreted in the Talmud (Sukk. 52 b), and in the Midrash (Bemidbar

R. 14). But both agree that one of them refers to the Messiah.

Zech. ii. 10 is one of the Messianic passages to which we have

referred in our remarks on Is. lx. 4. It has also a Messianic cast in

the Targum.

Zech. iii. 8. The designation 'Branch' is expressly applied to King

Messiah in the Targum. Indeed, this is one of the Messiah's peculiar

names.

Verse 10 is quoted in the Midrash on Ps. lxxii. (ed. Warsh. p. 56 a,

at the top) in a description of the future time of universal peace.

Zech. iv. 7 is generally applied to the Messiah, expressly in the

Targum, and also in several of the Midrashim. Thus, as regards both

clauses of it, in Tanchuma (Par. Toledoth 14, ed. Warsh. p. 37 b and

38 a).

Verse 10 is Messianically explained in Tanchuma (u. s.).

Zech. vi. 12 is universally admitted to be Messianic. So in the

Targum, the Jerusalem Talmud (Ber. 5 a), in the Pirqé de R. Eliez. c.

48, and in the Midrashim.

Zech. vii. 13 is one of the three passages supposed to mark the near

advent of Messiah. See our remarks on Jer. v. 19.

Zech. viii. 12 is applied to Messianic times in Ber. R. 12. See our

remarks on Gen. ii. 4.

Zech. viii. 23 is one of the predictions expected to be fulfilled in

Messianic days, it being however noted that it refers to instruction

in the Law in that remarkable passage on Is. lx. 1 in Yalkut ii. p. 56

d, to which we have already referred.

In Zech. ix. 1 the name 'Chadrakh' is mystically separated into

'Chad,' sharp, and 'rakh,' gentle, the Messiah being the one to the

Gentiles and the other to the Jews (Siphré on Deut. p. 65 a, Yalkut i.

p. 258 b).

Verse 9. The Messianic application of this verse in all its parts has

already repeatedly been indicated. We may here add that there are many

traditions about this ass on which the Messiah is to ride; and so firm

was the belief in it, that, according to the Talmud, 'if anyone saw an

ass in his dreams, he will see salvation' (Ber. 56 b). The verse is

also Messianically quoted in Sanh. 98 a, in Pirqé de R. Eliez. c. 31,

and in several of the Midrashim.

On verse 10 see our remarks on Deut. xx. 10.

Zech. x. 4 is Messianically applied in the Targum.

Zech. xi. 12 is Messianically explained in Ber. R. 98, but with this

remark, that the 30 pieces of silver apply to 30 percepts, which the

Messiah is to give to Israel.

Zech. xii. 10 is applied to the Messiah the Son of Joseph in the

Talmud (Sukk. 52 a), and so is verse 12, there being, however, a

difference of opinion whetherthe mouring is caused by the death of the

Messiah the Son of Joseph, or else on account of the evil

concupiscence (Yetser haRa).

Zech. xiv. 2 will be readily understood to have been applied to the

wars of Messianic times, and this in many passages of the Midrashim,

as, indeed, are verses 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Verse 7. The following interesting remark occurs in Yalkut on Ps.

cxxxix. 16, 17 (vol. ii. p. 129 d) on the words 'none of them.' This

world is to last 6,000 years; 2,000 years it was waste and desolate,

2,000 years mark the period under the Law, 2,000 years that under the

Messiah. And because our sins are increased,they are prolonged. As

they are prolonged, and as we make one year in seven a Sabbatic year,

so will God in the latter days make one day a Sabbatic year, which day

is 1,000 years - to which applies the verse in Zechariah just quoted.

See also Washing of hands

Purim, Feast of, how celebrated, i. 229

Puteoli, Jewish settlement in, i. 70

Rabbis, subject of study of, i. 11,

roles of etiquette for, ii. 209, 210;

their authority and place, 381, 407;

manner of ordination of, 382;

Christ's charges against them, 407-409;

their position in both worlds, 408, 410;

their power of binding and loosing, 85, 645

Rabbinic Theology, avoidance of anthropomorphisms in, i. 28, 29, 43;

the allegorical method in, 35, 36;

compared with that of Philo, 42-45;

Jehovah and Elohim in, 45, 46;

Rabbinic views on creation, 50-51;

on the heavenly Academy, 85; ii. 15, 16;

Rabbinic hatred of Gentiles and idolatry, i. 85, 89-92;

essential contrariety of Rabbinism to the teaching of Christ, 84, 145;

views of Israel's receiving the Law, 90, ii. 142-144;

place given to Scripture by Rabbinism, i. 105-108, ii. 17;

the conception of good in, i. 144; ii. 339;

contempt of Rabbinism for Galileans and the ignorant, i. 144, 145,

508;

no doctrine of original sin, 165;

views on death, 166;

the two inclinations in man, 167;

Rabbinic accounts of trials of O.T. heroes, 292;

views of sin and the sinner, 507-511;

Rabbinic teaching about penitence and penitents, 509-513; ii. 245,

246, 253, 258;

fasting, i. 512, 513;

the children of God and of Gehinnom in, 551;

the Rabbinic ordinance of handwashing, ii. 9-15;

decisions as to canonicity of certain books, 12,

the 18 decrees, 13, 14;

Rabbinic views of God's doings in heaven, 15, 16;

the ordinance of vows, 18-21;

the Sabbath laws, 52-62, 153, 154;

signs from heaven to confirm certain Rabbis, 68, 69;

signification of salt in Rabbinism, 121;

teaching as to angels, 122;

views on praying, 137, 138;

prayers of certain Rabbis, 291;

their authority, whence derived, 151;

their views on the sudden appearance of Messiah, 154;

their laws about testimony, 169;

the doctrine of sin before birth, 178, 179;

the spiritual leaders Parnasin, 188, 189;

Rabbinic teaching about nourishment and redemption, 196;

how to inherit eternal life, 235, 236;

separation of Israel according to, 237;

the merits of the fathers, 290;

Rabbinic teaching about forgiveness, 296, 297;

about divorce, 332-335;

the renovation of the world, 343;

Rabbinic teaching about the Resurrection, 397-399, 402, 403;

teaching about the light and heavy commandments, 404, 405, 407;

the abodes of the blessed according to the Rabbis, 513, 514.

See also Mishna, Midrash, Halakkah, Haggadah, Talmud

Redemption of the firstborn, i. 194, 195

Resurrection, Christ's teaching to Martha concerning it, ii. 321, 322;

Sadducean attacks on the doctrine, 397-399;

Jewish and Pharisaic views on it, 398, 399, 402, 403;

Christ's teaching concerning it, 401-403;

the Messiah's part in it, 436;

the Resurrection of Christ: the narrators of it, 621, 622;

the disciples' expectation concerning the event, 623-625;

St. Paul's statements concerning it, 625, 626;

hypotheses concerning it, 626-629;

the women at the sepulchre, 630, 633;

Mary Magdalene there, 631-636;

the guard see the angel, 631, 632;

Peter and John at the sepulchre, 633, 634;

the report of the body having been stolen, 636, 637;

Christ appears to the two who went to Emmaus, 638-642;

appears to Peter, 642;

to the disciples on Easter evening, 642-646;

appears the next Sunday, 646, 647;

is seen by the Lake of Galilee, 647-651;

other manifestations of Christ, 651;

our Resurrection-body, what will it be? 635, 636

Revelation, Christ's teaching as to its unity, ii. 404, 406

Roads in Palestine, the three great caravan ones, i. 147

Rome, views there entertained about the Jews, i. 65-67;

political history and standing of the Jews there, 67, 68, 70-72;

Jewish slaves and freedmen in Rome, 67, 68;

their quarters, Synagogues, and inscriptions, 68-70;

Romans proselytes, 71;

Jewish legend of Messiah at the gate of Rome, 175;

political, social, and religious history of the Roman Empire under

Augustus, 256-260;

Jewish legend of the origin of Rome, ii. 439

Sabbath, the, Jewish modes of making it a delight, i. 437, ii. 52,

114, 115;

Christ's controversy on the 'second first' Sabbath, ii. 53-56;

Rabbinic views of labour on the Sabbath, 56-58;

as to danger to life on it, 59-61;

the O. and N.T. teaching concerning the Sabbath, 56-59;

Christ heals the man with the withered hand on it, 61, 62;

is accused of breaking the Sabbath again, 181, 182;

His Peræan teaching concerning healing on it, 224, 225, 303

Sabbatyon, river, i. 15

Sadducees, origin of, i. 96, 238, 310;

characteristics of their system, 313;

dogmatic, ritual, and juridical views differing from the Pharisees of,

314-321;

they were a minority, 322;

origin of the name, 322-324;

had no sympathy with the Baptist, 334, 335;

identified with the Herodians by St. Matthew, ii. 67;

they seek a sign from heaven, 68-70;

their leaven, 70, 71;

their attitude towards Christ, 396, 397;

their arguments with the Pharisees and with Christ as to the

Resurrection, 397-399, 401, 402;

their views on the Levirate marriage, 400

Sadduk, a Shammaite, joins Judas the Nationalist, i. 241

Safed, i. 146

Saliva, mode of healing by, ii. 45, 48, 180, 182

Salorne, wife of Zebedee. See Zebedee

Salome, daughter of Herodias, dances before Herod, i. 672;

her end, 673

Salome, sister of Herod I., compasses murder of her husband, of

Mariamme, Soemus, and Costobarus, i. 125, 126;

releases the Jews shut up at Jericho, 219

Salt, Christ's teaching about its meaning, ii. 121

Samaria, province of, Biblical history of, i. 394-396;

its temple, 396;

later political history of, 397, 398;

how viewed by Jews, and attitude of Samaria towards Judæa, 398-402;

beauty of the Plain of Samaria, 404, 405

Samaria, or Sebaste, built, i. 88, 119;

heathen temple at, 88;

fate of, 397, 398

Samaritans, meaning of the designation in Jewish writings, i. 399,

400;

doctrines held by the Samaritans, 402, 403;

they refuse to receive Christ, ii. 131;

the healed Samaritan leper, 329-331

Sanhedrin, the, of Jerusalem, signals of the new month by, i. 9;

of supreme authority, 12;

actual power of, at the time of Christ, 120, 128, 238, ii. 556;

origin of, i. 97;

places of, meeting, 114, 371;

rank in it, and privileges thereby conferred, 96, 131, ii. 555;

character of decisions made by Sanhedrin, i. 129, ii. 557, 584,

teaching by members of it on the Temple-terrace, i. 247;

sent no official deputation to the Baptist, 309, 310;

did not sit on Sabbaths, ii. 182;

the Sanhedrist council against Christ, 326;

mode of ordination, 381, 382, 553-555;

Christ's trial illegal according to their laws, 553;

the three tribunals, 554;

regular mode of procedure in trial by the Sanhedrin, 555, 556.

See Trial of Christ

Satan or Sammael, compasses the Fall of Man, i. 165;

his assaults upon Abraham, 292;

his conquest by Messiah, 292, 293;

Christ sees his fa!l, ii. 140;

also named Shomron, 174

Schools in Palestine, i. 230, 231;

teachers in, 231;

subjects of study in, 232

Scribes or Sopherim, studies of, i. 11;

their position and dignity, 93,

origin, growth, and decay in power of, the institution, 94-96

Seleucidæ, troubles of Palestine under, i. 96, 121

Seleucus I. (Nicator) grants the Jews of Asia Minor citizenship, i. 71

Seleucus IV. (Philopator) conquers Samaria, i. 397

Sephiroth. See Kabbalah.

Sepphoris, seized by Judas, the Nationalist, i. 241

Septuagint, i. 23;

legend of its origin and name, 24-26;

its age, 26;

its characteristics, 27, 28;

how regarded and used by Hellenists and Rabbis, 29, 30

Sermon on the Mount, the, contrasted and compared with Rabbinic

writings, i. 524-526, 531-541;

its arrangement and divisions, 527, 528;

the Beatitudes, 529, 530;

alms, prayer and fasting in it 530, 531;

analysis of the third part, 531;

its effect on the hearers, 541

Seventy, mission of the, ii. 135;

differences between it and the sending of the Twelve, 135, 136;

their commission and return, 137-142

Shammai, his life and teaching, i. 95, 128, 129;

character of his school, 239, 240;

the eighteen decrees, how passed, 239, ii. 13, 14;

views of the school on hand-washing, ii. 13;

on divorce, 333;

the burdens bound by them, 407

Shaul, Abba, curse pronounced by, i. 372

Shechem, real capital of Samaria, i. 397, 398;

the 'city of fools,' 400;

the valley of Shechem, 404, 405

Shekkinah, the, removed from earth at the Fall of man, i. 166;

lingers over the wall of the Temple, 168

Sheliach Tsibbur, Christ acts as, in the Nazareth Synagogue, i. 439

Shema, the, reason of its order, i. 268

Shemayah, or Sameas, saying of, i. 128

Sibylline Oracles, lament of i. 6;

Jewish personation in, 36;

date and country of, 38;

passed for Erythræan and Cumæan, 38;

the restoration of Israel referred to in them; their presentation of

Messiah, 172, 173

Sickness, Jewish views concerning, i. 554

Siloam, Pool of, i. 111;

the procession thither on the Feast of Tabernacles, ii. 157, 158;

the man born blind sent to wash there, 180;

lessons of the fall of the tower there, 222, 223

Simeon, meets the Holy Family in the Temple, i. 198;

his song and prophecy, 199, 200

Simeon, grandson of Hillel, interferes concerning Temple traffic, i.

370, 371

Simon I. (Jus), described in Ecclus., i. 26, 121

saying of, 95;

sees a vision of an angel every year, 138

Simon, the Cyrenian, ii. 582, 587

Simon, son of Gamaliel, views on Samaritans of, i. 400

Simon, ben Jochai, saying of, i. 540, ii. 291

Simon, the Pharisee, the meal given to Christ in his house, and the

woman which was a sinner there, i. 563-569

Simon, ben Shetach, i. 96

Simon Zelotes, a cousin of Christ, i. 251, 522, ii. 603

Sirach, Son of, translates his grandfather's work, i. 26;

Grecian thought in it, 32

Sod, i. 21

Soemus, murdered, i. 126

Sowing, modes of, i. 586

Star of the Magi, i. 204, 205;

probable explanation of it, 211-213;

Jewish expectation of a star, 211, 212

Stoning, Place of, ii. 585

Sagoth, or couples, the, i. 95-97

Susanna, ministers to Christ, i. 573

Swine, keeping them prohibited to Jews, ii. 260

Sychar, i. 405;

roads to the place, 405;

its well, 409;

Christ at Jacob's Well there, 405-420

Synagogue, the Great, duration of, i. 94, 95

Synagogues, Hellenist, i. 19, 29, 30, 77;

the batlanim of, 76, 433, 434;

their tendency in the Dispersion and in Palestine, 77, 433, 434;

the Jerusalem Synagogues, 119, 432;

origin of Synagogues, 431, 432;

plan and structure of Synagogues, according to that at Capernaum,

434-436;

regulations as to conduct in, going to, and returning from, a

Synagogue, 437;

the officials, 438, 439;

the service, 439-445;

Jewish preachers and sermons in, 445-450;

Christ in the Synagogue of Nazareth, 452-456

Syracuse, Jewish colony at, i. 69

Syria, reckoned part of 'the land' i. 7

Syrophoenician Woman, healing of her daughter by Christ, ii. 38-43

Tabernacles, Feast of, how kept, i. 229;

pilgrims at it, and how treated, ii. 129, 148, 149;

Christ goes up to it privately, 131;

the booths, 145, 146;

Chol ha Moed of, 148;

symbolism of the Feast, 149, 150;

the illuminations, 150-165;

the services of the great day of the Feast, 156-160;

the Lulabh and Ethrog, 157

Tabor, distant view of, i. 146

Talmud, or Gemara, Metatron in, i. 47;

age and contents of the Jerusalem Talmud, 103, 104;

of the Babylon Talmud, 104;

number of tractates and pages in the Babylon, 104, 105;

its Boraithas, 104;

the birth of Messiah in the Talmud, 175

Tanchuma, R., saying of, i. 178

Targumim, origin of, i. 10, 11, 29;

to write them forbidden at first, 10, 11;

Memra in, 47, 48;

the Messiah in, 175

Targum Jonathan, when sanctioned, i. 11;

Metatron in, 47

Targum Onkelos, i. 11;

absence of anthropomorphisms in, 28;

Memra in, see Memra, also Appendix II. pp. 659-662

Tarichæa, battle of, ii. 68, 72;

the disciples there, 76

Temple, the, how regarded by the Jews, i. 3, 4, 235;

Gentile gifts and worshippers in it, 73, 74;

its porches, 112, 244, 245, ii. 151;

bridge, i. 112;

its gates, 244;

the courts, 245, 246;

the Sanctuary and Most Holy Place, 245, 246;

the veils, ii. 610;

the shops and Temple market, i. 114, 244, 369-372;

the moneychangers, 114, 369;

the Temple rebuilt by Herod, 111-120;

its beauty, 243;

the Sanhedrin in it, 114;

no Synagogue or Academy there, 246, 247;

beggars in the Temple, i. 114, ii. 177;

charity to poor offerers in it, i. 130;

the morning sacrifice in the Temple, 133;

the courses of priests in it, 135; its services a superfluity to

Rabbinism, 144;

the teaching on the Temple terrace, 247;

the Temple-guard: cannot seize Christ, ii. 155, 161, 162;

the Treasury, 165;

the Trumpets, 165, 387;

private prayer in the Temple, 289;

its second cleansing; 377, 378;

the children's Hosanna in it, 378, 379;

the widow's two mites: gifts to the Treasury, 387-389;

Christ's last view of the Temple, 431;

the disciples' question as to its destruction, 431, 432;

the midnight service in it on 15th Nisan, 508;

the renting of the Veil: Jewish legends of such a portent, 610-612

Temptation of Christ, i. 291-307

Ten Tribes, seat of, i. 14, 15;

their return expected, 15

Testament, New, quotations from Old in, i. 206

Testament, Old, grand unity of, i. 160, 161;

copies of, possessed by the people, 232, 233

Theodotus, i. 36

Therapeutæ, i. 61

Therumoth, from what countries due, i. 9, 86;

once kept close to the roll of the Law, ii. 12

Thomas, Didymus, call of, i. 521;

his conduct when leaving Peræa, ii. 315;

question of, after the Paschal Supper, 514;

his disbelief and confession after the Resurrection. 645, 646

Tiberias, built, i. 88, 261, 657;

its site, 261, 262;

scenes in the last war at, ii. 72

Tithes, due from Babylonians, i. 9;

Christ's teaching concerning the Rabbinic law of tithing, ii. 212;

His woe on the Pharisaic ordinances of, 412, 413

Torah, or Law, dignity and age of, i. 35, 85

Tosephtoth, i. 103

Towel, with which Christ girded Himself, ii. 501, 502

Transfiguration of Christ, ii. 94-101

Trial of Christ, not in regular Sanhedrin, nor according to Jewish

law, ii. 553, 556-558;

the false witnesses, 558;

the charge of the 'sign' 558-560;

Caiaphas' adjuration and Christ's answer, 560, 561;

the condemnation, 561;

the Sanhedrists' morning meeting, 565;

Christ before Pilate, 565-569;

the dream of Pilate's wife, 569;

the scruples and charges of the Sanhedrists, 565, 566, 569, 570;

Pilate questions Christ 570, 571;

He is sent to Antipas, 572;

Pilate seeks to save Him, 577;

Barabbas, chosen, 577;

Pilate washes his hands, 577, 578;

Christ scourged, derided and sentenced, 579-581

Tribute to Cæsar. See Cæsar

Tribute, Temple, amount of, i. 367, 368;

money changers for, 367-371;

its obligation, ii. 111;

privileges accorded to some in paying it, 111;

time of year for so doing, 111;

how applied by Vespasian, 112;

Peter and the tribute money: the miracle of the stater, 112-114

Tsitsith, the, i. 76, 277, 623, 626

Tyre, fair at, 82-83.

Tyre and Sidon, borders of, Christ's stay there, ii. 37, 38

Tyropoeon Valley, i. 112

Unknown Feast, Christ alone there, i. 461, 462;

the miracle at Bethesda, 462-469;

His teaching at the Feast, 465, 466, 469-471

Valerius Gratus, Procurator, i. 242

Venusia, Jewish tombstones at, i. 70

Vows, Rabbinic ordinances concerning, ii. 17-21;

the 'hand on the Qorban,' 19;

distinctions between vows, oaths, and ban, 19, 20;

Christ's woe on vows contrary to the fifth commandment, 412

Wages in Palestine, ii. 417

Washing of hands, Rabbinic ordinances of, ii. 9, 10;

the ceremony, 10-12;

Rabbinic teaching on the subject, 13, 15, 210;

Christ's attitude towards this tradition, and his teaching concerning

it, 15, 205-211

Watches, night, how many, i. 687, 688

Weeks, Feast of, how kept, i. 229

Wheat, price of, ii. 269

Wines, various kinds of, ii. 208

Wisdom of Solomon, character of, i. 31-33;

allegorical interpretations in, 34

Woes of Christ, on Chorazin and Bethsaida, ii. 138, 139;

on the Pharisees, 212, 410-414;

on the Scribes, 213

Writing materials, ii. 270;

inks, 270, 271;

pens, &c., 271;

the tablet, 271, 272

Xystos, in Jerusalem, i. 118

Yemen, kings of, professed the Jewish faith, i. 203

Yetser ha Ra, i. 52, 167;

final destruction of, ii. 441

Yetser tobh, i. 52, 53, 167

Yoke of the Kingdom, ii. 142-144

Zacchæus, ii. 352-355

Zacharias, home, wife, and character of, i. 135-137;

the annunciation of John the Baptist to, 137-140,

is dumb till the naming of his son, 140-158;

an 'idiot' priest, 141;

his hymn, 158, 159

Zadok, disciple of Antigonus of Socho, i. 322

Zadok, High-Priest, did not give their name to Sadducees, i. 322, 323

Zealots, Nationalists, or Cananæans, rise and political history of, i.

237, 238-242;

the Sicarii, 241, 242;

their presence in Christ's family, 242;

how described by Josephus, 243;

their principles, ii. 383, 385

Zebedee, sons of, probably Christ's cousins, i. 251;

meaning of the name, 474;

request of the mother of his children, ii. 116, 346, 347,

she is under the cross, 602, 603

Zechariah, the murdered prophet, legend of, ii. 413, 414

Zeqenim, i. 96;

Christ denounces their traditionalism, ii. 213;

the question of one of them about the greatest commandment, 403-405

Zugoth. See Sugoth.

INDEX II.

of passages from the four gospels referred to in these volumes.

St. Matt.

ch. Ver

i. 144

24 i. 251

25 i. 180

ii.

i. 212

1-18 i. 202

4 i. 93

6 i. 206

7 i. 205

11 i. 207

15 i. 162

16 i. 205

19-23 i. 217

22 i. 183, 221

22, 23 i. 221

iii. 1-12

i. 255

2 i. 270; ii.

421

4 i. 264

7 i. 309,

310, 335

12 i. 273

13-17 i. 275

14 i. 279, 282

17 ii. 101

iv.

ii. 55

1-11 i. 291

4 i. 48

12 i. 422

13 i. 364, 394

13-16 i. 423

13-17 i. 423, 451,

458

17 i. 422

17, 23 i. 270

18, &c i. 473

13-22 i. 394, 423,

472, ii. 55

18, 22 i. 457

20, 22 i. 474

23 i. 489

i. 529

v.-vii.

i. 524, 529

1-2 i. 524

3,10 i. 270

3-12 i. 529

6 i. 537

13 ii. 119

13-16 i. 529

15 i. 537; ii.

202

16 ii. 456

17 i. 537

17-20 i. 531

18 i. 234, 537

19, 20 i. 270

20 ii. 293

21 i. 538

21-48 i. 530

22 i. 538

25 i. 537

25, 26 ii. 221

26 i. 538

29 i. 537

31 i. 537

35 i. 538

42-48 i. 536

46 i. 537

47 i. 537

vi.

i. 530

1-4 i. 530

2 i. 196, 539

5-15 i. 530

8 i. 537

9-13 i. 536

10 i. 269

12 i. 537

13 i. 296, 539

14, 15 i. 539

16-18 i. 530

18 i. 537

19-21 i. 530; ii.

218

22 i. 537

22, 23 i. 530; ii.

202

22-24 i. 530

24 i. 537

25 i. 539

25-33 ii. 216

25-34 i. 530

28-30 i. 578

32 i. 537

33 i. 269, 270

34 i. 539

vii. 1-5

i. 531

2 i. 539

3, 4 i. 539

6 i. 531, 539

7-12 i. 531

8 i. 537

9 i. 537

10 i. 473, 537

11 i. 539

12 i. 535, ii.

236

13, 14 i. 531, ii.

298

14 i. 540

15 i. 537

15, 16 i. 531

16-20 i. 578

17-19 i. 537

17-20 i. 531

21 i. 270

21, 22 ii. 300

21-23 i. 541, ii.

298

22 i. 537

22, 23 i. 528

23 i. 537, ii.

301

24-27 i. 531

25 i. 578

26 i. 540

28 i. 478

viii. 1, 5-15 i. 542

2-4 i. 489; ii.

328

4 i. 619

5 i. 365,

426, 548

6 i. 548

7 i. 548

11 i. 279; ii.

301

11, 12 ii. 298, 329

12 i. 550, 551

14 i. 366, 549

14-17 i. 478

17 i. 342, 464,

488

18 ii. 132

18, 23-27 i. 599

19-22 ii. 126, 132

28 i. 607, 609

28-34 i. 606

29 ii. 132

ix.

ii. 49

1 i. 364,

423, 457

1-8 i. 499

2 i. 504

9-13 i. 507

10, 11 ii. 254

11 i. 576

14 i. 576

14-17 i. 520, 654,

662

15 i. 355, ii.

469

16, 17 i. 665

18-26 i. 616

20 i. 76, 277

27-31 i. 573; ii.

44, 48

30 i. 619

32-35 i. 570, 573;

ii. 48

33, 34 i. 576

34 i. 573, 574

35 i. 270

36 i. 640

36-38 i. 640; ii.

135, 137

38 ii. 536

ii. 214, 216

1, 5-42 i. 635

1-15 i. 644

2-4 i. 507, 521

5 i. 394; ii.

135

5-15 i. 640, 641

5-42 i. 640

7 i. 270

7, 8 ii. 137

8 i. 480

10 i. 621, 622

13 ii. 138

15 i. 641

16-18 i. 644

16-23 i. 640, 644

17 i. 645

18 i. 645

18-20 ii. 214, 216

21, 22 i. 645

21-25 ii. 216

23 i. 644

24-33 i. 640

24-34 i. 648

26 i. 640, 649

26-33 ii. 214

32 i. 650

34 i. 650

34-36 ii. 220

34-39 i. 640

37, 38 ii. 304

38 ii. 469

40-42 i. 640, 651

xi. 1

i. 654

2 i. 337

2-14 i. 654

2-19 i. 666

5 i. 669

7-19 ii. 136

11 i. 270

12 i. 270; ii.

277, 299

12-14 i. 670

13-17 i. 584

14 i. 338, 341;

ii. 104

14-19 i. 670

16-19 i. 562, 574

16-42 ii. 138

17, 18 i. 576

20-24 ii. 135, 136,

138

20-30 i. 561, 562

21 ii. 4

25-27 ii. 528

25-30 ii. 135

27 i. 500

28-30 i. 562; ii.

142

xii.

i. 573, ii. 55

1-21 ii. 51, 223

7 i. 520

9-13 ii. 223

11 ii. 225

12 ii. 60

14 ii. 197, 224

16 i. 619

18 i. 54

22 i. 296, 576,

ii. 197

22-32 i. 573

22-45 i. 580; ii.

195

23 ii. 49

24, &c i. 579

25 ii. 198

25-28 i. 295

27-30 ii. 198

28 i. 270

30 ii. 118

31, 32 ii. 214, 216

33-37 ii. 199

38 ii. 200

38-40 i. 375

39 ii. 200

39-42 ii. 200

40 ii. 469

43 i. 480

43-45 ii. 200

46 i. 251, 577

46, 47 ii. 202

46-50 i. 361, 570

xiii.

i. 579, 583, 586

1, 2 i. 579

1-9, 24-33 i. 584

1-52 i. 578

3 i. 583

3-9 i. 269

9-13 i. 646

10 i. 583, 594

11-15 i. 375

11, 19, 24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52 i. 270

12 i. 597

13-15 i. 584

16 i. 594, 597;

ii. 135, 142, 144

17 i. 597

18 i. 586

19 i. 597

19, 25, 39 i. 296

22 i. 597

33 i. 583

34 i. 583

36 i. 590, 594

36, 55-52 i. 583

38 i. 270

39 i. 591, 597

40 i. 591

41 i. 270

42 i. 597

43 i. 270

44 i. 597

45, 46 i. 583

46 i. 597

47 i. 473, 597

47, 48 i. 269

54 i. 478

54-58 i. 457, 635

55 i. 252

55, 56 i. 251

xiv. 1

i. 657

1-12 i. 654

3, 4 i. 657

5 i. 657

8 i. 674

12, 13 i. 654

13-21 i. 676, 678

14 i. 464, 679

15 i. 606

17 i. 681

19 i. 683; ii.

20 ii. 65

22 i. 606, 690,

694

22-36 i. 686

23 i. 696, 687;

ii. 374

24 i. 690, 692

26 i. 689

33 ii. 80

34-36 ii. 6

36 i. 76, 277

xv. 1

ii. 7

1-9 ii. 211

1-20 ii. 3

2 i. 314

3, 6 ii. 17

10 ii. 7, 22

10, 11 ii. 211

11, 18 i. 106

12 ii. 36, 77

12-14 ii. 7

15 i. 582

15-20 ii. 7

17 ii. 24

19 ii. 23

21 ii. 3, 37

21-28 ii. 37

22 ii. 49

23 ii. 38

28 ii. 42

29-31 ii. 44, 45

32-xiv. 12 ii. 63

36 i. 473, 683

39 ii. 67

xvi. 1

ii. 396

1-4 ii. 200

2, 3 ii. 69, 220

3 ii. 342

6, 7 i. 419

9, 10 ii. 65

14-28 ii. 72

16 ii. 536

19 i. 270; ii.

645

21 ii. 344, 470

22 ii. 500

23 ii. 346

24-27 ii. 87

28 i. 647; ii.

xvii. 1

ii. 538

1-8 ii. 91

9-21 ii. 102

12 i. 340

14 ii. 105

20 i. 593, ii.

306

21 i. 480; ii.

106

22 ii. 470

22, 23 ii. 344

22-xviii. 22 ii. 110

23 ii. 115

25 ii. 112

xviii.

i. 580

1 i. 270; ii.

115

1-6&c ii. 306

1-14 ii. 293

3 i. 270,

382; ii. 337

6-35 ii. 306

10 ii. 257

11 ii. 257

12-14 ii. 256

15 ii. 525

15, 21 ii. 115

15-22 ii. 293

17 ii. 84

18 ii. 645

19 ii. 124

19, 20 ii. 124, 521

21 ii. 115

21, 22 ii. 306, 377

23 i. 270, 568

23-35 ii. 284, 293

26 ii. 295

29 ii. 295

35 ii. 296

xix. 1

ii. 127, 293

1, 2 ii. 327, 331

3 ii. 332

3-12 ii. 331

4 ii. 334

8 i. 612

10-12 ii. 335

12 i. 269

13-15 ii. 336

16 ii. 338

16-22 ii. 235, 338

20 ii. 340

21 ii. 217

23-30 ii. 338

24 i. 270

25 i. 478

28 ii. 343

29 ii. 343

30 ii. 300,

416, 420

30-xx. 16 ii. 415

xx.

i. 580

1 i. 270, ii.

247, 417

2 ii. 239

6 ii. 418

15 ii. 416

16 ii. 300, 344

17 ii. 126

17-19 ii. 338, 344,

470

18 i. 93

20 ii. 116, 346

20-28 ii. 338, 346

24 ii. 337, 347

28 ii. 248, 606

29-34 ii. 349, 355

30, 31 ii. 49

xxi.

i. 580

1-11 ii. 363

9, 15 ii. 49

12 i. 244, 372,

373

12-22 ii. 374

15 i. 93; ii.

337

18-22 ii. 375

22-32 ii. 421

23-27 ii. 380, 383

25 i. 281, 287

28-32 ii. 415

29, 32 ii. 573

31 i. 270

33 ii. 247, 422

33-46 i. 646, ii.

415

36 ii. 422

38 ii. 469

40, 41 ii. 423

43 i. 270; ii.

422

44 ii. 422

45 ii. 423

xxii.

i. 580

1-9 ii. 426

1-14 ii. 415, 425

2 i. 270

10 ii. 429

10-14 ii. 426

12 ii. 403

15-22 ii. 380, 384

17 ii. 112

23-33 ii. 396

29-30 ii. 401

32 i. 316

33 i. 478

34 ii. 403, 429

34-40 ii. 235, 396

35 i. 93; ii.

234

41-46 ii. 380, 396,

560

42-45 i. 248

46 ii. 406

xxiii.

ii. 204, 211, 396, 406

2 i. 436

3, 4 i. 101; ii.

407

5 i. 76, 94,

277, 624

5-7 ii. 407

6 i. 436

8-12 ii. 407

11 ii. 410

13 i. 270

13-33 ii. 410

14 ii. 411

23 i. 312

25, 26 i. 312, 358

27 ii. 320

34-36 ii. 413, 424

37-39 ii. 302, 414,

431

38, 39 ii. 449

39 ii. 432

xxiv.

i. 580, 647; ii. 328, 331, 389, 431

1 ii. 415,

431

3 ii. 432,

448, 449

3-29 i. 205

4 ii. 446

4, 5 ii. 448

4-8 ii. 446

4-35 ii. 445, 446

6 ii. 446

6-8 ii. 447

8 ii. 446

9-14 ii. 446, 447

10-13 ii. 448

14 ii. 448,

449, 450

15-28 ii. 446, 448

22 ii. 449

28 ii. 449

29 ii. 450

29-31 ii. 449, 450

30 ii. 450

31 ii. 450

32 i. 582, 583

32, 33 ii. 450

34 i. 647; ii.

449

36 ii. 451

36-51 ii. 445, 451,

453

37-40 ii. 451

40, 41 ii. 451

42 ii. 452

42-51 ii. 452

43, 44 ii. 218, 452

44 ii. 452

45-51 ii. 219, 452

xxv.

i. 580

1 ii. 455,

456

1-13 ii. 453

1, 14 i. 270

1-30 i. 647

2 ii. 456

3 ii. 456

4 ii. 456

6 ii. 455

7 ii. 456

14-30 ii. 453, 459

31-46 App. xix.

34 i. 270

46 ii. 380

xxvi. 1

ii. 380, 481

1-5 ii. 468

3-6 ii. 371

6&c i. 563; ii.

311

6-13 ii. 349, 364

8 ii. 337

13 ii. 359

14-16 ii. 468

17-19 ii. 479, 490

17-20 ii. 481

20 ii. 490

21 ii. 504

21-24 ii. 490

24 ii. 506

25 ii. 490, 494

26 ii. 511

26-29 ii. 490

29 i. 270

30 ii. 513

30, 36 ii. 480

30-56 ii. 533

32 ii. 534

33 ii. 649

36 ii. 538

39, 42 ii. 539

40 ii. 540

41 i. 296

43 ii. 96

45 ii. 541

49 ii. 543

50 ii. 544

57 i. 93

57,58 ii. 546

58 ii. 550

59 ii. 565

59-68 ii. 546

60, 61 i. 451

66 ii. 557

69 ii. 551

69, 70 ii. 546

71, 72 ii. 546

73-75 ii. 546

xxvii. 1, 2, 11-14 ii.

565

3 ii. 421

3-10 ii. 565, 573

5 ii. 111,

574

7 ii. 316,

576

12 ii. 557

15-18 ii. 565

17 ii. 573

18 ii. 569

19 ii. 565

20-31 ii. 565

24, 25 ii. 577

31-43 ii. 582

39-43 ii. 591

40-42 i. 451

41 i. 93

42 ii. 596

44 ii. 582

45-56 ii. 582

48, 49 ii. 608

51 ii. 604, 610

52, 53 ii. 612

55 i. 692; ii.

602

56 i. 572; ii.

346

57-61 ii. 582

60 ii. 617

61 i. 572

62-66 ii. 582, 623

xxviii. 1

i. 692; ii. 631

1-10 ii. 630

9 ii. 633

11-15 ii. 630

16 ii. 535,

630, 633, 647

17 ii. 647

17-20 ii. 630

18-20 ii. 535

19 i. 643

St. Mark.

i. 2-8

i. 255

7-11 i. 275

10 i. 284

12 i. 291

13 i. 291

14 i. 270, 394,

422, 423, 451

15 i. 270, 422,

423, 451

16 i. 473, 474

16-20 i. 394, 472

20 i. 472

21-34 i. 478

22 i. 478

23 i. 484

25 ii. 403

27 i. 485, 602

29 ii. 4

35 i. 490; ii.

374

25-45 i. 489

35-39 i. 489

38 i. 490

40 ii. 50

40-45 ii. 328

41 ii. 50

43 ii. 49

44 i. 619

45 ii. 50

ii.

1 i. 364

1-12 i. 499

6 i. 500

7 i. 500

9 i. 500

10 i. 500

13 i. 514

13-17 i. 507

15 i. 366

16 i. 518

18 i. 663

18-22 i. 654

23 ii. 55

23-iii. 6 ii. 51

iii.

4 ii. 60

6 ii. 384

11 i. 692

12 i. 619

13-15 i. 524

13-19 i. 507, 521

18 i. 251

19-21 i. 542

20 i. 366, 542

21 i. 542

22 i. 570, 574,

575; ii. 197

22-30 i. 580

23 i. 573, 582

23-30 i. 573

31 i. 251, 366,

543, 576

iv. 1-34

i. 578

10 i. 594

11 i. 270, 375,

580

12 i. 375

26 i. 270

26-29 i. 583, 586,

588

30 i. 270

32 i. 593

33 i. 583

34 i. 583

35-41 i. 599

36 i. 599

37 i. 600

38 i. 602

39 i. 484; ii.

403

v. 1-16 i.

678

1-20 i. 606, 607

3-5 i. 609

6 i. 610

13 i. 612

15 i. 692

21-43 i. 616

22 i. 438, 457

27 i. 76

31 i. 617

37 ii. 538

38 i. 692

41 ii. 484

43 i. 619

vi. 1-6

i. 457

1-13 i. 635

2 i. 478, 639

3 i. 251,

252, 364, 637, 638

5 i. 464

7 i. 641; ii.

135

7-11 i. 641

12 i. 654

13 i. 464, 654

14-29 i. 654

17 i. 657

18 i. 657

20 i. 666

30-44 i. 654, 676

31-33 i. 678

32 i. 678

33 i. 678; ii.

150

34 i. 679, 680

35 i. 681

38 i. 681

39 i. 677, 683;

ii. 65

40 i. 683

45 i. 676; ii.

45-56 i. 686

48 i. 693

49 i. 689

53 ii. 5

53-56 ii. 6

56 i. 464; ii.

vii. 1

ii. 7

1-4 i. 357

1-23 ii. 3

2-5 i. 358

3 ii. 11

9 ii. 17

13 ii. 17

14 ii. 7, 22

15 ii. 7

16 ii. 22

17-23 ii. 7

19 ii. 23

21 ii. 23

24 i. 655; ii.

24-30 ii. 37

25 ii. 38, 39

31 ii. 44

31-37 ii. 44, 46

34 i. 489

36 i. 619

37 i. 378, 631

viii. 1-21

ii. 63

6 i. 683; ii.

7 ii. 65

11 ii. 67

12 ii. 69, 70

22 ii. 47

22-26 ii. 44, 47

23 ii. 45, 47

24 ii. 48

26 i. 619; ii.

47, 48

27 ii. 47

26-ix. 1 ii. 72

ix. 2-8

ii. 91

3 ii. 96

9-29 ii. 102

13 i. 340

16 ii. 106

21 i. 480

25 i. 602

30 ii. 92

30-50 ii. 110

31 ii. 115

34 ii. 115

35 ii. 410

38 ii. 115,

117, 346

42-50 ii. 115

43 i. 273; ii.

44 ii. 120

45 i. 273; ii.

120

46 ii. 120

47 i. 270

48 ii. 120

50 ii. 119

x. 1

ii. 127, 327, 331

2-12 ii. 327, 331

4 i. 612

10 ii. 335

13-16 ii. 327, 336

14 i. 270

15 i. 270

17-22 ii. 338

18 ii. 484

21 ii. 341

23 i. 270

23-31 ii. 338

24 i. 270, 485;

ii. 342

25 i. 270

26 i. 478

29 ii. 343

30 ii. 343

31 ii. 344

32 i. 485; ii.

126, 345

32-34 ii. 338

35 ii. 346

35-45 ii. 338, 346

41 ii. 337, 347

45 ii. 348

46-52 ii. 349, 355

47 ii. 49

48 ii. 49

49 ii. 356

xi. 1-11

ii. 363

3 ii. 365

10 i. 270

11 i. 373

15-26 ii. 374

18 i. 478

20 ii. 375, 380

25 ii. 377

26 ii. 377

27-33 ii. 380, 383

xii. 1-12

ii. 415

13-17 ii. 380, 384

14 ii. 112

17 ii. 386

18-27 ii. 396

28-34 ii. 396

34 i. 270

35-40 ii. 396

40 ii. 411

41 i. 692

41-44 ii. 387

xiii.

i. 640; ii. 328, 431

1 ii. 432

3 ii. 432

8 ii. 446

9 ii. 448

30 i. 647

35 i. 490

37 ii. 380

xiv. 1

i. 93; ii. 280, 468

2 ii. 371,

468

3 ii. 311

3-9 ii. 349,

358, 364

4 ii. 337

5 ii. 49

8 ii. 359

10 ii. 468

11 ii. 468

12-16 ii. 479, 490

12-17 ii. 481

14 i. 185; ii.

483

17 ii. 490

18 ii. 504

18-21 ii. 490

21 ii. 506

22 ii. 511

22-25 ii. 490

25 i. 270

26 ii. 480, 513

26-52 ii. 533

28 ii. 534

32 ii. 480

36 ii. 539

40 ii. 96

41 ii. 360, 541

43 i. 93

45 ii. 543

46 ii. 544

51 ii. 545

53 ii. 546

54 ii. 546, 550

55 ii. 565

55-65 ii. 546

64 ii. 557

66 i. 118; ii.

551

66-68 ii. 546

69 ii. 546

70 ii. 546

70-72 ii. 546

xv. 1

ii. 565

1-5 ii. 565

6-10 ii. 565

11 ii. 577

11-20 ii. 565

20-32 ii. 582

21 ii. 587

22 ii. 587

23 ii. 208

25 ii. 582, 587

29 ii. 597

32 ii. 582

33-41 ii. 582

36 ii. 608

39 ii. 609

40 i. 251, 692;

ii. 327, 346, 602

41 ii. 327, 602

42-47 ii. 582

43 ii. 615

47 i. 692

xvi. 1

ii. 631

1-11 ii. 630

4 i. 692

9 ii. 633

9-20 ii. 622

10 ii. 624

11 ii. 638

12 ii. 630, 635

13 ii. 630

15-18 ii. 630

18 i. 464

19 i. 557; ii.

630

20 ii. 630

St. Luke.

i. 2

i. 54

4 i. 185

5-25 i. 133

17 i. 340

20 ii. 248

26-80 i. 144

33 i. 270

63 ii. 270

65 i. 250

68 i. 560

80 i. 260

ii. 1-20

i. 180

2 i. 182

7 i. 189,

251; ii. 354, 483

12 i. 189

15 i. 250

19 i. 193, 250

21-38 i. 191

27 ii. 289

29-32 i. 199

32 ii. 166

36 i. 16

37 ii. 289

39, 40 i. 217

40 i. 221, 226

41-52 i. 235

43 i. 246

48 i. 478

49 i. 644

51 i. 193, 250

52 i. 250

iii. 1-18

i. 255

3 i. 264

15 i. 309, 340

17 i. 273

18 i. 270

19 ii. 525

21 i. 282, 283

21-23 i. 275

iv. 1

ii. 126

1-13 i. 291

14, 15 i. 422

15, 16 i. 423

15-32 i. 451

16 i. 234, 430,

431

16-30 i. 423

16-31 i. 635

18, 19 i. 452

20 i. 438

22 i. 431

23 i. 424, 582,

583

31, 32 i. 423

32 i. 478

33-41 i. 478

35 ii. 403

36 i. 485

42-44 i. 489

43 i. 270, 490

ii. 649

1-11 i. 394, 472;

ii. 648

2 i. 473

5 i. 473

12-16 i. 489

14 i. 619

16 ii. 126, 374

17 i. 93

17-26 i. 499

21 i. 478, 497

27-32 i. 507

30 i. 497

31 i. 520

32 i. 507

33 i. 497

33-39 i. 654

36 i. 582, 583

39 i. 665

44 i. 94

46 i. 94

vi.

i. 526

1-11 ii. 51

2 i. 478

4 ii. 58

6 ii. 61

7 i. 478, 497

11 ii. 62

12 i. 524; ii.

374

12-19 i. 507, 521

13 i. 524

15 i. 251, 522

17-19 i. 524

20 i. 270

38 i. 535

39 i. 583

vii. 1

i. 426

1-10 i. 542

5 i. 433, 457

6 i. 548

8 i. 547

11-17 i. 552

12 i. 353

17 i. 574

18-35 i. 654, 666

21 i. 669

24 ii. 126

26 ii. 424

28 i. 270, 274

29, 30 i. 670

30 i. 93, 94,

277

31-33 i. 576

36 i. 562

36-50 i. 561

39 i. 566

40 i. 564

43 i. 567

viii. 1

i. 270

1-3 i. 570

3 i. 429

4-18 i. 578

5 i. 587

10 i. 270

14 i. 587

17 i. 649

19 i. 360, 576

22-25 i. 599

26-39 i. 606

27 i. 609

28 i. 610

29 ii. 126

40-56 i. 616

44 i. 76

45 i. 617

47 i. 628

56 i. 619

ix. 1

ii. 135

1-5 i. 641

1-6 i. 635

1-56 ii. 126

2 i. 270

6 i. 654

7-9 i. 654; ii.

572

9 i. 675; ii.

301

10-17 i. 676

11 i. 270, 680

13 i. 681

14 i. 683

18 ii. 78, 81

18-27 ii. 72

28 ii. 374

28-36 ii. 91

31 ii. 128

34 ii. 98

37 ii. 93

37-43 ii. 102

43 i. 478

43-50 ii. 110

49 ii. 117

50 ii. 118, 199

51 ii. 96, 127,

131

51-xviii. 14 ii. 126, 127

52-56 ii. 377

53 ii. 174

54 ii. 346

54-56 ii. 131

57-62 ii. 126

59 ii. 133

62 i. 270

x.-xvi.

i. 579

x. 1-16

ii. 135

2 i. 640; ii.

137

6 ii. 138

7 ii. 138

8 ii. 138

9 i. 270; ii.

137

11 i. 270

12-16 ii. 136

13 ii. 4

13-16 ii. 138

13-22 i. 561

15 i. 542

17 i. 480; ii.

139

17-20 i. 489

17-24 ii. 135

18 i. 296, 480,

692

22 i. 500; ii.

141

23 ii. 142

24 ii. 142

25 i. 93; ii.

135, 144

25-37 ii. 233, 234

31 i. 560

33 ii. 238

38 ii. 145,

146, 311, 313

38-42 ii. 135

xi.-xiv. i. 579

xi. 1

ii. 196, 240

5 ii. 240,

284

5-13 ii. 233, 239

8 ii. 240,

288

14 i. 576; ii.

48, 197

14-26 i. 573

14-36 i. 580; ii.

195

14-xvii. 11 ii. 195

17 i. 295

19 i. 480

20 i. 270

21 ii. 198

22 ii. 198

24 i. 480

27 i. 594; ii.

132, 201

30 ii. 200

33-36 ii. 202

37-54 ii. 204, 406

38 i. 358

39 i. 312, 588;

ii. 211

39-52 ii. 204

40 ii. 211

41 i. 312; ii.

211

42 i. 312; ii.

212

43 i. 94; ii.

212

44 ii. 212

45 i. 93; ii.

205, 213

46 i. 101; ii.

213

52 ii. 382

53 ii. 205, 213

54 ii. 205, 213

xii.

ii. 218

1 i. 640; ii.

212

1-xiii. 17 ii. 214

1-12 ii. 214

2 i. 640,

649; ii. 215

2-9 ii. 214

4 ii. 215

6 ii. 215

7 ii. 215

8-10 ii. 215

10 ii. 214,

215, 216

11 ii. 214, 215

12 ii. 214, 215

13-21 ii. 243

16-21 ii. 216

22-34 ii. 216

29 ii. 217

31 i. 270

32 i. 270; ii.

216

33 ii. 217

34 ii. 217

35-38 ii. 218

35-48 ii. 431, 452

39 ii. 219

40 ii. 219

42-46 ii. 219, 267

47 ii. 220

48 ii. 220, 609

49 ii. 220

49-53 ii. 220

50 ii. 220

51-53 ii. 220

54 ii. 220

57 ii. 220

58 ii. 221

59 ii. 221

xiii. 1

i. 262

1-5 ii. 221

2 ii. 260

3 ii. 260

4 ii. 222

6-9 ii. 223,

243, 246, 375

10-17 ii. 223

14 i. 439; ii.

337

15 ii. 224

16 ii. 224

18 i. 270, 593

19 i. 593

20 i. 270

22 ii. 127, 226

23 ii. 298

23-30 ii. 298

24 ii. 298

25-27 ii. 298

27 ii. 301

28 i. 270; ii.

298

29 i. 270; ii.

298

30 ii. 418

31 i. 393; ii.

298, 302

31-33 i. 658

31-35 ii. 298, 301,

304

32 i. 393; ii.

301, 302

33 ii. 302

34 ii. 302

35 ii. 302

xiv. 1-11

ii. 249, 298, 303

3 i. 93, 94;

ii. 303

4 ii. 303

5 ii. 255

7-11 ii. 303

10 ii. 304

11 ii. 410

12 ii. 205, 249

12-14 ii. 304

13 ii. 249, 251

14 ii. 249

15 i. 270

16 ii. 250, 427

16-24 ii. 243, 248

17 ii. 427

21 ii. 303

21-24 ii. 428

25 ii. 304

25-35 ii. 298, 304

26 ii. 305

28-30 ii. 305

29 i. 692

31-35 ii. 305

xv.

ii. 253

1 ii. 264

2 ii. 264

3-7 ii. 123

4 ii. 254

8 ii. 254

8-10 i. 581

13 ii. 267

21 ii. 262

23 ii. 261

32 ii. 263

xvi.

ii. 264

1 ii. 264

1-8 ii. 266

2 ii. 267

3 ii. 267

7 ii. 272

8 ii. 266

9 ii. 266,

273

10 ii. 275

10-13 ii. 266

11 ii. 154

13 ii. 275

14 ii. 331

14-31 ii. 275

15 ii. 264

16 i. 270; ii.

264, 277

16-22 ii. 278

17 i. 234; ii.

264, 277, 332

18 ii. 264,

277, 332

20 ii. 279

23-26 ii. 280

26 ii. 282

27-31 ii. 282

28 ii. 282

30 ii. 283

xvii.

ii. 283, 284

1 ii. 306

1-4 ii. 306

1-7 ii. 119

1-10 ii. 298, 306

2 ii. 306

3 ii. 306

4 ii. 306

6 ii. 306

7-10 ii. 306

10 i. 509

11 ii. 126,

284, 327

12-19 ii. 327, 328

14 ii. 329

16 i. 395

18 i. 400

20 i. 270; ii.

284, 331

20-37 ii. 328, 331

21 i. 270; ii.

284

22-37 ii. 284

35 ii. 120

xviii.

i. 579

1 ii. 284

1-14 ii. 284

4 ii. 287

7 ii. 284,

288

8 ii. 284,

288

9-14 ii. 289

12 i. 312, 662

14 ii. 410

15-17 ii. 293, 327,

336

16 i. 270

17 i. 270; ii.

18-23 ii. 235, 338

24 i. 270

24-30 ii. 338

25 i. 270

29 i. 270; ii.

343

30 ii. 343

31 ii. 127

31-34 ii. 338

35-43 ii. 349, 355

38 ii. 49

39 ii. 49

xix.

i. 580

1-10 ii. 349

10 ii. 122

11-28 ii. 453, 465

12 i. 270

12-27 i. 220

15 i. 270

29-44 ii. 363

37 ii. 367

38 ii. 367

39 ii. 365

41 i. 243; ii.

324

41-44 ii. 70

45 i. 373

45-48 ii. 374

xx. 1-8

ii. 380, 383

9 ii. 423

9-19 ii. 415

19-26 ii. 384

20-26 ii. 380

27-39 ii. 396

40-47 ii. 396

45-47 ii. 204

47 ii. 411

xxi.

i. 640

1-4 ii. 380, 387

5-38 ii. 431

6 i. 692

12 ii. 448

24 ii. 433

29-31 i. 646

31 ii. 450

32 i. 647

36-38 ii. 380

37 ii. 415

xxii. 1

ii. 380

1-6 ii. 468

2 i. 93

3 i. 296; ii.

471

4 ii. 475

7 ii. 481

7-13 ii. 479, 490

8 ii. 364,

482

11 i. 185; ii.

483

13 ii. 481

14 ii. 481

14-16 ii. 496

15 ii. 481

17 ii. 490, 496

18 ii. 490, 496

19 ii. 490

20 ii. 490

21-23 ii. 490

24-30 ii. 490

25 ii. 495

26 ii. 495

28 i. 296

29 i. 270

30 ii. 343

31 i. 296; ii.

535

31-53 ii. 533

35, 38 ii. 537

37 i. 342

39 ii. 480

41 ii. 539

48 ii. 543

54 ii. 550

54-58 ii. 546

55 ii. 550

59-62 ii. 546

63-65 ii. 546

66 i. 93, 97;

ii. 549

66-68 ii. 560

67-71 ii. 546

xxiii. 1-5

ii. 565

2 ii. 384,

557, 565, 570

3 ii. 570

6 i. 118

6-12 ii. 565, 572

7 i. 118; ii.

383

10 i. 93

13 ii. 573

13-17 ii. 565

18-25 ii. 565

26 i. 63

26-38 ii. 582

27-31 ii. 588, 595

34 ii. 595

35 i. 692; ii.

597

36 ii. 595

37 ii. 595

39-43 ii. 582

44-49 ii. 582

45 ii. 604

46 ii. 595

48 i. 692

49 ii. 608

50-56 ii. 582

51 ii. 615

54 ii. 616

55 i. 572

56 i. 572

xxiv. 1-12 ii.

630

10 ii. 630

13-35 ii. 630

17 ii. 640

19 ii. 640

21 ii. 623

33 ii. 642

36-43 ii. 630

37 i. 692

38-43 ii. 627, 628

39 i. 692; ii.

643

44-48 ii. 647

44-53 ii. 630

47 i. 270

St. John.

i. 9

ii. 154

10 i. 47

11-13 i. 671

13 i. 384

14 ii. 99

15-51 i. 336

19-24 i. 308

19-28 i. 309

20 i. 340

22-28 i. 341

24 i. 322

28 i. 264, 278

29 i. 488

32 i. 284

32-34 i. 275

33 i. 279, 336;

ii. 644

34 i. 285

37 i. 474

40 i. 345

41 i. 347

42 ii. 82

43 i. 345

44 ii. 4

45-51 ii. 646

47 i. 348

48 i. 414

48, 49 i. 414

49 i. 414

50-51 i. 426

50 i. 350

51 i. 349, 350,

351

ii.

1 i. 345

1-11 i. 423

1-12 i. 351

3 i. 359

6 ii. 11

12 i. 394

13 ii. 54, 491

13-17 i. 357

13-iii. 21 i. 655

13-23 ii. 378

13-25 i. 364

13-iv. 54 i. 407

14 i. 244

14, 15 i. 374

18, 19 ii. 558

18-23 i. 357, 378

19 i. 80; ii.

469

20 i. 375

23 i. 378, 692

iii. 1-21

i. 377

3 i. 270,

384; ii. 33

3-5 i. 269, 383

4 i. 386

5 i. 270, 382

7 i. 384

8 i. 383

14 ii. 469

16 i. 389

16-21 i. 382, 389,

656

20 ii. 525

22 i. 390; ii.

22-iv. 3 i. 655

24 i. 657

25 i. 391, 655

25-30 i. 654

26 i. 661

29 i. 663, 664

31 i. 384

31-36 i. 382

iv.

i. 542; ii. 329

1 i. 390, 393

1, 2 i. 658

1-4 i. 390

1-42 i. 404

2 i. 390

4 i. 394

8 i. 409

9 i. 401

11-15 i. 413

15 i. 414

19 i. 414, 692

20 i. 77

20-24 ii. 187

23, 37 ii. 154

29 i. 414

30 i. 418

31 i. 418

33 i. 407

35 i. 594; ii.

55, 137

36 i. 420

39 i. 418

40 i. 408, 418

42 i. 421

43-54 i. 422, 423

44 i. 455

45 i. 422

46-53 i. 547

46-54 i. 572

49 i. 425

50 i. 426, 429

52 i. 428

53 i. 426, 428,

429

i. 460, 461, 499, 677; ii. 54, 55, 129

v.-vi. 3 i. 407

1 i. 423, 460

1-3 ii. 54

7 i. 463, 468

8 i. 500

9 ii. 53

13, 14 i. 468

15, 16 i. 309

16 ii. 53

16, 17 ii. 223

17 i. 465, 470

18 i. 500

18 ii. 153

19 i. 471; ii.

526

19-32 i. 466

24 i. 469

27 i. 500

30-38 i. 466

36 i. 500

37 i. 465

39 i. 465

40-43 i. 465

44 i. 465

45-47 i. 465

vi.

ii. 129

1 i. 655, 657

1-14 i. 676

2 i. 692

3 i. 679

4 i. 677,

679; ii. 128

6 i. 414, 680

9 i. 681

10 i. 683; ii.

15 i. 687

15-21 i. 686

17 ii. 3

19 i. 606, 692

21 i. 606, 693,

694

22 i. 678, 690;

ii. 26

22-24 ii. 4

22-25 ii. 6

22-71 ii. 25

24 ii. 26

25 ii. 26

25-29 ii. 28

25-36 ii. 26

25-65 ii. 26

26 ii. 27

27 ii. 35

29 i. 469

30 i. 469

30-36 ii. 29

31 ii. 593

32 ii. 154

33 ii. 30

37 ii. 35

37-40 ii. 31

40 i. 692; ii.

41 ii. 31

41-51 ii. 32

41-52 ii. 26

42 ii. 35

44 ii. 35

48 ii. 34

48-58 i. 683

49 i. 366

51 ii. 26, 469

52-58 ii. 27

53-58 ii. 26, 34

55 ii. 35

56 ii. 35

59 i. 366; ii.

4, 6, 7, 26

60-66 ii. 7, 77

61-65 ii. 27

62 i. 692; ii.

65 ii. 35

66 i. 590; ii.

67 ii. 77

68 ii. 36, 152,

536

69 ii. 36, 81,

152

70 i. 590

71 ii. 36

vii.

ii. 70, 129

vii.-x. ii. 126

1-5 ii. 77

1-16 ii. 126

2 ii. 129

3 i. 306, 692

4 ii. 527

5 i. 306

11 ii. 131

11-36 ii. 148

13 ii. 527

14 ii. 131, 145

15 i. 309

17 ii. 162

18 ii. 526

20 i. 479

26 ii. 527

27 ii. 436

28 ii. 154

29 ii. 155

35 i. 7

37-viii. 11 ii. 156

37-viii. 59 ii. 164

38 ii. 593

39 ii. 644

40-42 i. 423

50 ii. 617

50-52 i. 263

52 ii. 174

53 ii. 164

53-viii. 11 ii. 163

viii. 3

i. 309

9 ii. 525

12 ii. 164, 180

12-19 ii. 164

12-59 ii. 164

13 ii. 164, 169

14 ii. 169

15 ii. 169

16 ii. 154, 169

20 ii. 164, 165

21 ii. 164

22 ii. 170

23, 24 ii. 171

25-28 ii. 171

28 ii. 180

29 ii. 180

30 i. 460

30-32 ii. 172

31 i. 469

33 i. 271

34 ii. 173

35 ii. 173

37-40 ii. 173

39 i. 271

41 ii. 173

42 ii. 173

43-47 ii. 173

46 ii. 525

48 i. 395, 479;

ii. 197

49 i. 479

50 ii. 175

51 i. 692; ii.

175

52 i. 479; ii.

88, 175

53 i. 271

56 i. 161, 193

59 ii. 164

ix.

ii. 177

3 i. 468

4 ii. 180

5 ii. 180

6 ii. 45

7 ii. 158

8 i. 692

11 ii. 180

12 ii. 181

14 ii. 177

15 ii. 182

16 ii. 8

18 i. 309

22 i. 309; ii.

181

24 ii. 8

32 ii. 324

35 ii. 177

39 ii. 187

41 ii. 187

i. 583; ii. 177, 217

1-21 ii. 188

11 ii. 194, 469

12 i. 692

13-15 ii. 229

15 ii. 469

17 ii. 192

18 ii. 192

19 ii. 195

19-21 ii. 126

20 i. 479; ii.

197

21 i. 479

22 ii. 177, 226

22-39 ii. 195

22-42 ii. 126, 195,

226

23 ii. 151

24 ii. 527

26 ii. 229

27 ii. 229

28 ii. 229

35 ii. 231

37 ii. 232

39 ii. 126

39-43 ii. 126

xi.

ii. 126, 145, 284; ii. 306

1-45 ii. 195

1-54 ii. 308

2 ii. 311

4 ii. 322,

325

6 i. 629

8 ii. 301,

345

14 ii. 527

16 ii. 345

20 ii. 315

33, 38 ii. 49

35-44 ii. 375

41 ii. 324

45 ii. 311

46-54 ii. 195

47 ii. 475

47-50 i. 205, 263

48 ii. 475

49 i. 264

50 ii. 546

51 ii. 526

54 ii. 126,

127, 135, 527

55 i. 367

55-57 ii. 357

55-xii. 1 ii. 349

57 ii. 475

xii.

ii. 378

1 ii. 357,

358

2-11 ii. 349

5 ii. 472

6 ii. 472

10 ii. 357

11 ii. 357

12 ii. 365

12-19 ii. 363

16 ii. 366

17 ii. 367

18 ii. 367

19 i. 692; ii.

365

20 ii. 187

20-50 ii. 380, 388

21 i. 676; ii.

23 ii. 391

24-26 ii. 391

25 ii. 404

27 ii. 391, 392

28 ii. 391

28-33 ii. 392

31 i. 296; ii.

140

32 ii. 33, 171

34-36 ii. 392

36 ii. 393

37-43 ii. 393

42 ii. 183

44 ii. 394

45 i. 692

45-48 ii. 394

49 ii. 394

50 ii. 394

xiii.

ii. 348, 497

1 ii. 479,

490

2 ii. 471,

493, 497

2-20 ii. 490

3 ii. 498

4 i. 568

6 ii. 499

11 ii. 501

12-16 ii. 497

12-17 ii. 501

17-19 ii. 502

20 ii. 504

21 ii. 505

21-26 ii. 490

22 ii. 506

23 ii. 506

24 ii. 495, 506

26 ii. 494

26-38 ii. 490

27 i. 296; ii.

471, 477

28 ii. 506

30 ii. 507

31-35 ii. 509

32 ii. 509

33 ii. 513

36 ii. 524

36-38 i. 350

37 ii. 649

xiv.

ii. 513, 528

1 ii. 528

1-4 ii. 513, 514

5 ii. 514,

524

5-14 ii. 513

7-14 ii. 515

8 i. 680

9 i. 680

12-14 ii. 521

15-17 ii. 516

15-24 ii. 513

17 i. 692

19 i. 692; ii.

516

20-22 ii. 517

22 i. 522

24 ii. 517

24-31 ii. 513

26 i. 56

27, 28 ii. 518

29 ii. 519

30 i. 296; ii.

519

31 ii. 519

xv.

i. 583; ii. 513, 528

1 ii. 154

1-8 ii. 519

4 ii. 526

7 ii. 521

8 ii. 521

9-17 ii. 519

11 ii. 522, 530

12-14 ii. 522

16 ii. 521

16-18 ii. 523

18-27 ii. 519

19-21 ii. 523

22-24 ii. 523

xvi.

ii. 513, 524, 528

1-4 ii. 524

2 ii. 183

5 ii. 524

5-7 ii. 526

7 ii. 525

8-15 ii. 526

10 i. 692

11 i. 296

16 i. 692; ii.

526

17 i. 692

19 i. 692; ii.

527

23 ii. 527

25 ii. 527

29 ii. 527

30 ii. 528

31-32 i. 350

32 ii. 528

33 ii. 528

xvii.

ii. 513, 528

1-5 ii. 528

3 ii. 154

3-5 ii. 529

6-10 ii. 529

6-19 ii. 528

9-12 ii. 530

12 ii. 531, 543

12-17 ii. 531

13 ii. 530

15 ii. 536

20-26 ii. 528

24 i. 692, 693

24-26 ii. 531

xviii. 1

ii. 480, 485, 513

1-11 ii. 533

2 ii. 485

3 ii. 542

4-9 ii. 543

5 ii. 543

12 i. 309; ii.

542

12-14 ii. 546

13 i. 264; ii.

548

14 ii. 546

15 ii. 550

15-18 ii. 546, 548,

550

15-23 ii. 548

17 ii. 546

18 ii. 546

19 ii. 548

19-23 ii. 546, 548,

549

20 ii. 527, 549

24 ii. 546, 548

25 ii. 546

26-27 ii. 546

28 ii. 482, 556

28-38 ii. 565

29 ii. 557, 565

30 ii. 557, 565

31 i. 309; ii.

541, 557

32 ii. 569

33 i. 406

33-37 i. 266

36 i. 383; ii.

299

37 ii. 571

39 ii. 565

40 ii. 565

xix. 1

ii. 579

1-16 ii. 565

2-16 ii. 601

4 ii. 579

6 ii. 582

7 ii. 541

11 i. 384

14 i. 408

15 ii. 582

16 ii. 582

16-24 ii. 582

17-24 ii. 601

19 ii. 591

20 ii. 585

21 ii. 591

22 ii. 591

23 i. 384, 622,

624, 625

25 i. 251, 521;

ii. 602

25-27 ii. 582, 602

26 i. 360, 361

27 i. 383

28 ii. 603, 607

28-30 ii. 582

31 ii. 612

31-37 ii. 582, 595

35 ii. 154

38-42 ii. 582

39 i. 381

41 ii. 617

42 ii. 617

xx. 1

ii. 630

1-18 ii. 630

2 ii. 635

6 i. 693

9 ii. 623

11-17 ii. 633

12 i. 693

13 ii. 635

14 i. 693

16 i. 93

19-25 ii. 630

20 ii. 643

23 ii. 85

26-29 ii. 630

27 ii. 614

30 i. 394, 466;

ii. 647

31 i. 185, 394,

467; ii. 647

xxi. 1-24

ii. 630

2 i. 350; ii.

535, 633

3 ii. 647

9 i. 683; ii.

649

10 i. 683

13 i. 683; ii.

627

15-17 ii. 536

25 i. 394; ii.

139

Indexes

Index of Greek Words and Phrases

Index of Pages of the Print Edition

_________________________________________________________________

[6493]1 Comp. the historical account of these symbols in Zahn, Forsch.

z. Gesch. d. Neu-Test. Kanons, ii. pp. 257-275.

[6494]2 It is to be noted that in the marginal and note-references the

old mode of indicating a reference (as in the first ed. of this book)

and the, perhaps, more correct mode of transliteration have been

promiscuously employed. But the reader can have no difficulty in

understanding the reference.

[6495]3 Mark the note on previous page.

[6496]4 It will, of course, be understood that we have only given the

briefest, and, indeed, imperfect, indications of the contents of the

various Talmudic Tractates. Besides giving the Laws connected with

each of the subjects of which they treat, all kindred topics are taken

up, nay, the discussion often passes to quite other than the subjects

primarily treated of in a Tractate.

[6497]5 Such is the literal meaning of what is translated by

'shewbread.'

[6498]6 1 Macc. i. 54, 59; Jos. Ant. xii. 5. 4.

[6499]7 After the deposition of Onias III. through the bribery of his

own brother Jason, the latter and Menelaus outvied each other in

bribery for, and prostitution of, the holy office.

[6500]8 Modin, the birthplace of the Maccabees, has been identified

with the modern El-Medyeh, about sixteen miles northwest of Jerusalem,

in the ancient territory of Ephraim. Comp. Conder's Handbook of the

Bible, p. 291; and for a full reference to the whole literature of the

subject, see Schürer (Neutest. Zeitgesch. p. 78, note 1).

[6501]9 On the meaning of the name Maccabee, comp. Grimm's Kurzgef.

Exeget. Handb. z. d. Apokr. Lief. iii., pp. ix. x. We adopt the

derivation from Maqqabha, a hammer, like Charles Martel.

[6502]10 1 Macc. iv. 52-54: Megill. Taan. 23.

[6503]11 1 Macc. l. 54.

[6504]12 Alike the verb {hebrew} in Hebrew, and diaspe_rw in Greek,

with their derivatives, are used in the Old Testament, and in the

rendering of the LXX., with reference to punitive banishment. See, for

example, Judg. xviii. 30; 1 Sam. iv. 21; and in the LXX. Deut. xxx. 4;

Ps. cxlvii. 2; Is. xlix. 6, and other passages.

[6505]13 There is some truth, although greatly exaggerated, in the

bitter remarks of Hausrath (Neutest. Zeitgesch. ii. p. 93), as to the

sensitiveness of the Jews in the diaspor_, and the loud outcry of all

its members at any interference with them, however trivial. But events

unfortunately too often proved how real and near was their danger, and

how necessary the caution 'Obsta principiis.'

[6506]14 St. Peter seems to have used it in that sense, 1 Pet. i. 1.

[6507]15 Jew. W ii. 16. 4.

[6508]16 vii. 3.3.

[6509]17 Comp. the remarks of Schneckenburger (Vorles ü. Neutest.

Zeitg. p. 95).

[6510]18 Comp. Friedlieb, D. Sibyll. Weissag. xxii. 39.

[6511]19 Orac Sibyll. iii. 271,272, apud Friedlieb, p. 62.

[6512]20 Strabo apud Jos. Ant. xiv. 7.2: 'It is not easy to find a

place in the world that has not admitted this race, and is not

mastered by it.'

[6513]21 Philo in Flaccum (ed. Francf.), p. 971.

[6514]22 Comp. Jos. Ant. xii. 3; xiii. 10. 4; 13. 1; xiv. 6. 2; 8. 1;

10. 8; Sueton. Cæs. 85.

[6515]23 Acts ii. 9-11

[6516]24 Grimm (Clavis N.T. p. 113) quotes two passages from Philo, in

one of which he contradistinguishes 'us,' the Hellenist Jews, from

'the Hebrews,' and speaks of the Greek as 'our language.'

[6517]25 St. John vii. 35.

[6518]26 Acts vi. 1; ix. 29; xi. 20.

[6519]27 Philo ad Cajum, p. 1023; Jos. Ant. xv. 3.1.

[6520]28 Similarly we have (in Men. 110a) this curious explanation of

Is. xliii. 6: 'My sons from afar' - these are the exiles in Babylon,

whose minds were settled, like men, 'and my daughters from the ends of

the earth' - these are the exiles in other lands, whose minds were not

settled, like women.

[6521]29 Acts vi. 1.

[6522]30 Ber. R. 17.

[6523]31 Erub. 21 a Gritt. 6 a.

[6524]32 Comp. Fürst, Kult. u. Literaturgesch d. Jud. in Asien, vol.

i. p. 8.

[6525]33 537 b.c., and 459-'8 b.c.

[6526]34 Ant. xi. 5. 2; xv. 2. 2; xviii. 9.

[6527]35 Jos. Ant. xviii. 9. 9.

[6528]36 Midrash on Cant. v. 5, ed. Warsh. p. 26 a.

[6529]37 330 b.c.

[6530]38 63 b.c.

[6531]39 Philo ad Caj.

[6532]40 The following are the chief passages in Josephus relating to

that part of Jewish history: Ant. xi. 5. 2; xiv. 13. 5; xv. 2. 7; 3.

1; xvii. 2. 1-3; xviii. 9. 1, &c.; xx. 4. Jew. W. i. 13. 3.

[6533]41 Rosh. haSh. ii. 4; comp. the Jer. Gemara on it, and in the

Bab. Talmud 23 b.

[6534]42 Rosh. haSh. i. 4.

[6535]43 Shev. vi. passim; Gitt. 8 a.

[6536]44 Ohol. xxiii. 7.

[6537]45 Kidd. 69 b.

[6538]46 Cheth. 111 a.

[6539]47 As comments upon the genealogies from 'Azel' in 1 Chr. viii.

37 to 'Azel' in ix. 44. Pes. 62 b.

[6540]48 Chs. ix. x.

[6541]49 Life i.; Ag Apion i. 7.

[6542]50 Pes. 62 b; Sachs, Beitr. vol. ii. p. 157.

[6543]51 According to tradition he returned to Babylon, and died

there. Josephus says that he died in Jerusalem (Anti. xi. 5. 5).

[6544]52 Herzfeld has given a very clear historical arrangement of the

order in which, and the persons by whom, the various legal

determinations were supposed to have been given. See Gesch. d. V. Isr.

vol. iii. pp. 240 &c.

[6545]53 Sanh. 21 b.

[6546]54 Although thus introduced under Ezra, the ancient Hebrew

characters, which resemble the Samaritan, only very gradually gave

way. They are found on monuments and coins.

[6547]55 Herzfeld (u. s. vol. iii. p. 46) happily designates the

Palestinian as the Hebræo-Aramaic, from its Hebraistic tinge. The

Hebrew, as well as the Aramæan, belongs to the Semitic group of

languages, which has thus been arranged: 1. North Semitic:

Punico-Phoenician, Hebrew, and Aramaic (Western and Eastern dialects).

2. South Semitic: Arabic, Himyaritic, and Ethiopian. 3. East Semitic:

The Assyro-Baylonian cuneiform. When we speak of the dialect used in

Palestine, we do not, of course, forget the great influence of Syria,

exerted long before and after the Exile. Of these three branches the

Aramaic is the most closely connected with the Hebrew. Hebrew occupies

an intermediate position between the Aramaic and the Arabic, and may

be said to be the oldest, certainly from a literary point of view.

Together with the introduction of the new dialect into Palestine, we

mark that of the new, or square, characters of writing. The Mishnah

and all the kindred literature up to the fourth century are in Hebrew,

or rather in a modern development and adaptation of that language; the

Talmud is in Aramæan. Comp. on this subject: DeWette-Schrader, Lehrb.

d. hist. kr. Eink. (8 ed.) pp. 71-88; Herzog's Real-Encykl. vol. i.

466, 468; v. 614 &c., 710; Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. d. Jud. pp. 7-9;

Herzfeld, u.s. pp. 44 &c., 58&c.

[6548]56 Could St. Paul have had this in mind when, in referring to

the miraculous gift of speaking in other languages, he directs that

one shall always interpret (1 Cor. xiv. 27)? At any rate, the word

targum in Ezra iv. 7 is rendered in the LXX. by _rmjne_w. The

following from the Talmud (Ber. 8 a and b) affords a curious

illustration of 1 Cor. xiv. 27: 'Let a man always finish his Parashah

(the daily lesson from the Law) with the congregation (at the same

time) - twice the text, and once Targum.'

[6549]57 Megill. 3 b.

[6550]58 From darash, to search out, literally, to tread out. The

preacher was afterwards called the Darshan.

[6551]59 The Halakhah might be described as the apocryphal Pentateuch,

the Haggadah as the apocryphal Prophets

[6552]60 We may here remind ourselves of 1 Tim. v. 17. St. Paul, as

always, writes with the familiar Jewish phrases ever recurring to his

mind. The expression didaskal_a seems to be equivalent to Halakhic

teaching. Comp. Grimm, Clavis N. T. pp. 98, 99.

[6553]61 In Moed Q. 25 a. sojourn in Babylon is mentioned as a reason

why the Shekhinah could not rest upon a certain Rabbi.

[6554]62 Pes. 34 b; Men. 52 a; Sanh. 24 a; Bets. 16 a - apud Neubauer,

Géog. du Talmud, p. 323. In Keth. 75 a, they are styled the 'silly

Babylonians.' See also Jer. Pes. 32 a.

[6555]63 Sukk. 20 a. R. Chija, one of the teachers of the second

century, is among the most celebrated Rabbinical authorities, around

whose memory legend has thrown a special halo.

[6556]64 In this, as in so many respects, Dr. Neubauer has collated

very interesting information, to which we refer. See his Géogr. du

Talm. pp. 369-399.

[6557]65 The whole section gives a most curious glimpse of the dress

and ornaments worn by the Jews at that time. The reader interested in

the subject will find special information in the three little volumes

of Hartmann (Die Hebräerin am Putztische), in N. G. Schröder's

some-what heavy work: De Vestitu Mulier. Hebr., and especially in that

interesting tractate, Trachten d. Juden, by Dr. A. Brüll, of which,

unfortunately, only one part has appeared.

[6558]66 Shabb. vi. 6.

[6559]67 Yoma iii. 7.

[6560]68 Er. 55 a.

[6561]69 Kidd. iv. 14.

[6562]70 Philo ad Cajum, ed. Frcf. p. 1023.

[6563]71 Gal. i. 17;

[6564]72 1 Pet. v. 13.

[6565]73 Pes. 56 a, apud Neubauer, u. s., p. 351.

[6566]74 Comp. Neubauer, pp. 315, 372; Hamburger, Real-Encykl. p. 135.

[6567]75 Comp. Volkmar, Handb. d. Einl. in d. Apokr. iite Abth., pp.

193, 194, notes. For the reasons there stated, I prefer this to the

ingenious interpretation proposed by Dr. Schiller-Szinessy (Journ. of

Philol. for 1870, pp. 113, 114), who regards it as a contraction of

Erez achereth, 'another land,' referred to in Deut. xxix. 27 (28).

[6568]76 Ant. xi. 5.2.

[6569]77 Sanh. x. 3.

[6570]78 R. Eliezer seems to connect their return with the dawn of the

new Messianic day.

[6571]79 Ber. R. 73.

[6572]80 Jer. Sanb 29 c.

[6573]81 This is not the place to discuss the later Jewish fiction of

a second or 'suffering' Messiah, 'the son of Joseph,' whose special

mission it would be to bring back the ten tribes, and to subject them

to Messiah, 'the son of David,' but who would perish in the war

against Gog and Magog.

[6574]82 Comp. the work of Dr. Asahel Grant on the Nestorians. His

arguments have been well summarised and expanded in an interesting

note in Mr. Nutt's Sketch of Samaritan History, pp. 2-4.

[6575]83 I would here call special attention to a most interesting

paper on the subject ('A New Afghan Question'), by Mr. H. W. Bellew,

in the 'Journal of the United Service Institution of India,' for 1881,

pp. 49-97.

[6576]84 Yebam 16 b.

[6577]85 Kidd. 69 b.

[6578]86 So Anna from the tribe of Aser, St. Luke ii. 36. Lutterbeck

(Neutest. Lehrbegr. pp. 102, 103) argues that the ten tribes had

become wholly undistinguishable from the other two. But his arguments

are not convincing, and his opinion was certainly not that of those

who lived in the time of Christ, or who reflected their ideas.

[6579]87 Indeed, the word Alnisti (or Alunistin) - 'Greek' - actually

occurs, as in Jer. Sot. 21 b, line 14 from bottom. Böhl (Forsch. n.

ein. Volksb. p. 7) quotes Philo (Leg. ad Caj. p. 1023) in proof that

he regarded the Eastern dispersion as a branch separate from the

Palestinians. But the passage does not convey to me the inference

which he draws from it. Dr. Guillemard (Hebraisms in the Greek Test.)

on Acts vi. 1, agreeing with Dr. Roberts, argues that the term

'Hellenist' indicated only principles, and not birthplace, and that

there were Hebrews and Hellenists in and out of Palestine. But this

view is untenable.

[6580]88 An account of this propaganda of Judaism and of its results

will be given in another connection.

[6581]89 St. Paul fully describes these feelings in the Epistle to the

Romans.

[6582]90 The 'Gerey haShaar,' proselytes of the gate, a designation

which some have derived from the circumstance that Gentiles were not

allowed to advance beyond the Temple Court, but more likely to be

traced to such passages as Ex. xx. 10; Deut. xiv. 21; xxiv. 14.

[6583]91 De Vita Mosis, p. 685; Leg ad Caj. p. 1014.

[6584]92 Leg. ad Caj. p. 1035.

[6585]93 Ag. Apion ii. 17.

[6586]94 Comp. here Targ. Jon. on Judg. v. 2, 9. I feel more

hesitation in appealing to such passages as Ber. 19 a, where we read

of a Rabbi in Rome, Thodos (Theudos?), who flourished several

generations before Hillel, for reasons which the passage itself will

suggest to the student. At the time of Philo, however, such

instructions in the Synagogues at Rome were a long, established

institution (Ad Caj. p. 1014).

[6587]95 filoxen_a, Hebr. xiii. 2.

[6588]96 l_gov parakl_sewv pr_v t_n la_n, Acts xiii. 15.

[6589]97 Men. 99 b, towards the end.

[6590]98 Jer. Chag. ii. 1; comp. Chag. 15.

[6591]99 Jer. Sanh. x. 28 a.

[6592]100 Yad. iv. 6.

[6593]101 Through this literature, which as being Jewish might have

passed unsuspected, a dangerous acquaintance might have been

introduced with Greek writings - the more readily, that for example

Aristobulus described Homer and Hesiod as having 'drawn from our

books' (ap. Euseb. Praepar. Evang. xiii. 12). According to Hamburger

(Real-Encykl. für Bibel u. Talmud, vol. ii. pp. 68, 69), the

expression Siphrey Homeros applies exclusively to the

Judæo-Alexandrian heretical writings; according to Fürst (Kanon d. A.

Test. p. 98), simply to Homeric literature. But see the discussion in

Levy, Neuhebr. u. Chald. Wörterb., vol. i. p. 476 a and b.

[6594]102 Gitt. 35 last line and b.

[6595]103 Comp. Friedländer, Sitteng. Roms, vol. iii. p. 315.

[6596]104 To these causes there should perhaps be added the attempt to

introduce Grecianism by force into Palestine, the consequences which

it may have left, and the existence of a Grecian party in the land.

[6597]105 Aristobulus in Euseb. Præpar. Evang. ix. 6; xiii. 12. The

doubts raised by Hody against this testimony have been generally

repudiated by critics since the treatise by Valkenaer (Diatr. de

Aristob. Jud. appended to Gaisford's ed. of the Præpar. Evang.).

[6598]106 286-284 b.c.

[6599]107 Comp. Josephi Opera, ed. Havercamp, vol. ii. App. pp.

103-132. The best and most critical edition of this letter by Prof. M.

Schmidt, in Merx' Archiv. i. pp. 252-310. The story is found in Jos.

Ant. xii. 2. 2; Ag. Ap. ii. 4; Philo, de Vita Mosis, lib. ii. section

5-7. The extracts are most fully given in Euseb. Præpar. Evang. Some

of the Fathers give the story, with additional embellishments. It was

first critically called in question by Hody (Contra Historiam Aristeæ

de L. X. interpret. dissert. Oxon. 1685), and has since been generally

regarded as legendary. But its foundation in fact has of late been

recognized by well nigh all critics, though the letter itself is

pseudonymic, and full of fabulous details.

[6600]108 This is also otherwise attested. See Keil, Lehrb. d. hist.

kr. Einl. d. A. T., p. 551, note 5.

[6601]109 Meg. i.

[6602]110 Meg. 9 a.

[6603]111 It is scarcely worth while to refute the view of Tychsen,

Jost (Gesch. d. Judenth.), and others, that the Jewish writers only

wrote down for Ptolemy the Hebrew words in Greek letters. But the word

{hebrew} cannot possibly bear that meaning in this connection. Comp.

also Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 31.

[6604]112 According to Sopher. i. 8, by five persons, but that seems a

round number to correspond to the five books of Moses. Frankel (Ueber

d. Einfl. d. paläst. Exeg.) labours, however, to show in detail the

differences between the different translators. But his criticism is

often strained, and the solution of the question is apparently

impossible.

[6605]113 Böhl would have it, 'the Jerusalem Sanhedrin!'

[6606]114 But the expression has also been referred to the

thirty-eighth year of the reign of Euergetes.

[6607]115 To my mind, at least, the historical evidence, apart from

critical considerations, seems very strong. Modern writers on the

other side have confessedly been influenced by the consideration that

the earlier date of the Book of Sirach would also involve a much

earlier date for the close of the O. T. Canon than they are disposed

to admit. More especially would it bear on the question of the

so-called 'Maccabean Psalms,' and the authorship and date of the Book

of Daniel. But historical questions should be treated independently of

critical prejudices. Winer (Bibl. Realwörterb. i. p. 555), and others

after him admit that the Simon of Ecclus. ch. L. was indeed Simon the

Just (i.), but maintain that the Euergetes of the Prologue was the

second of that name, Ptolemy VII., popularly nicknamed Kakergetes.

Comp. the remarks of Fritzsche on this view in the Kurzgef. Exeg.

Handb. z. d. Apokr. 5te Lief. p. xvii.

[6608]116 Comp. here, besides the passages quoted in the previous

note, Baba B. 13 b and 14 b; for the cessation of revelation in the

Maccabean period, 1 Macc. iv. 46; ix. 27; xiv. 41; and, in general,

for the Jewish view on the subject at the time of Christ, Jos. Ag. Ap.

i. 8.

[6609]117 Anterior: Josh., Judg., 1 and 2 Sam. 1 and 2 Kings.

Posterior: Major: Is., Jer., and Ezek.; and the Minor Prophets.

[6610]118 De Vita Contempl. § 3.

[6611]119 They occur chiefly in 1 Kings, the books of Esther, Job,

Proverbs, Jeremiah, and Daniel. In the Pentateuch we find them only in

four passages in the Book of Exodus.

[6612]120 There is also a curious correspondence between the Samaritan

version of the Pentateuch and that of the LXX., which in no less than

about 2,000 passages agree as against our Hebrew, although in other

instances the Greek text either agrees with the Hebrew against the

Samaritan, or else is independent of both. On the connection between

Samaritan literature and Hellenism there are some very interesting

notices in Freudenthal, Hell. Stud. pp. 82-103, 130-136, 186, &c.

[6613]121 The extravagant computations in this respect of Frankel

(both in his work, Ueber d. Einfl. d. Paläst. Exeg., and also in the

Vorstud. z. Sept. pp. 189-191) have been rectified by Herzfeld (Gesch.

d. Vol. Isr. vol. iii.), who, perhaps, goes to the other extreme.

Herzfeld (pp. 548-550) admits - and even this with hesitation - of

only six distinct references to Halakhoth in the following passages in

the LXX.: Gen. ix. 4; xxxii. 32; Lev. xix. 19; xxiv. 7; Deut. xxv. 5;

xxvi. 12. As instances of Haggadah we may mention the renderings in

Gen. v. 24 and Ex. x. 23.

[6614]122 Dähne and Gfrörer have in this respect gone to the same

extreme as Frankel on the Jewish side. But even Siegfried (Philo v.

Alex. p. 8) is obliged to admit that the LXX. rendering, _ d_g_ _n

__ratov _ka_ kataske_astov Gen. i. 2), bears undeniable mark of

Grecian philosophic views. And certainly this is not the sole instance

of the kind.

[6615]123 As in the so-called 'Tiqquney Sopherim,' or 'emendations of

the scribes.' Comp. here generally the investigations of Geiger

(Urschrift u. Ueberse z. d. Bibel). But these, however learned and

ingenious, require, like so many of the dicta of modern Jewish

criticism, to be taken with the utmost caution, and in each case

subjected to fresh examination, since so large a proportion of their

writings are what is best designated by the German Tendenz-Schriften,

and their inferences Tendenz-Schlüsse. But the critic and the

historian should have no Tendenz - except towards simple fact and

historical truth.

[6616]124 Mechilta on Ex. xix.

[6617]125 Ber. 31 b.

[6618]126 Ned. 37 b; Kidd. 49 a.

[6619]127 Meg. 3 a.

[6620]128 Jer. Meg. iv. 3, ed. Krot. p. 75a.

[6621]129 Meg. i. 8. It is, however, fair to confess strong doubt, on

my part, whether this passage may not refer to the Greek translation

of Akylas. At the same time it simply speaks of a translation into

Greek. And before the version of Aquila the LXX. alone held that

place. It is one of the most daring modern Jewish perversions of

history to identify this Akylas, who flourished about 130 after

Christ, with the Aquila of the Book of Acts. It wants even the excuse

of a colourable perversion of the confused story about Akylas, which

Epiphanius who is so generally inaccurate, gives in De Pond. et

Mensur. c. xiv.

[6622]130 The 'Shema' (Jewish creed), with its collects, the eighteen

'benedictions,' and 'the grace at meat.' A later Rabbi vindicated the

use of the 'Shema' in Greek by the argument that the word Shema meant

not only 'Hear,' but also 'understand' (Jer. Sotah vii. 1.) Comp.

sotah vii. 1, 2. In Ber. 40 b, it is said that the Parashah connected

with the woman suspected of adultery, the prayer and confession at the

bringing of the tithes, and the various benedictions over food, may be

said not only in Hebrew, but in any other languages.

[6623]131 Mass. Sopher i. Hal. 7 - at the close of vol. ix. of the

Bab.Talmud.

[6624]132 Hilch. Ged. Taan.

[6625]133 Jer. Meg. i. 11, ed. Krot. p. 71 b and c.

[6626]134 Philo, Vita Mos. ii. ed. Francf. p. 660.

[6627]135 Philo, de Vita Mos. ed. Mangey, ii. p. 140.

[6628]136 All the Apocrypha were originally written in Greek, except 1

Macc., Judith, part of Baruch, probably Tobit, and, of course, the

'Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach.'

[6629]137 Comp. x. - xx.

[6630]138 It is printed in Havercamp's edition of Josephus, vol. ii.

pp. 497-520. The best edition is in Fritzsche, Libri Apocryphi Vet.

Test. (Lips. 1871).

[6631]139 Comp. for ex. Ecclus. xxiv. 6.

[6632]140 ii. 39, 40.

[6633]141 Comp. also Jos. Ag. Ap. ii. 34.

[6634]142 Comp. 2 Macc. vi. 18 - vii. 41.

[6635]143 Ewald (Gesch. d. Volkes Isr., vol. iv. pp. 626-632) has

given a glowing sketch of it. Ewald rightly says that its Grecian

elements have been exaggerated; but Bucher (Lehre vom Logos, pp.

59-62) utterly fails in denying their presence altogether.

[6636]144 Ch. vii. 22-27.

[6637]145 Compare especially ix. 1; xviii. 14-16, where the idea of

sof_a passes into that of the l_gov. Of course the above remarks are

not intended to depreciate the great value of this book, alike in

itself, and in its practical teaching, in its clear enunciation of a

retribution as awaiting man, and in its important bearing on the New

Testament revelation of the l_gov.

[6638]146 Vv. 22-24.

[6639]147 Vv. 25-29.

[6640]148 In ch. viii. 7.

[6641]149 In vv. 19, 20.

[6642]150 ix. 15.

[6643]151 Some Apocryphal books which have not been preserved to us

are mentioned in Talmudical writings, among them one, 'The roll of the

building of the Temple,' alas, lost to us! Comp. Hamburger, vol. ii.

pp. 66-70.

[6644]152 Sanh 100.

[6645]153 Comp. Siegfried, Philo von Alex. pp. 275-299, who, however,

perhaps overstates the matter.

[6646]154 Comp. Siegfried, pp. 9-16; Hartmann, Enge Verb. d. A. Test.

mit d. N., pp. 568-572.

[6647]155 This is to be carefully distinguished from the typical

interpretation and from the mystical - the type being prophetic, the

mystery spiritually understood.

[6648]156 Not to speak of such sounder interpretations as that of the

brazen serpent (Wisd. xvi. 6, 7), and of the Fall (ii. 24), or of the

view presented of the early history of the chosen race in ch. x., we

may mention as instances of allegorical interpretation that of the

manna (xvi. 26-28), and of the high-priestly dress (xviii. 24), to

which, no doubt, others might be added. But I cannot find sufficient

evidence of this allegorical method in the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of

Sirach. The reasoning of Hartmann (u. s., pp. 542-547) seems to me

greatly strained. Of the existence of allegorical interpretations in

the Synoptic Gospels, or of any connection with Hellenism, such as

Hartmann, Siegfried, and Loesner (Obs. ad. N.T. e Phil. Alex) put into

them, I cannot, on examination, discover any evidence. Similarity of

expressions, or even of thought, afford no evidence of inward

connection. Of the Gospel by St. John we shall speak in the sequel. In

the Pauline Epistles we find, as might be expected, some allegorical

interpretations, chiefly in those to the Corinthians, perhaps owing to

the connection of that church with Apollos. Comp here 1 Cor. ix. 9; x.

4 (Philo, Quod deter. potiori insid. 31); 2 Cor. iii. 16; Gal. iv. 21.

Of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse we cannot here speak.

[6649]157 See p. 25.

[6650]158 A similar principle applied to the prohibition of such

species as the mouse or the weasel, not only because they destroyed

everything, but because the latter, from its mode of conceiving and

bearing, symbolized listening to evil tales, and exaggerated, lying,

or malicious speech.

[6651]159 Of course this method is constantly adopted by Josephus.

Comp. for example, Ant. iii. 1. 6; 7. 7.

[6652]160 Or Dorshey Chamuroth, searchers of difficult passages. Zunz.

Gottesd. Vortr. p. 323. note b.

[6653]161 Ps. lxii. 11; Sanh. 34 a.

[6654]162 The seventy languages in which the Law was supposed to have

been written below Mount Ebal (Sotah vii. 5). I cannot help feeling

this may in part also refer to the various modes of interpreting Holy

Scripture, and that there is an allusion to this Shabb. 88 b, where

Ps. lxviii. 12. and Jer. xxiii. 29, are quoted, the latter to show

that the word of God is like a hammer that breaks the rock in a

thousand pieces. Comp. Rashi on Gen. xxxiii. 20.

[6655]163 Perhaps we ought here to point out one of the most important

principles of Rabbinism, which has been almost entirely overlooked in

modern criticism of the Talmud. It is this: that any ordinance, not

only of the Divine law, but of the Rabbis, even though only given for

a particular time or occasion, or for a special reason, remains in

full force for all time unless it be expressly recalled (Betsah 5 b).

Thus Maimonides (Sepher ha Mitsv.) declares the law to extirpate the

Canaanites as continuing in its obligations. The inferences as to the

perpetual obligation, not only of the ceremonial law, but of

sacrifices, will be obvious, and their bearing on the Jewish

controversy need not be explained. Comp. Chief Rabbi Holdheim. d.

Ceremonial Gesetz in Messasreich, 1845.

[6656]164 About 160 b.c.

[6657]165 Præpar. Evang. vii. 14. 1 ; vii. 10. 1-17; xiii. 12.

[6658]166 As Val. Kenaer puts it, Daitr. de Aristob. Jud. p. 73.

[6659]167 4 Esdras xiv. 44, 46.

[6660]168 Rom. xiii. 11.

[6661]169 The kair_v of St. Paul seems here used in exactly the same

sense as in later Hebrew {hebrew}. The Septuagint renders it so in

five passages (Ezr. 5:3; Dan. 4:33; 6:10; 7:22, 25).

[6662]170 Of course, it suits Jewish, writers, like Dr. Jost, to

deprecate the value of the Pseudepigrapha. Their ardour of expectancy

ill agrees with the modern theories, which would eliminate, if

possible, the Messianic hope from ancient Judaism.

[6663]171 Comp. Dillmann in Herzog's Real-Encykl. vol. xii. p. 301.

[6664]172 For a brief review of the 'Pseudepigraphic Writings,' see

Appendix I.

[6665]173 Hausrath (N.T. Zeitg. vol. ii. p. 222 &c.) has given a

highly imaginative picture of Philo- as, indeed, of many other persons

and things.

[6666]174 39 or 40 a.d.

[6667]175 Siegfried has, with immense labor, collected a vast number

of parallel expressions, chiefly from Plato and Plutarch (pp. 39-47).

[6668]176 Comp. Grossmann, Quæ st. Phil. i. p. 5 &c.

[6669]177 In this sketch of the system of Philo I have largely availed

myself of the careful analysis of Siegfried.

[6670]178 It should be noted that these are also Talmudical canons,

not indeed for allegorical interpretation, but as pointing to some

special meaning, since there was not a word or particle in Scripture

without a definite meaning and object.

[6671]179 Baba K 64 a.

[6672]180 To illustrate what use might be made of such alterations,

the Midrash (Ber. R. 65) would have us punctuate Gen. xxvii. 19, as

follows: 'And Jacob said unto his father, I (viz. am he who will

receive the ten commandments) - (but) Esau (is) thy firstborn.' In

Yalkut there is the still more curious explanation that in heaven the

soul of Jacob was the firstborn!

[6673]181 Each of these positions is capable of ample proof from

Philo's writings, as shown by Siegfried. But only a bare statement of

these canons was here possible.

[6674]182 Comp. our above outline with the 'XXV. theses de modis et

formulis quibus pr. Hebr. doctores SS. interpretari etc. soliti

fuerunt,' in Surenhusius, B_blov katallag_v, pp. 57-88.

[6675]183 For a comparison between Philo and Rabbinic theology, see

Appendix II.: 'Philo and Rabbinic Theology.' Freudenthal (Hellen.

Studien, pp. 67 &c.) aptly designates this mixture of the two as

'Hellenistic Midrash,' it being difficult sometimes to distinguish

whether it originated in Palestine or in Egypt, or else in both

independently. Freudenthal gives a number of curious instances in

which Hellenism and Rabbinism agree in their interpretations. For

other interesting comparisons between Haggadic interpretations and

those of Philo, see Joel, Blick in d. Religionsgesch. i. p. 38 &c.

[6676]184 Ber. 31 b.

[6677]185 Ber. R. 31.

[6678]186 Ber. R. 70.

[6679]187 Thus, to give only a few out of many examples, Ruth is

derived from ravah, to satiate to give to drink, because David, her

descendant, satiated God with his Psalms of praise (Ber. 7 b). Here

the principle of the significance of Bible names is deduced from Ps.

xlvi. 8 (9 in the Hebrew): 'Come, behold the works of the Lord, who

hath made names on earth,' the word 'desolations,' shamoth, being

altered to shemoth, 'names.' In general, that section, from Ber. 3 b,

to the end of 8 a, is full of Haggadic Scripture interpretations. On

fol. 4 a there is the curious symbolical derivation of Mephibosheth,

who is supposed to have set David right on halakhic questions, as

Mippi bosheth: 'from my mouth shaming,' 'because he put to shame the

face of David in the Halakhah.' Similarly in Siphré (Par.

Behaalothekha, ed. Friedmann, p. 20 a) we have very beautiful and

ingenious interpretations of the names Reuel, Hobab and Jethro.

[6680]188 It would be impossible here to give the references, which

would occupy too much space.

[6681]189 For want of handier material I must take leave to refer to

my brief sketch of the Kabbalah in the 'History of the Jewish Nation,'

pp. 434-446.

[6682]190 Chag. ii. 1.

[6683]191 Ab. v. 4.

[6684]192 In short, the l_gov spermatik_v of the Stoics.

[6685]193 Supposed to mean either numerationes, or splendour. But why

not derive the word from sfa_ra? The ten are: Crown, Wisdom,

Intelligence, Mercy, Judgment, Beauty, Triumph, Praise, Foundation,

Kingdom.

[6686]194 For the teaching of Eastern Judaism in this respect, see

Appendix II.: 'Philo and Rabbinic Theology.'

[6687]195 A very interesting question arises: how far Philo was

acquainted with, and influenced by, the Jewish traditional law or the

Halakhah. This has been treated by Dr. B. Ritter in an able tractate

(Philo u. die Halach.), although he attributes more to Philo than the

evidence seems to admit.

[6688]196 Jer. Ber. ix. 7.

[6689]197 At the same time there is a remarkable difference here

between Philo and Rabbinism. Philo holds that the creation of the

world was brought about by the Potencies, but the Law was given

directly through Moses, and not by the mediation of angels. But this

latter was certainly the view generally entertained in Palestine as

expressed in the LXX. rendering of Deut. xxxii. 2, in the Targumim on

that passage, and more fully still in Jos. Ant. xv. 5. 3, in the

Midrashim and in the Talmud, where we are told (Macc. 24 a) that only

the opening words, 'I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other

gods but Me,' were spoken by God Himself. Comp. also Acts vii. 38, 53;

Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2.

[6690]198 Hammejuchad, 'appropriatum;' hammephorash, 'expositum,'

'separatum,' the 'tetragrammaton,' or four-lettered name, {hebrew}.

There was also a Shem with 'twelve,' and one with 'forty-two' letters

(Kidd. 71a).

[6691]199 Or Ruach ham Maqom, Ab. iii. 10, and frequently in the

Talmud.

[6692]200 Levy (Neuhebr. Wörterb. i. p. 374 a.) seems to imply that in

the Midrash the term dibbur occupies the same place and meaning. But

with all deference I cannot agree with this opinion, nor do the

passages quoted bear it out.

[6693]201 The 'word,' as spoken, is distinguished from the 'Word' as

speaking, or revealing Himself. The former is generally designated by

the term 'pithgama.' Thus in Gen. XV. 1, 'After these words (things)

came the "pithgama" of Jehovah to Abram in prophecy, saying, Fear not,

Abram, My "Memra" shall be thy strength, and thy very great reward.'

Still, the term Memra, as applied not only to man, but also in

reference to God, is not always the equivalent of 'the Logos.'

[6694]202 The various passages in the Targum of Onkelos, the

Jerusalem, and the Pseudo-Jonathan Targum on the Pentateuch will be

found enumerated and classified, as those in which it is a doubtful, a

fair, or an unquestionable inference, that the word Memra is intended

for God revealing Himself, in Appendix II.: 'Philo and Rabbinic

Theology.'

[6695]203 As, for example, Gen. xxviii. 21, 'the Memra of Jehovah

shall be my God.'

[6696]204 As, for example, Num. xxiii. 21, 'the Memra of Jehovah their

God is their helper, and the Shekhinah of their King is in the midst

of them.'

[6697]205 That term is often used by Onkelos. Besides, the expression

itself is 'the Memra of Jehovah.'

[6698]206 Onkelos only once (in Ex. iv. 24) paraphrases Jehovah by

'Malakha.'

[6699]207 Metatron, either = met_ qr_non, or met_ t_rannon. In the

Talmud it is applied to the Angel of Jehovah (Ex. xxiii. 20), 'the

Prince of the World,' 'the Prince of the Face' or 'of the Presence,'

as they call him; he who sits in the innermost chamber before God,

while the other angels only hear His commands from behind the veil

(Chag. 15 a; 16 a; Toseft. ad Chull. 60 a; Jeb. 16 b). This Metatron

of the Talmud and the Kabbalah is also the Adam Qadmon, or archetypal

man.

[6700]208 Of deep interest is Onkelos' rendering of Deut. xxxiii. 27,

where, instead of 'underneath are the everlasting arms,' Onkelos has,

'and by His Memra was the world created,' exactly as in St John i. 10.

Now this divergence of Onkelos from the Hebrew text seems

unaccountable. Winer, whose inaugural dissertation, 'De Onkeloso

ejusque paraph. Chald.' Lips. 1820, most modern writers have followed

(with amplifications, chiefly from Luzzato's Philoxenus), makes no

reference to this passage, nor do his successors, so far as I know. It

is curious that, as our present Hebrew text of this verse consists of

three words, so does the rendering of Onkelos, and that both end with

the same word. Is the rendering of Onkelos then a paraphrase, or does

it represent another reading? Another interesting passage is Deut.

viii. 3. Its quotation by Christ in St. Matt. iv. 4 is deeply

interesting, as read in the light of the rendering of Onkelos, 'Not by

bread alone is man sustained, but by every forthcoming Memra from

before Jehovah shall man live.' Yet another rendering of Onkelos is

significantly illustrative of 1 Cor. x. 1-4. He renders Deut. xxxiii.

3 'with power He brought them out of Egypt; they were led under thy

cloud; they journeyed according to (by) thy Memra.' Does this

represent a difference in Hebrew from the admittedly difficult text in

our present Bible? Winer refers to it as an instance in which Onkelos

'suopte ingenio et copiose admodum eloquitur vatum divinorum mentem,'

adding, 'ita ut de his, quas singulis vocibus inesse crediderit,

significationibus non possit recte judicari;' and Winer's successors

say much the same. But this is to state, not to explain, the

difficulty. In general, we may here be allowed to say that the

question of the Targumim has scarcely received as yet sufficient

treatment. Mr. Deutsch's Article in Smith's 'Dictionary of the Bible'

(since reprinted in his 'Remains') is, though brilliantly written,

unsatisfactory. Dr. Davidson (in Kitto's Cyclop., vol. iii. pp.

948-966) is, as always, careful, laborious, and learned. Dr. Volck's

article (in Herzog's Real-Encykl., vol. xv. pp. 672-683) is without

much intrinsic value, though painstaking. We mention these articles,

besides the treatment of the subject in the Introduction to the Old

Testament (Keil, De Wette-Schrader, Bleek-kamphausen, Reuss), and the

works of Zunz, Geiger, Noldeke, and others, to whom partial reference

has already been made. Frankel's interesting and learned book (Zu dem

Targum der Propheten) deals almost exclusively with the Targum

Jonathan, on which it was impossible to enter within our limits. As

modern brochures of interest the following three may be mentioned:

Maybaum, Anthropomorphien bei Onkelos; Grönemann, Die Jonath. Pentat.

Uebers. im Verhaltn. z. Halacha; and Singer, Onkelos im Verhaltn. z.

Halacha.

[6701]209 Gen. xlix. 10, 11; Num. xxiv. 17.

[6702]210 See the enumeration of these 70 Names in the Baal-ha-Turim

on Numb. xi. 16.

[6703]211 Comp. Siegfried, u. s., pp. 221-223.

[6704]212 Gen. i. 27.

[6705]213 De Leg. Alleg. iii. 25, 26.

[6706]214 For a full discussion of this similarity of form and

divergence of spirit, between Philo - or, rather, between

Alexandrianism - and the Epistle to the Hebrews, the reader is

referred to the masterly treatise by Riehm (Der Lehrbegriff d.

Hebräerbr. ed. 1867, especially pp. 247-268, 411-424, 658-670, and

855-860). The author's general view on the subject is well and

convincingly formulated on p. 249. We must, however, add, in

opposition to Riehm, that, by his own showing the writer of the

Epistle to the Hebrews displays few traces of a Palestinian training.

[6707]215 On the subject of Philo's Logos generally the brochure of

Harnoch (Königsberg, 1879) deserves perusal, although it does not

furnish much that is new. In general, the student of Philo ought

especially to study the sketch by Zeller in his Philosophie der Gr.

vol. iii. pt. ii. 3rd ed. pp. 338-418.

[6708]216 With singular and characteristic inconsistency, Philo,

however, ascribes also to God the creation of matter (de Somn. i. 13).

[6709]217 As for example Ecclus. iii. 21-24.

[6710]218 So the Talmudists certainly understood it, Jer. Chag. ii. 1.

[6711]219 Comp. Grimm, Exeg. Handb. zu d. Apokr., Lief. vi. pp. 55,

56.

[6712]220 They were arranged into those concerning the Maasey

Bereshith (Creation), and the Maasey Merkabbah, 'the chariot' of

Ezekiel's vision (Providence in the widest sense, or God's

manifestation in the created world).

[6713]221 Of the four celebrities who entered the 'Pardes,' or

enclosed Paradise of theosophic speculation, one became an apostate,

another died, a third went wrong (Ben Soma), and only Akiba escaped

unscathed, according to the Scripture saying, 'Draw me, and we will

run' (Chag. 14 b).

[6714]222 'It is not lawful to enter upon the Maasey Bereshith in

presence of two, nor upon the Merkabhah in presence of one, unless he

be a "sage," and understands of his own knowledge. Any one who

ratiocinates on these four things, it were better for him that he had

not been born: What is above and what is below; what was afore, and

what shall be hereafter.' (Chag. ii. 1).

[6715]223 Shem. R. 13.

[6716]224 'Ben Soma went astray (mentally): he shook the (Jewish)

world.'

[6717]225 That criticism, which one would designate as impertinent,

which would find this view in 2 Peter iii. 5, is, alas! not confined

to Jewish writers, but hazarded even by De Wette.

[6718]226 Jer. Chag. 77 a.

[6719]227 Judah bar Pazi, in the second century. Ben Soma lived in the

first century of our era.

[6720]228 According to the Jerusalem Talmud (Ber. i. I) the firmament

was at first soft, and only gradually became hard. According to Ber.

R. 10, God created the world from a mixture of fire and snow, other

Rabbis suggesting four original elements, according to the quarters of

the globe, or else six, adding to them that which is above and that

which is below. A very curious idea is that of R. Joshua ben Levi,

according to which all the works of creation were really finished on

the first day, and only, as it were, extended on the other days. This

also represents really a doubt of the Biblical account of creation.

Strange though it may sound, the doctrine of development was derived

from the words (Gen. ii. 4). 'These are the generations of heaven and

earth when they were created, in the day when Jahveh Elohim made earth

and heavens.' It was argued, that the expression implied, they were

developed from the day in which they had been created. Others seem to

have held, that the three principal things that were created - earth,

heaven, and water - remained, each for three days, at the end of which

they respectively developed what is connected with them (Ber. R. 12).

[6721]229 Ber. R. i.

[6722]230 For further notices on the Cosmology and Anthropology of

Philo, see Appendix II.: 'Philo and Rabbinic Theology.'

[6723]231 We cannot help quoting the beautiful Haggadic explanation of

the name Adam, according to its three letters, A, D, M - as including

these three names, Adam, David, Messiah.

[6724]232 Raymundus Martini, in his 'Pugio Fidei' (orig. ed. p. 675;

ed. Voisin et Carpzov, pp. 866, 867), quotes from the book Siphré: 'Go

and learn the merit of Messiah the King, and the reward of the

righteous from the first Adam, on whom was laid only one commandment

of a prohibitive character, and he transgressed it. See how many

deaths were appointed on him, and on his generations, and on the

generations of his generations to the end of all generations.

(Wünsche, Leiden d. Mess. p. 65, makes here an unwarrantable addition,

in his translation.) But which attribute (measuring?) is the greater -

the attribute of goodness or the attribute of punishment

(retribution)? He answered, the attribute of goodness is the greater,

and the attribute of punishment the less. And Messiah the King, who

was chastened and suffered for the transgressors, as it is said, "He

was wounded for our transgressions," and so on, how much more shall He

justify (make righteous, by His merit) all generations; and this is

what is meant when it is written, "And Jehovah made to meet upon Him

the sin of us all."' We have rendered this passage as literally as

possible, but we are bound to add that it is not found in any now

existing copy of Siphré.

[6725]233 Death is not considered an absolute evil. In short, all the

various consequences which Rabbinical writings ascribe to the sin of

Adam may be designated either as physical, or, if mental, as amounting

only to detriment, loss, or imperfectness. These results had been

partially counteracted by Abraham, and would be fully removed by the

Messiah. Neither Enoch nor Elijah had sinned, and accordingly they did

not die. Comp. generally, Hamburger, Geist d. Agada, pp. 81-84, and in

regard to death as connected with Adam, p. 85.

[6726]234 Ber. 61 a.

[6727]235 These are also hypostatised as Angels. Comp. Levy, Chald.

Wörterb. p. 342 a; Neuhebr. Wörterb. p. 259, a, b.

[6728]236 Or with 'two reins,' the one, advising to good, being at his

right, the other, counselling evil, at his left, according to Eccles.

x. 2 (Ber. 61 a, towards the end of the page).

[6729]237 Sanh. 91 b.

[6730]238 In a sense its existence was necessary for the continuance

of this world. The conflict between these two impulses constituted the

moral life of man.

[6731]239 The solitary exception here is 4 Esdras, where the Christian

doctrine of original sin is most strongly expressed, being evidently

derived from New Testament teaching. Comp. especially 4 Esdras (our

Apocryphal 2 Esdras) vii. 46-53, and other passages. Wherein the hope

of safety lay, appears in ch. ix.

[6732]240 Symbolised by Lot's wife.

[6733]241 Symbolised by Ebher, Hebrew.

[6734]242 The Sabbath, Jerusalem.

[6735]243 For further details on these points see Appendix II.: 'Philo

and Rabbinic Theology.'

[6736]244 The views of Philo on the Messiah will be presented in

another connection.

[6737]245 This is not the place to enter on the question of the

composition, date, and authorship of the four Gospels. But as regards

the point on which negative criticism has of late spoken strongest,

and on which, indeed (as Weiss rightly remarks) the very existence of

'the Tübingen School' depends - that of the Johannine authorship of

the fourth Gospel, I would refer to Weiss, Leben Jesu (1882: vol. i.

pp. 84-139), and to Dr. Salmon's Introd. to the New Test. pp. 266-365.

[6738]246 No one not acquainted with this literature can imagine the

character of the arguments sometimes used by a certain class of

critics. To say that they proceed on the most forced perversion of the

natural and obvious meaning of passages, is but little. But one cannot

restrain moral indignation on finding that to Evangelists and Apostles

is imputed, on such grounds, not only systematic falsehood, but

falsehood with the most sinister motives.

[6739]247 I do not, of course, mean that the narration of St. Mark was

not itself derived chiefly from Apostolic preaching, especially that

of St. Peter. In general, the question of the authorship and source of

the various Gospels must be reserved for separate treatment in another

place.

[6740]248 Comp. Mangold's ed. of Bleek, Einl. in d. N.T. (3te Aufl.

1875), p. 346.

[6741]249 With the sole exception of St. Matt. xii. 18, where the

expression is a quotation from the LXX. of Is. xlii. 1.

[6742]250 First expressed by Delitzsch (Bibl. Comm. ü. d. Proph. Jes.

p. 414), and then adopted by Oehler (Theol. d. A. Test. vol. ii. pp.

270-272).

[6743]251 The two fundamental principles in the history of the Kingdom

of God are selection and development. It is surely remarkable, not

strange, that these are also the two fundamental truths in the history

of that other Kingdom of God, Nature, if modern science has read them

correctly. These two substantives would mark the facts as ascertained;

the adjectives, which are added to them by a certain class of

students, mark only their inferences from these facts. These facts may

be true, even if as yet incomplete, although the inferences may be

false. Theology should not here rashly interfere. But whatever the

ultimate result, these two are certainly the fundamental facts in the

history of the Kingdom of God, and, marking them as such, the devout

philosopher may rest contented.

[6744]252 The Gnostics, to whom, in the opinion of many, so frequent

references are made in the writings of St. John and St. Paul, were

only an offspring (rather, as the Germans would term it, an Abart) of

Alexandrianism on the one hand, and on the other of Eastern notions,

which are so largely embodied in the later Kabbalah.

[6745]253 A complement, not a supplement, as many critics put it

(Ewald, Weizsäcker, and even Hengstenberg) - least of all a

rectification (Godet, Evang. Joh. p. 633).

[6746]254 Keim (Leben Jesu von Nazara, i. a, pp. 112-114) fully

recognises this; but I entirely differ from the conclusions of his

analytical comparison of Philo with the fourth Gospel.

[6747]255 St. John xiv. 26

[6748]256 The student who has carefully considered the views expressed

by Philo about the Logos, and analysed, as in the Appendix, the

passages in the Targumim in which the word Memra occurs, cannot fail

to perceive the immense difference in the presentation of the Logos by

St. John. Yet M. Renan, in an article in the 'Contemporary Review' for

September 1877, with utter disregard of the historical evidence on the

question, maintains not only the identity of these three sets of

ideas, but actually grounds on it his argument against the

authenticity of the fourth Gospel. Considering the importance of the

subject, it is not easy to speak with moderation of assertions so bold

based on statements so entirely inaccurate.

[6749]257 Dr. Bucher, whose book, Des Apostels Johannes Lehre vom

Logos, deserves careful perusal, tries to trace the reason of these

peculiarities as indicated in the Prologue of the fourth Gospel.

Bucher differentiates at great length between the Logos of Philo and

of the fourth Gospel. He sums up his views by stating that in the

Prologue of St. John the Logos is presented as the fulness of Divine

Light and Life. This is, so to speak, the theme, while the Gospel

history is intended to present the Logos as the giver of this Divine

Light and Life. While the other Evangelists ascend from the

manifestation to the idea of the Son of God, St. John descends from

the idea of the Logos, as expressed in the Prologue, to its concrete

realisation in His history. The latest tractate (at the present

writing, 1882) on the Gospel of St. John, by Dr. Müller, Die Johann.

Frage, gives a good summary of the argument on both sides, and

deserves the careful attention of students of the question.

[6750]258 I cannot agree with Weiss (u. s., p. 122) that the great

object of the fourth Gospel was to oppose the rising Gnostic movement,

This may have been present to the Apostle's mind, as evidenced in his

Epistle, but the object in view could not have been mainly, nor even

primarily, negative and controversial.

[6751]259 Acts xviii 24-28

[6752]260 What charm Egypt had for the Romans may be gathered from so

many of their mosaics and frescoes. Comp. Friedländer, u. s. vol. ii.

pp. 134-136.

[6753]261 This immense lighthouse was square up to the middle, then

covered by an octagon, the top being round. The last recorded repairs

to this magnificent structure of blocks of marble were made in the

year 1303 of our era.

[6754]262 The average passage from Alexandria to Puteoli was twelve

days, the ships touching at Malta and in Sicily. It was in such a

ship, the 'Castor and Pollux' carrying wheat, that St. Paul sailed

from Malta to Puteoli, where it would be among the first arrivals of

the season.

[6755]263 They bore, painted on the two sides of the prow, the emblems

of the gods to whom they were dedicated, and were navigated by

Egyptian pilots, the most reowned in the world. One of these vessels

is described as 180 by 45 feet and of about 1,575 tons, and is

computed to have returned to its owner nearly 3,000l. annually. (Comp.

Friedländer, u.s. vol. ii. p. 131, &c.) And yet these were small ships

compared with those built for the conveyance of marble blocks and

columns, and especially of obelisks. One of these is said to have

carried, besides an obelisk, 1,200 passenger, a freight of paper,

nitre, pepper, linen, and a large cargo of wheat.

[6756]264 The journey took about three months, either up the Nile,

thence by caravan, and again by sea; or else perhaps by the Ptolemy

Canal and the Red Sea.

[6757]265 It included gold-dust, ivory, and mother-of-pearl from the

interior of Africa, spices from Arabia, pearls from the Gulf of

Persia, precious stones and byssus from India, and silk from China.

[6758]266 On the existence of the Therapeutes comp. Art. Philo in

Smith & Wace's Dict. of Chr. Biogr. vol. iv.

[6759]267 Mommsen (Röm. Gesch. v. p. 489) ascribes this rather to

Ptolemy I.

[6760]268 Sukk. 51 b.

[6761]269 Instead of the seven-branched golden candlestick there was a

golden lamp, suspended from a chain of the same metal.

[6762]270 Is xix. 18.

[6763]271 Philo, ii. 646, ed. Mangey.

[6764]272 Jos. Ag. Ap. i. 7.

[6765]273 Men. xiii. 10, and the Gemara, 109 a and b.

[6766]274 Strabo in Jos. Ant. xiv. 7, 2.

[6767]275 Could there have been any such meaning in laying the Roman

cross which Jesus had to bear upon a Cyrenian (St. Luke xxiii. 26)? A

symbolical meaning it certainly has, as we remember that the last

Jewish rebellion (132-135 a.d.), which had Bar Cochba for its Messiah,

first broke out in Cyrene. What terrible vengeance was taken on those

who followed the false Christ, cannot here be told.

[6768]276 Jewish inscriptions have also been found in Mauritania and

Algiers.

[6769]277 On a tombstone at Capua (Mommsen, Inscr. R. Neap. 3,657,

apud Schürer, p 629). The subject is of great importance as

illustrating the rule of the Synagogue in the days of Christ. Another

designation on the gravestones pat_r sunagwg_v seems to refer solely

to age - one being described as 110 years old.

[6770]278 Jost, Gesch. d. Judenth. i. p. 345.

[6771]279 Marquardt (Röm. Staatsverwalt. vol. i. p. 297). Note 5

suggests that _qnov may here mean classes, ordo.

[6772]280 Strabo in Jos. Ant. xiv. 7. 2

[6773]281 The office itself would seem to have been continued. (Jos.

Ant. xix. 5. 2.)

[6774]282 Philo, in Flacc. ed. Mangey, ii. 527

[6775]283 Comp. Wesseling, de Jud. Archont. pp. 63, &c., apud Schürer,

pp. 627,628.

[6776]284 Jos. Ant. xiv. 13. 5; War. i. 13, 5

[6777]285 Ant. xix 5. 1

[6778]286 Ant. xviii. 6.3

[6779]287 Ant. xix. 5. 1; xx. 5. 3

[6780]288 Comp., for example, such a trenchant chapter as Baruch vi.,

or the 2nd Fragm. of the Erythr. Sibyl, vv. 21-33.

[6781]289 Probably about 200 b.c.

[6782]290 Comp. Friedländer, u. s. ii. p. 155.

[6783]291 A very good sketch of Apion is given by Hausrath, Neutest.

Zeitg. vol. ii. pp. 187-195.

[6784]292 Jos. Ag. Ap. ii. 4, 5, 6.

[6785]293 Leg. ad Caj. ed. Frcf.

[6786]294 Comp. Tacitus, Hist. v. 2-4; Plut. Sympos. iv. 5

[6787]295 Hist. Nat. xiii. 4.

[6788]296 Persius v. 184.

[6789]297 Comp. the quotation of such scenes in the Introd. to the

Midrash on Lamentations.

[6790]298 Juv. Sat. xiv. 103, 104

[6791]299 Hist. v. 13

[6792]300 Ann. ii.85, Comp. Suet. Tib. 36.

[6793]301 Philo, Leg. ad Caj. ed. Frcf. p. 101.

[6794]302 Life 3.

[6795]303 Lutterbeck (Neutest. Lehrbegr. p. 119), following up the

suggestions of Wieseler (Chron. d. Apost. Zeitalt. pp. 384, 402,

etc.), regards these priests as the accusers of St. Paul, who brought

about his martyrdom.

[6796]304 Comp., for example, Mart. xi. 94; Jos. Life 3.

[6797]305 Martialis, u. s. The 'Anchialus' by whom the poet would have

the Jew swear, is a corruption of Anochi Elohim ('I am God') in Ex.

xx. 2. Comp. Ewald, Gesch. Isr. vol. vii. p. 27.

[6798]306 Mart. i.41; xii. 57.

[6799]307 Described by Bosio, but since unknown. Comp. Friedländer, u.

s. vol. iii. pp. 510, 511.

[6800]308 Sat. iii.13; vi. 542.

[6801]309 Comp. Friedländer, u. s. vol. iii. p.510.

[6802]310 Midr. R. on Ex. 36.

[6803]311 Jos. Ant. xvii. 12. 1; War ii. 7. 1.

[6804]312 Comp. Cassel, in Ersch u. Gruber's Encyclop. 2d sect. vol.

xxvii. p. 147.

[6805]313 Acts xxviii. 17.

[6806]314 Comp. Friedländer, u. s. vol. ii. pp. 17-204 passim.

[6807]315 It was probably this unity of Israelitish interests which

Cicero had in view (Pro Flacco, 28) when he took such credit for his

boldness in daring to stand up against the Jews - unless, indeed, the

orator only meant to make a point in favour of his client.

[6808]316 Jos. Ant. xvii. 11. 1; War. ii. 6. 1.

[6809]317 Life 3.

[6810]318 Schiller (Gesch. d. Röm. Kaiserreichs, p. 583) denies that

Poppæa was a proselyte. It is, indeed, true, as he argues, that the

fact of her entombment affords no absolute evidence of this, if taken

by itself; but comp. Jos. Ant. xx. 8. 11; Life 3.

[6811]319 The question of Jewish proselytes will be treated in another

place.

[6812]320 19 a.d.

[6813]321 Comp. Jos. Ant. xiv. 10, passim, and xvi. 6. These edicts

are collated in Krebs. Decreta Romanor. pro Jud. facta, with long

comments by the author, and by Levyssohn.

[6814]322 Ob.280 b.c.

[6815]323 Ab. Sar ii. 6.

[6816]324 Jos. Ant. xii. 3. 1.

[6817]325 44 b.c.

[6818]326 Suet. Cæs. 84.

[6819]327 Jos. Ant. xiv. 10, passim; Acts xxii. 25-29.

[6820]328 Comp. Acts xix. 14 ix. 2.

[6821]329 Jos. Ant. xii. 2. 5; xiii. 3. 4; Ag. Ap.ii. 5; Ant. xiv. 16.

4; War v. 13.

[6822]330 Jos. War ii. 10. 4; ii. 17.

[6823]331 One of these tablets has lately been excavated. Comp. 'The

Temple: its Ministry and Services in the Time of Christ,' p. 24.

[6824]332 War iv. 4. 3; comp. War ii. 17. 2-4.

[6825]333 War, vii. 3. 3.

[6826]334 War, vii. 5. 2.

[6827]335 Comp. generally Neubauer, Géogr. du Talmud, pp. 312, 313.

[6828]336 Acts x.28.

[6829]337 Comp. Rom. ii. 17-24.

[6830]338 Ber. iii. 3; Meg. i. 8; Moed K. iii. 4; Men. iii. 7. Comp.

Jos. Ant. iv.8.13; and the tractate Mezuzah in Kirchheim, Septem libri

Talmud. parvi Hierosol. pp. 12-17.

[6831]339 St. Matt. xxiii. 5; Ber. i. 3; Shabb. vi. 2; vii. 3; xvi. 1;

Er. x. 1, 2; Sheq. iii. 2; Meg. i. 8; iv. 8; Moed. Q. iii. 4; Sanh.

xi. 3; Men. iii. 7; iv. 1; Kel. xviii. 8; Miqv. x. 3; yad. iii. 3.

Comp. Kirchheim, Tract. Tephillin, u. s. pp. 18-21.

[6832]340 Moed K. iii. 4; Eduy. iv. 10; Men. iii. 7; iv. 1. Comp.

Kirchheim, Tract. Tsitsith, u. s. pp. 22-24.

[6833]341 The Tephillin enclosed a transcript of Exod. xiii. 1-10,

11-16; Deut. vi. 4-9; xi. 13-21. The Tsitsith were worn in obedience

to the injunction in Num. xv. 37 etc.; Deut. xxii. 12 (comp. St. Matt.

ix. 20; xiv. 36; St. Mark v. 27; St. Luke viii. 44).

[6834]342 It is remarkable that Aristeas seems to speak only of the

phylacteries on the arm, and Philo of those for the head, while the

LXX. takes the command entirely in a metaphorical sense. This has

already been pointed out in that book of gigantic learning, Spencer,

De Leg. Heb. p. 1213. Frankel (Uber d. Einfl. d. Pal. Exeg., pp. 89,

90) tries in vain to controvert the statement. The insufficiency of

his arguments has been fully shown by Herzfeld (Gesch. d. Volk. Isr.

vol. iii. p. 224).

[6835]343 Acts xv. 21.

[6836]344 sunagwg_ Jos. Ant. xix. 6. 3; War, ii. 14. 4, 5; vii. 3. 3;

Philo, Quod omnis probus liber, ed. Mangey, ii. p. 458; sunag_gion

Philo, Ad Caj. ii. p. 591; sabbate_on Jos. Ant. xvi. 66. 2

proseukt_rionPhilo, Vita Mosis, lib. iii., ii. p. 168.

[6837]345 Acts xvi.13

[6838]346 proseuc_ Jos. Ant. xiv. 10 23, life 54; Philo, In Flacc. ii.

p. 523; Ad Caj. ii. pp. 565, 596; Epiphan. Haer. 1xxx. 1. Comp. Juven.

Sat. iii. 296: 'Ede ubi consistas? in qua te quæro proseucha?'

[6839]347 Comp., among others, Ovid, Ars Amat. i. 76; Juv. Sat. xvi.

96, 97; Hor. Sat. i. 5. 100; 9. 70; Suet. Aug. 93.

[6840]348 Persius v. 180.

[6841]349 St. John iv. 20.

[6842]350 Comp. Jos. Ant. xiv. 7. 2; xvi. 6, passium; Philo, De

Monarchia, ed. Mangey, ii. p. 224; Ad Caj. ii. p. 568; Contra Flacc.

ii. p. 524.

[6843]351 Philo, De Monarchia, ii. p. 223.

[6844]352 Philo, in a fragment preserved in Euseb., Præpar. Ev. viii.

13. What the Temple was in the estimation of Israel, and what its loss

boded, not only to them, but to the whole world, will be shown in a

later part of this book.

[6845]353 War vi. 9. 3; comp. ii. 14. 3

[6846]354 Even Maimonides, in spite of his desire to minimise the

Messianic expectancy, admits this.

[6847]355 This is the tenth of the eighteen (or rather nineteen)

benedictions in the daily prayers. Of these the first and the last

three are certainly the oldest. But this tenth also dates from before

the destruction of Jerusalem. Comp. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. d. Juden, p.

368.

[6848]356 Hos. xi. 11.

[6849]357 Midr. On Cant. i. 15, ed. Warshau, p. 11b.

[6850]358 Comp. Jer. Sanh. x. 6; Sanh. 110 b: Yalk. Shim.

[6851]359 The suggestion is made by Castelli, Il Messia, p. 253.

[6852]360 Notably in connection with Ex. Xii. 42 (both in the

Pseudo-Jon. And Jer. Targum); Numb. xxiv. 7 (Jer. Targ.); Deut. xxx.4

(targ. Ps.-Jon.); Is xiv. 29; Jer. xxxiii. 13; Hos. xiv. 7; Zech. x.

6. Dr. Drummond, in his 'Jewish Messiah,' p. 335, quotes from the

Targum on Lamentations. But this dates from long after the Talmudic

period.

[6853]361 As each sentence which follows would necessitate one or more

references to different works, the reader, who may be desirous to

verify the statements in the text, is generally referred to Castelli,

u. s. pp. 251-255.

[6854]362 Men. 53 b.

[6855]363 The fiction of two Messiahs - one the Son of David, the

other the Son of Joseph, the latter being connected with the

restoration of the ten tribes - has been conclusively shown to be the

post-Christian date (comp. Schöttgen, Horæ Hebr. i. p. 359; and

Wünsche, Leiden d. Mess. p. 109). Possibly it was invented to find an

explanation for Zech. xii. 10 (comp. Succ. 52 a), just as the Socinian

doctrine of the assumption of Christ into heaven at the beginning of

His ministry was invented to account for St. John iii. 13.

[6856]364 Acts i.6.

[6857]365 Book of En. ch. lvii.; comp. xc.33.

[6858]366 B. iii. 286-294; comp. B. v. 414-433.

[6859]367 B. iii. 732-735.

[6860]368 B. iii. 766-783.

[6861]369 M. Maurice Vernes (Hist. Des Idées Messian. pp. 43-119)

maintains that the writers of Enoch and Or. Sib. 3 expected this

period under the rule of the Maccabees, and regarded one of them as

the Messiah. It implies a peculiar reading of history, and a lively

imagination, to arrive at such a conclusion.

[6862]370 Ps. of Sol. vxii. 50; comp. also Ps. xi.

[6863]371 Ps. Sal. xviii. 23.

[6864]372 v. 25.

[6865]373 v. 27.

[6866]374 v. 28.

[6867]375 vv. 30, 31.

[6868]376 Book of Jub. Ch. i.; comp. also ch. xxiii.

[6869]377 St. John ii. 19.

[6870]378 The doctrinal part of IV. Esdras may be said to be saturated

with the dogma of original sin, which is wholly foreign to the

theology alike of Rabbinic and Hellenistic Judaism. Comp. Vis. i. ch.

iii. 21, 22; iv. 30, 38; Vis. iii. ch. vi, 18, 19 (ed. Fritzsche, p.

607); 33-41; vii. 46-48; viii. 34-35.

[6871]379 It almost seems as if there were a parallelism between this

book and the Epistle to the Romans, which in its dogmatic part, seems

successively to take up these three subjects, although from quite

another point of view. How different the treatment is, need not be

told.

[6872]380 Vis. vi. ch. xiii. 27-52.

[6873]381 The better reading is 'in tempore diei ejus. (v. 52).'

[6874]382 Prophet. et Ass. Mos. iv. 7-14; vii. 20.

[6875]383 Ap. Bar. xxvii. 22.

[6876]384 In Sanh. 110 b we read, 'Our Rabbis teach, that the Ten

Tribes have no part in the era to come, because it is written "The

Lord drave them out of their land in anger, and in wrath, and in great

indignation, and cast them into another land." "The Lord drave them

from their land" - in the present era - "and cast them into another

land," in the era to come.' In curious agreement with this,

Pseudo-Baruch writes to the nine and a half tribes to 'prepare their

hearts to that which they had formerly believed,' least they should

suffer 'in both eras (ab utroque soeculo),' being led captive in the

one, and tormented in the other (Apoc. Bar. lxxxiii. 8).

[6877]385 Thus, for example, the assertion that there had been

individuals who fulfilled the commandments of God, Vis. i. ch. iii.

36; the domain of reason, iv. 22; v. 9; general Messianic blessings to

the world at large, Vis. i. ch. iv. 27, 28; the idea of a law within

their minds, like that of which St. Paul speaks in the case of the

heathen, Vis. iii. ch. vi. 45-47 (ed. Fritzsche, p. 609). These are

only instances, and we refer besides to the general cast of the

reasoning.

[6878]386 De Execrat. ed. Frcf. pp. 936, 937.

[6879]387 Acts xxvi. 7.

[6880]388 2 Pet. i. 19.

[6881]389 Mac. 23 b.

[6882]390 Rosh HaSh. 11 a.

[6883]391 Ber. R. 44.

[6884]392 Yalkut §2.

[6885]393 Ber. R. 1.

[6886]394 Comp. Ab. ii. 5

[6887]395 Jer. Chag. i. hal. 7, towards the end; Jer. Pes. iii.7.

[6888]396 Ab. Z. 3 b.

[6889]397 Shir haShir. R. on Cant. v. 11, ed Warshau, p. 26b.

[6890]398 Eph. iv. 16.

[6891]399 Lev. xix. 24.

[6892]400 Acts xi. 26.

[6893]401 Acts xi. 20, 21.

[6894]402 Acts xv.1.

[6895]403 The following cities probably formed the Decapolis, though

it is difficult to feel quite sure in reference to one or the other of

them: Damascus, Philadelphia, Raphana, Scythopolis, Gadara, Hippos

Dion, Pella, Gerasa, and Canatha. On these cities, comp. Caspari,

Chronol. Geogr. Einl. in d. Leben J. Christ, pp. 83-90.

[6896]404 Herod rebuilt or built other cities, such as Antipatris,

Cypros, Phasaelis, Anthedon, &c. Schürer describes the two first as

built, but they were only rebuilt or fortified (comp. Ant. xiii. 15.

1; War i. 21. 8.) by Herod.

[6897]405 He also rebuilt Sepphoris.

[6898]406 Comp. on the subject of the civic institutions of the Roman

Empire, Kuhn, Die Städt. u. bürgerl. Verf. d. Röm. Reichs, 2 vols.;

and for this part. vol. ii. pp. 336-354, and pp. 370-372.

[6899]407 A good sketch of the various rites prevailing in different

places is given by Schürer, Neutest. Zeitg. pp. 378-385.

[6900]408 Comp. Weiseler, Beitr. z richt. Wur dig. d. Evang. pp. 90,

91.

[6901]409 Jos. Ant. xv. 9. 6; War i. 21. 5-8.

[6902]410 The Actian games took place every fifth year, three years

always intervening. The games in Jerusalem were held in the year 28

b.c. (Jos. Ant. xv. 8. 1); the first games in Cæsarea in the year 12

b.c. (Ant. xvi. 5. 1; comp. War. i. 21. 8).

[6903]411 Ant. xv. 8. 1-4; xvii. 6. 2.

[6904]412 So at least in a Boraitha. Comp. the discussion and the very

curious arguments in favour of attendance in Ab. Zar. 18 b, and

following.

[6905]413 Mechilta on Ex. xx. 4 ed. Weiss, p. 75 a.

[6906]414 Ab. Zar. iii.

[6907]415 For a full statement of the Talmudical views as to images,

representations on coins, and the most ancient Jewish coins, see

Appendix III.

[6908]416 Jos. Ant. xv. 2, 5 and 6.

[6909]417 Jos. War v. 4. 4.

[6910]418 Acts xii. 23.

[6911]419 Ant. xix. 9. l.

[6912]420 Comp. here the interesting tractate of Dr. Bodek, 'Marc.

Aur. Anton. als Freund u. Zeitgenosse des R. Jehuda ha Nasi.'

[6913]421 Dan. vii. 23.

[6914]422 The Athidlabho, 'sæculum futurum,' to be distinguished from

the Olam habba, 'the world to come.'

[6915]423 Midr. R. on Ex. Par. 23.

[6916]424 Ab. Z. 2 b.

[6917]425 Ab. Z. 10 a; Gitt. 80 a.

[6918]426 Ps. lxxvi. 9.

[6919]427 Shabb. 88 a.

[6920]428 Ab. Z. 22 b. But as in what follows the quotations would be

too numerous, they will be omitted. Each statement, however, advanced

in the text or notes is derived from part of the Talmudic tractate

Abodah Zarah.

[6921]429 Ab. Z. ii. 1.

[6922]430 The Talmud declares it only lawful if done to avoid exciting

hatred against the Jews.

[6923]431 Mechilta, ed. Weiss, p. 33 b, line 8 from top.

[6924]432 There is a well-known story told of a Rabbi who was bitten

by a serpent, and about to be cured by the invocation of the name of

Jesus by a Jewish Christian, which was, however, interdicted.

[6925]433 Yet, such is the moral obliquity, that even idolatry is

allowed to save life, provided it be done in secret!

[6926]434 Against this, although somewhat doubtfully, such concessions

may be put as that, outside Palestine, Gentiles were not to be

considered as idolators, but as observing the customs of their fathers

(Chull. 13 b), and that the poor of the Gentiles were to be equally

supported with those of Israel, their sick visited, and their dead

buried; it being, however, significantly added, 'on account of the

arrangements of the world' (Gitt. 61 a). The quotation so often made

(Ab. Z. 3 a), that a Gentile who occupied himself with the Torah was

to be regarded as equal to the High-Priest, proves nothing, since in

the case supposed the Gentile acts like a Rabbinic Jew. But, and this

is a more serious point, it is difficult to believe that those who

make this quotation are not aware, how the Talmud (Ab. Z. 3 a)

immediately labours to prove that their reward is not equal to that of

Israelites. A somewhat similar charge of one-sideness, if not of

unfairness, must be brought against Deutsch (Lecture on the Talmud,

Remains, pp. 146, 147), whose sketch of Judaism should be compared,

for example, with the first Perek of the Talmudic tractate Abodah

Zarah.

[6927]435 Ab. Zar. 35 b.

[6928]436 According to R. Asi, there was a threefold distinction. If

wine had been dedicated to an idol, to carry, even on a stick, so much

as the weight of an olive of it, defiled a man. Other wine, if

prepared by a heathen, was prohibited, whether for personal use or for

trading. Lastly, wine prepared by a Jew, but deposited in custody of a

Gentile, was prohibited for personal use, but allowed for traffic.

[6929]437 St. Luke v. 17.

[6930]438 Jos. Ant. xviii. 3. 5; xx. 11. 2.

[6931]439 The title Rabbon (our Master) occurs first in connection

with Gamaliel i. (Acts v. 34). The N.T. expression Rabboni or Rabbouni

(St. Mark x. 51; St. John xx. 16) takes the word Rabbon or Rabban

(here in the absolute sense)= Rabh, and adds to it the personal suffix

'my,' pronouncing the Kamez in the Syriac manner.

[6932]440 nomik_v, the legis Divinae peritus, St. Matt. xxii. 35; St.

Luke vii. 30; x.25; xi. 45; xiv. 3.

[6933]441 Not 45 a, as apud Derenbourg. Similarly, his rendering

'littéralement, "citerne vide"' seems to me erroneous.

[6934]442 Ab. ii. 8.

[6935]443 Ber. 45 b 2; Ab. ii. 5; Bemid. R. 3.

[6936]444 Jos. Ant. xvii. 6. 2.

[6937]445 nomodid_v kalov, St. Luke v. 17; Acts v. 34; comp. also 1

Tim. i. 7.

[6938]446 St. Matt. ii. 4; xx. 18; xxi. 15; xxvi. 57; xxvii. 41; St.

Mark xiv.1.43;xv. 1; St. Luke xxii. 2, 66; xxiii. 10; Acts iv. 5.

[6939]447 The distinction between 'Pharisees' and 'Scribes,' is marked

in may passages in the N.T., for example, St. Matt. xxiii. passim; St.

Luke vii. 30; xiv. 3; and especially in St. Luke xi. 43, comp. with v.

46. The words 'Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites,' in ver. 44, are,

according to all evidence, spurious.

[6940]448 Siphré or Numb. p 25 b.

[6941]449 Siphré on Deut. p. 105 a.

[6942]450 Ezra vii.6, 10, 11, 12.

[6943]451 {hebrew}

[6944]452 Nedar. iv. 8.

[6945]453 In Ned. iv. 3 this is the actual division. Of course, in

another sense the Midrash might be considered as the source of both

the Halakhah and the Haggadah.

[6946]454 Neh. xiii.

[6947]455 Very strange and ungrounded conjectures on this subject have

been hazarded, which need not here find a place. Comp. for ex. the two

articles of Grätz in Frankel's Montsschrift for 1857, pp. 31 etc. 61

etc., the main positions of which have, however, been adopted by some

learned English writers.

[6948]456 The Talmudic notices are often inconsistent. The number as

given in them amounts to abut 120. But the modern doubts (of Kuenen

and others) against the institution itself cannot be sustained.

[6949]457 Ezra x. 14; Neh. v. 7.

[6950]458 Ab. i. 1.

[6951]459 In the beginning of the third century b.c.

[6952]460 Ab. i. 3, 4

[6953]461 Zunz has well pointed out that, if in Ab. i. 4 the first

'couple' is said to have 'received from them' - while only Antigonus

is mentioned in the preceding Mishnah, it must imply Antigonus and his

unnamed disciples and followers. In general, I may take this

opportunity of stating that, except for special reasons, I shall not

refer to previous writers on this subject, partly because it would

necessitate too many quotations, but chiefly because the line of

argument I have taken differs from that of my predecessors.

[6954]462 Ab. i. 2.

[6955]463 Ab. i. 3.

[6956]464 See Appendix IV.: 'Political History of the Jews from the

Reign of Alexander to the Accession of Herod.'

[6957]465 160-143 b.c.

[6958]466 The Gerous_a, 1 Macc. xii. 6; xiii. 36; xiv. 28; Jos. Ant.

xiii. 4. 9; 5. 8.

[6959]467 At the same time some kind of ruling lerous_a existed

earlier than at this period, if we may judge from Jos. Ant. xii 3.3.

But he uses the term somewhat vaguely, applying it even to the time of

Jaddua (Antiq. xi. 8. 2).

[6960]468 Ant. xi. 4. 8.

[6961]469 Even Ber. 48 a furnishes evidence of this 'enmity.' This, of

course, is an inference from the whole history and relation there

indicated. On the hostile relations between the Pharisaical party and

the Maccabees see Hamburger, Real-Enc. ii. p. 367. Comp. Jer. Taan.

iv. 5.

[6962]470 Ant. xiii. 10. 5. 6.

[6963]471 Kidd 66 a.

[6964]472 Jer. Maas Sheni v. end, p. 56 d Jer. Sot. ix. p. 24 a.

[6965]473 geroussia

[6966]474 {hebrew}Sanh 82 a; Ab. Z. 36 b.

[6967]475 Derenbourg takes a different view, and identifies the

tribunal of the Asmoneans with the Sanhedrin. This seems to me,

historically, impossible. But his opinion to that effect (u. s. p. 87)

is apparently contradicted at p. 93.

[6968]476 sun_drion. {hebrew} in the N.T also once gerous_a, Acts v.

21 and twice presbut_rion St. Luke xxii. 66; Acts xxii 5.

[6969]477 Schürer, following Wieseler, supposes the Sanhedrin to have

been of Roman institution. But the arguments of Wieseler on this point

(Beitr. zur richt. Wurd. d. Evang. p. 224) are inconclusive.

[6970]478 Comp. Derenbourg, u. s. p. 95.

[6971]479 Thus we read: 'The sayings of the elders have more weight

than those of the prophets' (Jer. Ber. i. 7); 'an offence against the

sayings of the Scribes is worse than one against those of Scripture'

(Sanh. xi. 3). Compare also Er. 21 b The comparison between such

claims and those sometimes set up on behalf of 'creeds' and 'articles'

(Kitto's Cyclop., 2nd ed., p. 786, col a) does not seem to me

applicable. In the introduction to the Midr. on Lament. it is inferred

from Jer. ix. 12, 13, that to forsake the law - in the Rabbinic sense

- was worse than adolatry, uncleanness, or the shedding of blood. See

generally that Introduction.

[6972]480 Eduy. i. 3. See the comment of Maimonides.

[6973]481 It is so explained in the Aruch (ed Zandau, vol. ii. p. 529,

col b).

[6974]482 Comp. Hamburger, u.s. p 343.

[6975]483 Comp. here especially the detailed description by Herzfeld

(u. s. vol. iii. pp. 226, 263); also the Introduction of Maimonides,

and the very able and learned works (not sufficiently appreciated) by

Dr. H. S. Hirschfeld, Halachische Exegese (Berlin, 1840), and

Hagadische Exegese (Berlin, 1847). Perhaps I may also take leave to

refer to the corresponding chapters in my 'History of the Jewish

Nation.'

[6976]484 Midr. Shochar Tobh on Ps. ix. 6. ed. Warshau, p. 14 b; Abde

R. Nath. 2.

[6977]485 Similarly, the expressions in Ex. xxiv. 12 were thus

explained: 'the tables of stone,' the ten commandments; the 'law,' the

written Law; the 'commandments,' the Mishnah; 'which I have written,'

the Prophets and Hagiographa; 'that thou mayest teach them,' the

Talmud - 'which shows that they were all given to Moses on Sinai'

(Ber. 5 a, lines 11-16). A like application was made of the various

clauses in Cant. vii. 12 (Erub. 21 b). Nay, by an alternation of the

words in Hos. vii. 10, it was shown that the banished had been brought

back for the merit of their study (of the sacrificial sections) of the

Mishnah (Vayyik R. 7).

[6978]486 Hos. viii 12;comp. Shem. R. 47.

[6979]487 Ex. xxxiv. 27.

[6980]488 Jer. Chag. p. 76 d.

[6981]489 Tos. Shabb. xiv.

[6982]490 Another reason also is, however, mentioned for his

prohibition.

[6983]491 Erub. 54 b.

[6984]492 Deut. i. 5.

[6985]493 Hirschfeld, u. s. pp. 92-99.

[6986]494 From {hebrew} to lean against. At the same time the

ordinances, for which an appeal could be made to Asmakhta, were better

liked than those which rested on tradition alone (Jer. Chag. p. 76,

col d).

[6987]495 {hebrew}

[6988]496 {hebrew}

[6989]497 In connection with this it is very significant that R.

Jochanan ben Zaccai, who taught not many years after the Crucifixion

of Christ, was wont to say, that, in the future, Halakhahs in regard

to purity, which had not the support of Scripture, would be repeated

(Sot. 27 b, line 16 from top). In geneal, the teaching of R. Jochanan

should be studied to understand the unacknowledged influence which

Christianity exercised upon the Synagogue.

[6990]498 {hebrew}.

[6991]499 {hebrew}.

[6992]500 But this is not always.

[6993]501 St. Matt. xxiii. 3, 4.

[6994]502 To elucidate the meaning of Christ, it seemed necessary to

submit an avowedly difficult text to fresh criticism. I have taken the

word kine_n, moveo in the sense of ire facio (Grimm, Clavis N.T. ed.

2^da, p. 241 a), but I have not adopted the inference of Meyer (Krit.

Exeget. Handb. p. 455). In classical Greek also kine_n is used for

'to remove, to alter.' My reasons against what may be called the

traditional interpretation of St. Matt. xxiii. 3, 4, are: 1. It seems

scarcely possible to suppose that, before such an audience, Christ

would have contemplated the possibility of not observing either of the

two first classes of Halakhoth, which were regarded as beyond

controversy. 2. It could scarcely be truthfully charged against the

Scribes and Pharisees, that they did not attempt to keep themselves

the ordinances which they imposed upon others. The expression in the

parallel passage (St. Luke xi. 46) must be explained in accordance

with the commentation on St. Matt. xxiii. 4. Nor is there any serious

difficulty about it.

[6995]503 B. Kam. 79 b.

[6996]504 For the classification, arrangement, origin, and enumeration

of these Halakhoth, see Appendix V.: 'Rabbinic Theology and

literature.'

[6997]505 See the learned remarks of Levy about the reasons for the

earlier prohibition of writing down the oral law, and the final

collection of the Mishnah (Neuhebr. u. Chald. Wörterb. vol. ii. p.

435).

[6998]506 132-135 a.d.

[6999]507 These collections are enumerated in the Midrash on Eccles.

xii. 3. They are also distinguished as 'the former' and 'the later'

Mishnah (Nedar. 91 a).

[7000]508 The first 'Order' (Zeraim, 'seeds') begins with the

ordinances concerning 'benedictions,' or the time, mode, manner, and

character of the prayers prescribed. It then goes on to detail what

may be called the religio-agrarian laws (such as tithing, Sabbatical

years, first fruits, &c.). The second 'Order' (Moed, 'festive time')

discusses all connected with the Sabbath observance and the other

festivals. The third 'Order' (Nashim, 'women') treats of all that

concerns betrothal, marriage and divorce, but also includes a tractate

on the Nasirate. The fourth 'Order' (Neziqin, 'damages') contains the

civil and criminal law. Characteristically, it includes all the

ordinances concerning idol-worship (in the tractate Abhodah Zarah) and

'the sayings of the Fathers' (Abhoth). The fifth 'Order' (Qodashim,

'holy things') treats of the various classes of sacrifices, offerings,

and things belonging (as the first-born), or dedicated, to God, and of

all questions which can be grouped under 'sacred things' (such as the

redemption, exchange, or alienation of what had been dedicated to

God). It also includes the laws concerning the daily morning and

evening service (Tamid), and a description of the structure and

arrangements of the Temple (Middoth, 'the measurements'). Finally, the

sixth 'Order' (Toharoth, 'cleannesses') gives every ordinance

connected with the questions of 'clean and unclean,' alike as regards

human beings, animals, and inanimate things.

[7001]509 Comp. the very interesting tractate by Dr. Brüll (Fremdspr

Redensart in d. Talmud), as well as Dr. Eisler's Beiträge z. Rabb. u.

Alterthumsk., 3 fascic; Sachs, Beitr. z. Rabb u. Alterthumsk.

[7002]510 Comp. the enumeration in Pinner, u. s.

[7003]511 Talmud: that which is learned, doctrine. Gemara: either the

same, or else 'perfection,' 'completion.'

[7004]512 The following will explain our meaning: On the first 'order'

we have the Jerusalem Talmud complete, that is, on every tractate

(comprising in all 65 folio leaves), while the Babylon Talmud extends

only over its first tractate (Berakhoth). On the second order, the

four last chapters of one tractate (Shabbath) are wanting in the

Jerusalem, and one whole tractate (Sheqalim) in the Babylon Talmud.

The third order is complete in both Gemaras. On the fourth order a

chapter is wanting in one tractate (Makkoth) in the Jerusalem, and two

whole tractates (Eduyoth and Abhoth) in both Gemaras. The fifth order

is wholly wanting in the Jerusalem, and two and a half tractates of it

(Middoth, Qinnim, and half Tamid) in the Babylon Talmud. Of the sixth

order only one tractate (Niddah) exists in both Gemaras. The principal

Halakhoth were collected in a work (dating from about 800 a.d.)

entitled Halakhoth Gedoloth. They are arranged to correspond with the

weekly lectionary of the Pentateuch in a work entitled Sheeltoth

('Questions:' best ed. Dghernfurth, 1786). The Jerusalem Talmud

extends over 39, the Babylonian over 36 ½ tractates - 15 ½ tractates

have no Gemara at all.

[7005]513 The last ten chapters curiously group together events or

things under numerals from 10 downwards. The most generally

interesting of these is that of the 10 Nequdoth, or passages of

Scripture in which letters are marked by dots, together with the

explanation of their reasons (ch. xxxiv.). The whole Boraitha seems

composed of parts of three different works, and consists of forty (or

forty-one) chapters, and occupies ten folio leaves.

[7006]514 In twenty-one chapters, each containing a number of

Halakhahs, and occupying in all four folio leaves.

[7007]515 In fourteen chapters, occupying rather more than three folio

leaves.

[7008]516 It fills little more than a folio page.

[7009]517 In eleven chapters, covering about 1 ¾ folio leaves.

[7010]518 In nine chapters, filling one folio leaf.

[7011]519 Little more than a folio column.

[7012]520 Besides these, Raphael Kirchheim has published (Frankfort,

1851) the so-called seven smaller tractates, covering altogether with

abundant notes, only forty-four small pages, which treat of the

copying of the Bible (Sepher Torah, in five chapters), of the Mezuzah,

or memorial on the doorposts (in two chapters), Phylacteries

(Tephillin, in one chapter), of the Tsitsith, or memorial-fringes (in

one chapter), of Slaves (Abhadim, in three chapters) of the Cutheans,

or Samaritans (in two chapters), and, finally, a curious tractate on

Proselytes (Gerim, in four chapters).

[7013]521 St. Matt. xv. 11, 18.

[7014]522 Thus, in B. Mez. 86 a, we read of a discussion in the

heavenly Academy on the subject of purity, when Rabbah was summoned to

heaven by death, although this required a miracle, since he was

constantly engaged in sacred study. Shocking to write, it needed the

authority of Rabbah to attest the correctness of the Almighty's

statement on the Halakhic question discussed.

[7015]523 Some of these miracles are detailed in B. Mets. 85 b, 86 a.

Thus, Resh Lakish, when searching for the tomb of R. Chija, found that

it was miraculously removed from his sight, as being too sacred for

ordinary eyes. The same Rabbi claimed such merit, that for his sake

the Law should never be forgotten in Israel. Such was the power of the

patriarchs that, if they had been raised up together, they would have

brought Messiah before His time. When R. Chija prayed, successively a

storm arose, the rain descended, and the earth trembled. Again,

Rabbah, when about to be arrested, caused the face of the messenger to

be turned to his back, and again restored it; next, by his prayer he

made a wall burst, and so escaped. In Abhod. Zar. 17 b, a miracle is

recorded in favour of R. Eleazar, to set him free from his

persecutors, or, rather, to attest a false statement which he made in

order to escape martyrdom. For further extravagant praises of the

Rabbis, comp. Sanh. 101 a.

[7016]524 Baba Mets. 33 a.

[7017]525 Similarly we read in Aboth d. R. Nathan 29: 'He who is

master of the Midrash, but knows no Halakhahs, is like a hero, but

there are no arms in his hand. He that is master of the Halakhoth, but

knows nothing of the Midrashim, is a weak person who is provided with

arms. But he that is master of both is both a hero and armed.'

[7018]526 Most of these, of course, are from the Pentateuch.

References to any other Old Testament books are generally loosely

made, and serve chiefly as points d'appuî for Rabbinical sayings.

Scriptural quotations occur in 51 out of the 63 tractates of the

Mishnah, the number of verses quoted being 430. A quotation in the

Mishnah is generally introduced by the formula 'as it is said.' This

in all but sixteen instances, where the quotation is prefaced by,

'Scripture means to say.' But, in general, the difference in the mode

of quotation in Rabbinic writings seems to depend partly on the

context, but chiefly on the place and time. Thus, 'as it is written'

is a Chaldee mode of quotation. Half the quotations in the Talmud are

prefaced by 'as it is said;' a fifth of them by 'as it is written;' a

tenth by 'scripture means to say;' and the remaining fifth by various

other formulas. Comp. Pinner's Introduction to Berakhoth. In the

Jerusalem Talmud no al-tikré ('read not so, but read so') occurs, for

the purposes of textual criticism. In the Talmud a favourite mode of

quoting from the Pentateuch, made in about 600 passages, is by

introducing it as spoken or written by {hebrew}. The various modes in

which Biblical quotations are made in Jewish writings are enumerated

in Surenhusius B_blov katallag_v, pp. 1-56.

[7019]527 For details on the Jewish views on the Canon, and historical

and mystical theology, see Appendix V.: 'Rabbinic Theology and

Literature.'

[7020]528 I do not here reckon the brief reign of King Agrippa.

[7021]529 Ps. cxxii.

[7022]530 It will be seen that, with the most recent explorers, I

locate Mount Zion not on the traditional site, on the western hill of

Jerusalem, but on the eastern, south of the Temple area.

[7023]531 1 Macc. i. 33, and often; but the precise situation of this

'fort' is in dispute.

[7024]532 1 Macc. xii. 36; Jos. Ant. xiii. 5. 11; comp. with it xiv.

16. 2; War vi. 7. 2; 8. 1.

[7025]533 141 b.c.

[7026]534 135-106 b.c.

[7027]535 It is, to say the least, doubtful, whether the numeral 50

cubits (75 feet), which Josephus assigns to this rock (War v. 5. 8),

applies to its height (comp. Speiss, Das Jerus. d. Jos.p. 66).

[7028]536 Ant. xv. 11. 7.

[7029]537 Jos. War v. 5. 8.

[7030]538 I must take leave to refer to the description of Jerusalem,

and especially of the Temple, in the 'Temple and its Services at the

Time of Jesus Christ.'

[7031]539 Dr. Mühlau, in Riehm's Handwörterb. Part viii. p. 682 b,

speaks of the dimensions of the old Sanctuary as little more than

those of a village church.

[7032]540 It was only finished in 64 a.d., that is, six years before

its destruction.

[7033]541 See Conder, Heth and Moab, p. 94.

[7034]542 Such as the Palace of Grapte, and that of Queen Helena of

Adiabene.

[7035]543 Baba B. ix. 7.

[7036]544 Arakh. vi. 5.

[7037]545 Baba K. x. 4.

[7038]546 Men. xiii. 8; Baba K. iii. 9.

[7039]547 Tos. Sheq. ii.; Tos. Ar. iv.

[7040]548 Men. xiii. 8.

[7041]549 Tos. Baba Mets. iv.

[7042]550 Yoma 35 b.

[7043]551 Peah viii. 8, 9.

[7044]552 Comp. Herzfeld's Handelsgesch.

[7045]553 Ancient Jerusalem is supposed to have covered about double

the area of the modern city. Comp. Dr. Schick in A.M. Luncz,

'Jerusalem,' for 1882.

[7046]554 Although Jerusalem covered only about 300 acres, yet, from

the narrowness of Oriental streets, it would hold a very much larger

population than any Western city of the same extent. Besides, we must

remember that its ecclesiastical boundaries extended beyond the city.

[7047]555 Maaser. ii. 3.

[7048]556 Baba B. 89 a.

[7049]557 Jer. Ab. Z 44 b; Ab. Z. 58 a.

[7050]558 Jer. Dem 22 c.

[7051]559 Yoma 9 a.

[7052]560 On the question of officially fixing the market-price,

diverging opinions are expressed, Baba B. 89 b. It was thought that

the market-price should leave to the producer a profit of one-sixth on

the cost (Baba B. 90 a). In general, the laws on these subjects form a

most interesting study. Bloch (Mos. Talm. Polizeir.) holds, that there

were two classes of market-officials. But this is not supported by

sufficient evidence, nor, indeed, would such an arrangement seem

likely.

[7053]561 Sanh. 89 a.

[7054]562 Erub. x. 9.

[7055]563 Jos. War v. 8. 1.

[7056]564 Ibid. ii. 19. 4.

[7057]565 Tos. Baba Mets. iii.

[7058]566 That of Botnah was the largest, Jer. Ab. Z. 39 d.

[7059]567 Kerith. iii. 7; Temur. iii.5.

[7060]568 Makhsh. vi. 2.

[7061]569 Kethub. ix. 4.

[7062]570 Compare here generally Unruh, D. alte Jerusalem.

[7063]571 St. Mark xiv. 66.

[7064]572 St. Luke xxiii. 6, 7.

[7065]573 Jos. War ii. 3. 1.

[7066]574 Ant. xv. 8. 1.

[7067]575 Ant. xvii. 10. 2; War ii. 3. 1, 2.

[7068]576 Tradition exaggerates their number as 460 (Jer. Kethub. 35

c.) or even 480 (Jer. Meg. 73 d). But even the large number

(proportionally to the size of the city) mentioned in the text need

not surprise us when we remember that ten men were sufficient to form

a Synagogue, and how many - what may be called 'private' - Synagogues

exist at present in every town where there is a large and orthodox

Jewish population.

[7069]577 Baba B. 3 b.

[7070]578 Bemid. R. 14.

[7071]579 The occasion is said to have been, that the Rabbis, in

answer to Herod's question, quoted Deut. xvii. 15. Baba ben Buta

himself is said to have escaped the slaughter, indeed, but to have

been deprived of his eyes.

[7072]580 Baba B. 4 a.

[7073]581 For a fuller sketch of this history see Appendix IV.

[7074]582 So Schürer in his Neutestam. Zeitgesch.

[7075]583 A table of the Maccabean and Herodian families is given in

Appendix VI.

[7076]584 Comp. 1 Macc. vi. 31.

[7077]585 By dashing out his brains against the prison walls.

[7078]586 He had previously been married to one Doris, the issue of

the marriage being a son, Antipater.

[7079]587 31 b.c.

[7080]588 Jos. Ant. xvii. 8. 3.

[7081]589 Ant. xv. 10. 4.

[7082]590 Comp. the discussion of this question in Wieseler, Beitr.

pp. 215 &c.

[7083]591 Ant. xiv. 9. 4; xv. 1. 1, 10. 4.

[7084]592 Ab. i. 10, 11.

[7085]593 Even their recorded fundamental principles bear this out.

That of Shemajah was: 'Love labour, hate lordship, and do not push

forward to the authorities.' That of Abtalion was: 'Ye sages, be

careful in your words, lest perchance ye incur banishment, and are

exiled to a place of bad waters, and the disciples who follow you

drink of them and die, and so in the end the name of God be profaned.'

[7086]594 On Hillel and Shammai see the article in Herzog's

Real-Encyklop.; that in Hamburger's; Delitzsch, Jesus u. Hillel. and

books on Jewish history generally.

[7087]595 Eduj. 1. 4.

[7088]596 A number of points on which the ordinances of Hillel were

more severe than those of Shammai are enumerated in Eduj. iv. 1-12; v.

1-4; Ber. 36 a, end. Comp. also Ber. R. 1.

[7089]597 Jer. Ber. 3 b, lines 3 and 2 from bottom.

[7090]598 Ber. R. 98.

[7091]599 St.Matt. ii. 4.

[7092]600 On the chronology of the life of Hillel &c., see also

Schmilg, Ueb. d. Entsteh. &c. der Megillath Taanith, especially p. 34.

Hillel is said to have become Chief of the Sanhedrin in 30 b.c., and

to have held the office for forty years. These numbers, however, are

no doubt somewhat exaggerated.

[7093]601 Jer. Kethub. 35 c; Kethub. 104 b.

[7094]602 The police laws of the Rabbis might well serve us as a model

for all similar legislation.

[7095]603 At the same time I can scarcely agree with Delitzsch and

others, that this was the dialect called Sursi. The latter was rather

Syriac. Comp. Levy, ad voc.

[7096]604 Professor Roberts has advocated, with great ingenuity, the

view that Christ and His Apostles used the Greek language. See

especially his 'Discussions on the Gospels.' The Roman Catholic Church

sometimes maintained, that Jesus and His disciples spoke Latin, and in

1822 a work appeared by Black to prove that the N.T. Greek showed a

Latin origin.

[7097]605 For a full statement of the arguments on this subject we

refer the student to Böhl, Forsch. n. e. Volksbibel z. Zeit Jesu, pp.

4-28; to the latter work by the same writer (Aittestam. Citate im N.

Test.); to a very interesting article by Professor Delitzsch in the

'Daheim' for 1874 (No. 27); to Buxtorf, sub Gelil; to J. D. Goldberg,

'The Language of Christ'; but especially to F. de Rossi, Della lingua

prop. di Cristo (Parma 1772).

[7098]606 Thus Hillel was said to have hired a horse, and even an

outrunner, for a decayed rich man.

[7099]607 Bemid. R. 14; ed. Warsh. p. 59 a.

[7100]608 Baba K.

[7101]609 Jer.Shabb. 7 d.

[7102]610 Shabb. 149 a.

[7103]611 Kel. xiv. 6.

[7104]612 Tos. Shabb. xiii. ed. Zuckerm. p. 130.

[7105]613 Shabb. x. 4.

[7106]614 Shabb. 19 a.

[7107]615 Rosh haSh. 9 b.

[7108]616 Tos. Shabb. xviii.

[7109]617 Shabb. 62 b.

[7110]618 Comp. Shabb. 62 b, last line and first of 63 a.

[7111]619 Kel. xxiv. 16; xxviii. 9.

[7112]620 On ch. iv 2.

[7113]621 See the Introduction to the Midrash on Lamentations. But

some of the descriptions are so painful - even blasphemous - that we

do not venture on quotation.

[7114]622 Meg. 15 a.

[7115]623 We presume, that the ministration of Zacharias (St. Luke i.

9) took place in the morning, as the principal service. But Meyer

(Komm. i. 2, p. 242) is mistaken in supposing, that this follows from

the reference to the lot. It is, indeed, true that, of the four lots

for the priestly functions, three took place only in the morning. But

that for incensing was repeated in the evening (Yoma 26 a). Even

Bishop Haneberg (Die Relig. Alterth. p. 609) is not accurate in this

respect.

[7116]624 For a description of the details of that service, see 'The

Temple and its Services,' &c.

[7117]625 Tamid i. 2.

[7118]626 If we reckon the total number in the twenty-four courses of,

presumably, the officiating priesthood, at 20,000, according to

Josephus (Ag. Ap. ii. 8), which is very much below the exaggerated

Talmudic computation of 85,000 for the smallest course (Jer. Taan. 69

a), and suppose, that little more than one-third of each course had

come up for duty, this would give fifty priests for each week-day,

while on the Sabbath the whole course would be on duty. This is, of

course, considerably more than the number requisite, since, except for

the incensing priest, the lot for the morning also held good for the

evening sacrifice.

[7119]627 Yoma 25 a.

[7120]628 Tamid v. 2.

[7121]629 Yoma 26 a. The designation 'rich' is derived from the

promise which, in Deut. xxxiii. 11, follows on the service referred to

in verse 10. But probably a spiritual application was also intended.

[7122]630 The so-called Shema, consisting of Deut. vi. 4-9; xi. 13-21;

Num. xv. 37-41.

[7123]631 The question of this date is, of course, intimately

connected with that of the Nativity of Christ, and could therefore not

be treated in the text. It is discussed in Appendix VII.: 'On the Date

of the Nativity of our Lord.'

[7124]632 This was the eighth course in the original arrangement (1

Chr. xxiv. 10).

[7125]633 According to St. Luke i. 7, they were both 'well stricken in

years.' But from Aboth v. 21 we learn, that sixty years was considered

'the commencement of agedness.'

[7126]634 According to tradition, about one-fourth of the priesthood

was resident in Jericho. But, even limiting this to those who were in

the habit of officiating, the statement seems greatly exaggerated.

[7127]635 Comp. Ber. 44 a; Pes. 49 a; Vayyikra R. 4.

[7128]636 d_kaiov - of course not in the strict sense in which the

word is sometimes used, especially by St. Paul, but as pius et bonus.

See Vorstius (De Hebraism. N.T. pp. 55 &c.). As the account of the

Evangelist seems derived from an original Hebrew source, the word must

have corresponded to that of Tsaddiq in the then popular

signification.

[7129]637 d_kaiov - of course not in the strict sense in which the

word is sometimes used, especially by St. Paul, but as pius et bonus.

See Vorstius (De Hebraism. N.T. pp. 55 &c.). As the account of the

Evangelist seems derived from an original Hebrew source, the word must

have corresponded to that of Tsaddiq in the then popular

signification.

[7130]638 _ntola_ and dikai_mata evidently mark an essential division

of the Law at the time. But it is almost impossible to determine their

exact Hebrew equivalents. The LXX. render by these two terms not

always the same Hebrew words. Comp. Gen. xxvi. 5 with Deut. iv. 40.

They cannot refer to the division of the law into affirmative (248)

and prohibitive (365) commandments.

[7131]639 There is, perhaps, no point on which the Rabbinic Law is

more explicit or stringent than on that of tenderest regard for the

feelings of others, especially of the poor.

[7132]640 Mal. ii. 13-16.

[7133]641 Gitt. 90 b.

[7134]642 Yeb. 64 a.

[7135]643 For the prayers offered by the people during the incensing,

see 'The Temple,' pp. 139, 140.

[7136]644 Rev. v. 8; viii. 1, 3, 4.

[7137]645 Tamid vi. 3.

[7138]646 The following extract from Yalkut (vol. i. p. 113 d, close)

affords a curious illustration of this Divine communication from

beside the altar of incense: 'From what place did the Shekhinah speak

to Moses? R. Nathan said: From the altar of incense, according to Ex.

xxx. 6. Simeon ben Asai said: From the side of the altar of incense.'

[7139]647 Ber. 7 a.

[7140]648 According to the Talmud, Ishmael once went into the

innermost Sanctuary, when he had a vision of God, Who called upon the

priest to pronounce a benediction. The token of God's acceptance had

better not be quoted.

[7141]649 Jer. Yoma 42 c.

[7142]650 Instances of an analogous kind frequently occur in the

Apocryphal Gospels.

[7143]651 On the different classes of Nazarites, see 'The Temple,

&c.,' pp. 322-331.

[7144]652 Mal. iii. 1.

[7145]653 1 Kings xviii. 37.

[7146]654 Mal. iv. 5, 6.

[7147]655 St. Luke i. 17; comp. St. Matt. xi. 19.

[7148]656 Gen. xvii. 17, 18.

[7149]657 Judg. xiii 2-21.

[7150]658 Numb. vi. 24-26.

[7151]659 The word {hebrew} or 'idiot,' when conjoined with 'priest'

ordinarily means a common priest, in distinction to the High priest.

But the word unquestionably also signifies vulgar, ignorant, and

illiterate. See Jer. Sot. 21 b, line 3 from bottom; Sanh. 21 b. Comp.

also Meg. 12 b; Ber. R. 96.

[7152]660 According to Sanh. 90 b, such an one was not even allowed to

get the Terumah.

[7153]661 Jer. haSh. 56 d, line 10 from bottom.

[7154]662 Judg. xiii. 18.

[7155]663 Dan. ix. 21.

[7156]664 x. 21.

[7157]665 Two other Angels are mentioned, but not named, in Dan. x.

13, 20.

[7158]666 The Jewish ideas and teaching about angels are fully given

in Appendix XIII.: 'Jewish Angelology and Demonology.'

[7159]667 Moed k. 26 a.

[7160]668 1 Kings xviii. 37 (in Hebr. without 'that' and 'again'); see

Ber. 31 b, last two lines.

[7161]669 Bemidbar R. 14. Another view in Par. 13.

[7162]670 This in Shir haSh R. i. ed. Warshau, p. 3 a.

[7163]671 All the Rabbinic traditions about 'Elijah as the Forerunner

of the Messiah' are collated in Appendix VIII.

[7164]672 I should, however, remark, that that very curious chapter on

Repentance, in the Pirké de R. Elieser (c. 43), closes with these

words: 'And Israel will not make great repentance till Elijah - his

memory for blessing! - come, as it is said, Mal. iv. 6,' &c. From this

isolated and enigmatic sentence, Professor Delitzsch's implied

inference (Zeitschr. fur Luther. Theol. 1875, p. 593) seems too

sweeping.

[7165]673 Terrible as it may sound, it is certainly the teaching of

Rabbinism, that God occupied so many hours every day in the study of

the Law. Comp. Targ. Ps.-Jonathan on Deut. xxxii. 4, and Abhod. Z. 3

b. Nay, Rabbinism goes farther in its daring, and speaks of the

Almighty as arrayed in a white dress, or as occupying himself by day

with the study of the Bible, and by night with that of the six

tractates of the Mishnah. Comp. also the Targum on Cant. v. 10.

[7166]674 The object which the Evangelists had in view was certainly

not that of biography, even as the Old Testament contains no

biography. The twofold object of their narratives is indicated by St.

Luke i. 4, and by St. John xx. 31.

[7167]675 Josh. xix. 10, 11.

[7168]676 The name Nazareth may best be regarded as the equivalent of

{hebrew} 'watch' or 'watcheress.' The name does not occur in the

Talmud, nor in those Midrashim which have been preserved. But the

elegy of Eleazar ha Kallir - written before the close of the Talmud -

in which Nazareth is mentioned as a Priestcentre, is based upon an

ancient Midrash, now lost (comp. Neubauer, Geogr. du Talmud, p. 117,

note 5). It is, however, possible, as Dr. Neubauer suggests (u.s. p.

190, note 5), that the name {hebrew} in Midr. on Eccl. ii. 8 should

read {hebrew} and refers to Nazareth.

[7169]677 Comp. the detailed description of these roads, and the

references in Herzog's Real-Encykl. vol. xv. pp. 160, 161.

[7170]678 Comp. Neubauer, u. s. p. 190. See a detailed account in

'sketches of Jewish Social Life,' &c. p. 36.

[7171]679 It is strange, that these two circumstances have not been

noticed. Keim (Jesu von Nazari i. 2, pp. 322, 323) only cursorily

refers to the great road which passed through Nazareth.

[7172]680 The inference, that the expression of Nathanael (St. John i.

46) implies a lower state of the people of Nazareth, is unfounded.

Even Keim points out, that it only marks disbelief that the Messiah

would come from such a place.

[7173]681 Our description of them is derived from notices by Josephus

(such as War iii. 3, 2), and many passages in the Talmud.

[7174]682 These differences are marked in Pes. iv. 5; Keth. iv. 12;

Ned. ii. 4; Chull. 62 a; Baba K. 80 a; Keth. 12 a.

[7175]683 The reader who wishes to understand what we have only

ventured to hint, is referred to the Mishnic tractate Niddah.

[7176]684 Keth. 12 a.

[7177]685 Keth. 12 a, and often.

[7178]686 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' &c., pp. 152 &c.

[7179]687 St. John iii. 29

[7180]688 The best defence of this view is that by Wieseler, Beitr.

zur Wurdig. d. Evang. pp. 133 &c. It is also virtually adopted by

Weiss (Leben Jesu, vol. i. 1882).

[7181]689 This view is adopted almost unanimously by modern writers.

[7182]690 This view is defended with much skill by Mr. McClellan in

his New Testament, vol. i. pp. 409-422.

[7183]691 So Grotius, Bishop Lord Arthur Hervey, and after him most

modern English writers.

[7184]692 The Davidic descent of the Virgin-Mother - which is

questioned by some even among orthodox interpreters - seems implied in

the Gospel (St. Luke i. 27, 32, 69; ii. 4), and an almost necessary

inference from such passages as Rom. i. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 8; Hebr. vii.

14. The Davidic descent of Jesus is not only admitted, but elaborately

proved - on purely rationalistic grounds - by Keim (u. s. pp.

327-329).

[7185]693 This is the general view of antiquity.

[7186]694 St. Luke i. 36.

[7187]695 Reference to this union of Levi and Judah in the Messiah is

made in the Test. xii. Patriarch., Test. Simeonis vii. (apud Fabr.

Cod. Pseudepigr. vol. ii. p. 542). Curiously, the great Hillel was

also said by some to have descended, through his father and mother,

from the tribes of Judah and Levi - all, however, asserting his

Davidic origin (comp. Jer. Taan. iv. 2; Ber. R. 98 and 33).

[7188]696 Comp, Maimonides, Yad haChaz Hil. Sanh. ii. The inference

would, of course, be the same, whether we suppose Mary's mother to

have been the sister-in-law, or the sister, of Elisabeth's father.

[7189]697 St. Luke ii. 24.

[7190]698 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of

Christ,' pp. 143-149. Also the article on 'Marriage' in Cassell's

Bible-Educator, vol. iv. pp. 267-270.

[7191]699 There was a third mode, by cohabitation; but this was highly

disapproved of even by the Rabbis.

[7192]700 The assertion of Professor Wünsche (Neue Beitr. zur

Erläuter. d. Evang. p. 7) that the practice of betrothal was confined

exclusively, or almost so, to Judæa, is quite ungrounded. The passages

to which he refers (Kethub. i. 5 - not 3 - and especially Keth. 12 a)

are irrelevant. Keth. 12 a marks the simpler and purer customs of

Galilee, but does not refer to betrothals.

[7193]701 I have rendered the Greek ca_re by the Hebrew {hebrew} and

for the correctness of it refer the reader to Grimm's remarks on 1

Macc. x. 18 (Exeget. Handb. zu d. Apokryph. 3^tte Lief. p. 149).

[7194]702 Judg. vi. 12.

[7195]703 Bengel aptly remarks, 'Non ut mater gratiae, sed ut filia

gratiae.' Even Jeremy Taylor's remarks (Life of Christ, ed. Pickering,

vol. i. p. 56) would here require modification. Following the best

critical authorities, I have omitted the words, 'Blessed art thou

among women.'

[7196]704 We here refer, as an interesting corroboration, to the

Targum on Ps. xlv. 7 (6 in our A. V.). But this interest is intensely

increased when we read it, not as in our editions of the Targum, but

as found in a MS. copy of the year 1208 (given by Levy in his Targum.

Wörterb. vol. i. p. 390 a). Translating it from that reading, the

Targum thus renders Ps. xlv. 7, 'Thy throne, O God, in the heaven'

(Levy renders, 'Thy throne from God in heaven,' but in either case it

refers to the throne of the Messiah) 'is for ever and ever' (for

'world without end,' {hebrew} 'a rule of righteousness is the rule of

Thy kingdom, O Thou King Messiah!'

[7197]705 In Pirqé de R. El. c. 11, the same boundless dominion is

ascribed to Messiah the King. In that curious passage dominion is

ascribed to 'ten kings,' the first being God, the ninth the Messiah,

and the tenth again God, to Whom the kingdom would be delivered in the

end, according to Is. xliv. 6; Zechar. xiv. 9; Ezek. xxxiv. 24, with

the result described in Is. lii. 9.

[7198]706 Pirqé de R. El. 32, at the beginning.

[7199]707 Professor Wünsche's quotation is here not exact (u. s. p.

414).

[7200]708 St. Matt. i. 21.

[7201]709 Weiss (Leben Jesu, 1882, vol. i. p. 213) rightly calls

attention to the humility of her self-surrender, when she willingly

submitted to what her heart would feel hardest to bear - that of

incurring suspicion of her purity in the sight of all, but especially

in that of her betrothed. The whole account, as we gather from St.

Luke ii. 19, 51, must have been derived from the personal

recollections of the Virgin-Mother.

[7202]710 So in almost innumerable Rabbinic passages.

[7203]711 Nedar. 38 a.

[7204]712 This is answer to the objection, so pertinaciously urged, of

inconsistency with the narrative in St. Matt. i. 19 &c. It is clear,

that Mary went 'with haste' to her kinswoman, and that any

communication to Joseph could only have taken place after that, and

after the Angelic prediction was in all its parts confirmed by her

visit to Elisabeth. Jeremy Taylor (u. s. p. 64) has already arranged

the narrative as in the text.

[7205]713 According to Jewish tradition, the yet unborn infants in

their mother's wombs responded by an Amen to the hymn of praise at the

Red Sea. This is supposed to be indicated by the words {hebrew}(Ps.

lxviii. 27; see also the Targum on that verse). Comp. Keth. 7 b and

Sotah 30 b (last line) and 31 a, though the coarse legendary

explanation of R. Tanchuma mars the poetic beauty of the whole.

[7206]714 The poetic grandeur and the Old Testament cast of the

Virgin's hymn (comp. the Song of Hannah, 1 Sam. ii. 1-10), need

scarcely be pointed out. Perhaps it would read fullest and best by

trying to recall what must have been its Hebrew original.

[7207]715 1st stanza vv. 46-49.

[7208]716 2nd stanza, vv. 50-53.

[7209]717 3rd stanza, vv. 54-55.

[7210]718 Weiss, while denying the historical accuracy of much in the

Gospel-narrative of it, unhesitatingly accepts the fact of the

supernatural birth of Jesus.

[7211]719 Keim elaborately discusses the origin of what he calls the

legend of Christ's supernatural conception. He arrives at the

conclusion that it was a Jewish-Christian legend - as if a Jewish

invention of such a 'legend' were not the most unlikely of all

possible hypotheses! But negative criticism is at least bound to

furnish some historical basis for the origination of such an unlikely

legend. Whence was the idea of it first derived? How did it find such

ready acceptance in the Church? Weiss has, at considerable length, and

very fully, shown the impossibility of its origin either in Jewish or

heathen legend.

[7212]720 I have thus paraphrased the verb paradeigmat_zw rendered in

Heb. vi. 6 'put to an open shame.' Comp. also LXX. Num. xxv. 4; Jer.

xiii. 22; Ezek. xxviii. 17 (see Grimm, Clavis N.T. p. 333 b)

Archdeacon Farrar adopts the reading deigmat_sai.

[7213]721 For example, if he had not sufficient witnesses, or if their

testimony could be invalidated by any of those provisions in favour of

the accused, of which traditionalism had not a few. Thus, as indicated

in the text, Joseph might have privately divorced Mary leaving it open

to doubt on what ground he had so acted.

[7214]722 Keth. 74 b 75 a.

[7215]723 Keth. 97 b.

[7216]724 See a former note.

[7217]725 Thus we read in (Shocher Tobh) the Midrash on Prov. xix. 21

(closing part; ed. Lemberg. p. 16 b) of eight names given to the

Messiah, viz. Yinnon (Ps. xxii. 17, 'His name shall sprout [bear

sprouts] before the Sun;' comp. also Pirqé de R. El. c. 2); Jehovah;

Our Righteousness; Tsemach (the Branch, Zech. iii. 8); Menachem (the

Comforter, Is. li. 3); David (Ps. xviii. 50); Shiloh (Gen. xlix. 10);

Elijah (Mal. iv. 5). The Messiah is also called Anani (He that cometh

in the clouds, Dan. vii. 13; see Tanch. Par. Toledoth 14); Chaninah,

with reference to Jer. xvi. 13; the Leprous, with reference to Is.

liii. 4 (Sanh. 96 b). It is a curious instance of the Jewish mode of

explaining a meaning by gimatreya, or numerical calculation, that they

prove Tsemach (Branch) and Menachem (Comforter) to be the same,

because the numerical equivalents of the one word are equal to those

of the other: {hebrew} = 40, {hebrew} =50, {hebrew}=8, {hebrew} = 40,

= 138; {hebrew} = 90, {hebrew} = 40, {hebrew} = 8, =138.

[7218]726 Professor Wünsche (Erlauter. d. Evang. p. 10) proposes to

strike out the words 'from their sins' as an un-Jewish interpolation.

In answer, it would suffice to point him to the passages on this very

subject which he has collated in a previous work: Die Leiden des

Messias, pp. 63-108. To these I will only add a comment in the Midrash

on Cant. i. 14 (ed. Warshau, p. 11 a and b), where the reference is

undoubtedly to the Messiah (in the words of R. Berakhyah, line 8 from

bottom; and again in the words of R. Levi, 11 b, line 5 from top,

&c.). The expression {hebrew} is there explained as meaning 'He Who

makes expiation for the sins of Israel,' and it is distinctly added

that this expiation bears reference to the transgressions and evil

deeds of the children of Abraham, for which God provides this Man as

the Atonement.

[7219]727 'A good king, a fruitful year, and a good dream.'

[7220]728 Ber. 55 b.

[7221]729 Rabbi Zera proves this by a reference to Prov. xix. 23, the

reading Sabhea (satisfied) being altered into Shebha - both written

{hebrew} - while {hebrew} is understood as of spending the night. Ber.

55 a to 57 b contains a long, and sometimes very coarse, discussion of

dreams, giving their various interpretations, rules for avoiding the

consequences of evil dreams, &c. The fundamental principle is, that 'a

dream is according to its interpretation' (Ber. 55 b). Such views

about dreams would, no doubt, have long been matter of popular belief,

before being formally expressed in the Talmud.

[7222]730 The objection, that the account of Joseph and Mary's

immediate marriage is inconsistent with the designation of Mary in St.

Luke ii. 5, is sufficiently refuted by the consideration that, in any

other case, Jewish custom would not have allowed Mary to travel to

Bethlehem in company with Joseph. The expression used in St. Luke ii.

5, must be read in connection with St. Matt. i. 25.

[7223]731 Haupt (Alttestam. Citate in d. vier Evang. pp. 207-215)

rightly lays stress on the words, 'all this was done.' He even extends

its reference to the threefold arrangement of the genealogy by St.

Matthew, as implying the ascending splendour of the line of David, its

midday glory, and its decline.

[7224]732 The correct Hebrew equivalent of the expression 'that it

might be fulfilled' _na pljrwq_ is not, as Surenhusius (Biblos

Katallages, p. 151) and other writers have it, {hebrew}, still loss

(Wünsche) {hebrew}, but, as Professor Delitzsch renders it, in his new

translation of St. Matthew, {hebrew}. The difference is important, and

Delitzsch's translation completely established by the similar

rendering of the LXX. of 1 Kings ii. 27 and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22.

[7225]733 Is. vii. 14.

[7226]734 Ex. iii. 12.

[7227]735 A critical discussion of Is. vii. 14 would here be out of

place; though I have attempted to express my views in the text. (The

nearest approach to them is that by Engelhardt in the Zeitschr. für

Luth. Theol. fur 1872, Heft iv.). The quotation of St. Matthew

follows, with scarcely any variation, the rendering of the LXX. That

they should have translated the Hebrew {hebrew} by parq_nov, 'a

Virgin,' is surely sufficient evidence of the admissibility of such a

rendering. The idea that the promised Son was to be either that of

Ahaz, or else of the prophet, cannot stand the test of critical

investigation (see Haupt, u.s., and Böhl, Alttest. Citate im N.T. pp.

3-6). Our difficulties of interpretation are, in great part, due to

the abruptness of Isaiah's prophetic language, and to our ignorance of

surrounding circumstances. Steinmeyer ingeniously argues against the

mythical theory that, since Is. vii. 14 was not interpreted by the

ancient Synagogue in a Messianic sense, that passage could not have

led to the origination of 'the legend' about the 'Virgin's Son'

(Gesch. d. Geb. d. Herrn, p. 95). We add this further question, Whence

did it originate?

[7228]736 Pes. 4 a.

[7229]737 Yalkut Sh. i. par. 81.

[7230]738 Tanch. P Tetsavveh, at the beginning, ed. Warshau, p. 111 a.

[7231]739 Tanch. u. s.

[7232]740 Pirqé de R. Elies. c. 29.

[7233]741 Probably the designation of 'chair' or 'throne of Elijah,'

for the chair on which the godparent holding the child sits, and

certainly the invocation of Elijah, are of later date. Indeed, the

institution of godparents is itself of later origin. Curiously enough,

the Council of Terracina, in 1330 had to interdict Christians acting

as godparents at circumcision! Even the great Buxtorf acted as

godparent in 1619 to a Jewish child, and was condemned to a fine of

100 florins for his offence. See Löw, Lebensalter, p. 86.

[7234]742 According to Josephus (Ag. Ap. ii. 26) circumcision was not

followed by a feast. But, if this be true, the practice was soon

altered, and the feast took place on the eve of circumcision (Jer.

Keth. i. 5; B. Kama 80 a; B. Bath. 60 b, &c.). Later Midrashim traced

it up to the history of Abraham and the feast at the weaning of Isaac,

which they represented as one at circumcision (Pirqé d. R. Eliez. 29).

[7235]743 Wünsche reiterates the groundless objection of Rabbi Low (u.

s. p.96), that a family-name was only given in remembrance of the

grandfather, deceased father, or other member of the family! Strange,

that such a statement should ever have been hazarded; stranger still,

that it should be repeated after having been fully refuted by

Delitzsch. It certainly is contrary to Josephus (War iv. 3, 9), and to

the circumstance that both the father and brother of Josephus bore the

name of Mattias. See also Zunz (Z. Gesch. u. Liter. p. 318).

[7236]744 The reader will find B. H. Auerbach's Berith Abraham (with a

Hebrew introduction) an interesting tractate on the subject. For

another and younger version of these prayers, see Löw, u. s. p. 102.

[7237]745 From St. Luke i. 62 we gather, that Zacharias was what the

Rabbis understood by {hebrew} - one deaf as well as dumb. Accordingly

they communicated with him by {hebrew} 'signs' - as Delitzsch

correctly renders it: {hebrew}

[7238]746 Although almost all modern authorities are against me, I

cannot persuade myself that the expression (St. Luke i. 78) rendered

'dayspring' in our A. V. is here not the equivalent of the Hebrew

{hebrew} 'Branch.' The LXX. at any rate rendered {hebrew} in Jer.

xxiii. 5; Ezek. xvi. 7; xvii. 10; Zech. iii. 8; vi. 12, by _natol_.

[7239]747 The italics mark the points of correspondence with the hymn

of Zacharias. Comp. The best edition of the Jewish Prayer Book

(Frankfort, 5601), pp. 21-28. The Eighteen Eulogies are given in full

in the 'History of the Jewish Nation,' pp. 363-367.

[7240]748 The insertion of g_r seems critically established, and gives

the fuller meaning.

[7241]749 Gen. iii. 13.

[7242]750 St. John viii. 56.

[7243]751 In this respect there is deep significance in the Jewish

legend (frequently introduced; see, for example, Tanch. ii. 99 a; Deb.

R. 1), that all the miracles which God had shown to Israel in the

wilderness would be done again to redeemed Zion in the 'latter days.'

[7244]752 St. Matt. ii. 15.

[7245]753 Phil. ii. 6-11.

[7246]754 Gen. iii. 15.

[7247]755 Sanh. 99 a.

[7248]756 Sanh. 98 b.

[7249]757 See Appendix IX., where a detailed list is given of all the

Old Testament passages which the ancient Synagogue applied

Messianically, together with the references to the Rabbinic works

where they are quoted.

[7250]758 Large as this number is, I do not present the list as

complete. Thus, out of the thirty-seven Parashahs constituting the

Midrash on Leviticus, no fewer than twenty-five close with an outlook

on Messianic times. The same may be said of the close of many of the

Parashahs in the Midrashim known as Pesiqta and Tanchuma (Zunz, u.s.

pp. 181, 234). Besides, the oldest portions of the Jewish liturgy are

full of Messianic aspirations.

[7251]759 For these, see Appendix IX.

[7252]760 Yalkut on Is. ix. 1.

[7253]761 This is the view expressed by all Jewish dogmatic writers.

See also Weber, Altsynag. Theol. p. 217.

[7254]762 Comp. on the subject. Ber. R. 12-16.

[7255]763 In Ber. R., however, it has seemed to me, as if sometimes a

mystical and symbolical view of the history of the Fall were

insinuated - evil concupiscence being the occasion of it.

[7256]764 Pirqé de R. El. c. 13; Yalkut i. p. 8 c.

[7257]765 Comp. Pirqé de R. El. and Yalkut, u.s.; also Ber. R. 19.

[7258]766 Ber. R. 19, ed. Warshau, p. 37 a.

[7259]767 Bemidb. R. 13.

[7260]768 They are: the shining splendour of his person, even his

heels being like suns; his gigantic size, from east to west, from

earth to heaven; the spontaneous splendid products of the ground, and

of all fruit-trees; an infinitely greater measure of light on the part

of the heavenly bodies; and, finally, endless duration of life (Ber.

R. 12, ed. Warsh. p. 24 b; Ber. R. 21; Sanh. 38 b; Chag. 12 a; and for

their restoration by the Messiah, Bem. R. 13).

[7261]769 Vayyikra R. 27.

[7262]770 Ber. R. 16, 21, and often.

[7263]771 Ber. R. 5, 12, 10; comp. also Midr. on Eccl. vii. 13; and

viii. 1, and Baba B. 17 a.

[7264]772 Ber. R. 9.

[7265]773 Bemidb. R. 19.

[7266]774 According to Deut.xxxiii. 2; Hab. iii. 3.

[7267]775 Ab. Zar. 2 b.

[7268]776 Ab. Z. 5 a.

[7269]777 By a most ingenious theological artifice the sin of the

golden calf, and that of David are made matter for thanksgiving; the

one as showing that, even if the whole people sinned, God was willing

to forgive; the other as proving, that God graciously condescended to

each individual sinner, and that to each the door of repentance was

open.

[7270]778 In the Talmud (Shabb. 55 a and b) each view is supported in

discussion, the one by a reference to Ezek. xviii. 20, the other to

Eccles. ix. 2 (comp. also Siphré on Deut. xxxii. 49). The final

conclusion, however, greatly inclines towards the connection between

death and the fall (see especially the clear statement in Debar. R. 9,

ed. Warsh., p. 20 a). This view is also supported by such passages in

the Apocrypha as Wisdom ii. 23, 24; iii. 1, &c.; while, on the other

hand, Ecclus. xv. 11-17 seems rather to point in a different

direction.

[7271]779 Targum Ps.-Jon. on Gen. ii. 7.

[7272]780 Nedar. 32 b; Midr. on Eccl. iv. 13, 14, ed. W. p. 89 a; ix.

15; ib. p. 101 a.

[7273]781 Ber. R. 9.

[7274]782 Ber. 61 a.

[7275]783 Sukk. 52 a, and Yalkut ii. p. 149 b.

[7276]784 Comp. also Jer. Targum on Ex. xxxii. 22.

[7277]785 Ab. Z. 5 b; Kidd. 30 b.

[7278]786 For example, Yoma 28 b; Chag. 4 b.

[7279]787 Comp. IV. Esd. iii. 21, 22, 26; iv. 30; and especially vii.

46-53.

[7280]788 There can be no question that, despite its strong polemical

tendency against Christianity, the Fourth Book of Esdras (II. Esdras

in our Apocrypha), written at the close of the first century of our

era, is deeply tinged with Christian doctrine. Of course, the first

two and the last two chapters in our Apocryphal II. Esdras are later

spurious additions of Christian authorship. But in proof of the

influence of the Christian teaching on the writer of the Fourth Book

of Esdras we may call attention, besides the adoption of the doctrine

of original sin, to the remarkable application to Israel of such N.T.

expressions as the 'firstborn,' the 'only-begotten,' and the

'Well-beloved' (IV. Esdras vi. 58 - in our Apocr. II. Esdras iv. 58).

[7281]789 Men. 53 b.

[7282]790 Gitt. 7 a.

[7283]791 Gitt. 88 a.

[7284]792 Jer. Yoma i. 1; Yoma 9 a, and many other passages.

[7285]793 Yoma 9 b.

[7286]794 Jer. Yoma i. 1.

[7287]795 Nidd. 13 b.

[7288]796 Yoma 19 b.

[7289]797 For all these points comp. Ber. 58 b; 59 a; Sot. 48 a;

Shabb. 138 b; Baba B. 12 a, b.

[7290]798 Vayyikra R 19.

[7291]799 Sukk. 55 b.

[7292]800 Pesiqta, 1 ed. Buber, p. 145 a, last lines.

[7293]801 Midr, on Ps.cxxxvii.

[7294]802 Pesiqta 148 b.

[7295]803 This is the Pesiqta, not that which is generally quoted

either as Rabbathi or Sutarta.

[7296]804 Chag. 13 b.

[7297]805 This in very many Rabbinical passages. Comp. Castelli, II

Messia, p. 176, note 4.

[7298]806 Shemoth R. 2. ed. Warsh. p. 7 b, lines 12 &c.

[7299]807 In proof they appeal to such passages as 2 Chr. vii. 16; Ps.

iii. 4; Cant. ii. 9, proving it even from the decree of Cyrus (Ezra i.

3, 4), in which God is spoken of as still in desolate Jerusalem.

[7300]808 The passage from Yalkut on Is. lx. 1 is quoted in full in

Appendix IX.

[7301]809 Ber. 3 a; 59 a.

[7302]810 Pesiqta 119 b; 120 a.

[7303]811 Jer. Yoma i. 1, ed. Krot. p 38 c, last part, Sanh. 97 b, 98

[7304]812 Midr. on Cant. v. 2, ed. Warsh. p. 25 a; Sanh. 98 a.

[7305]813 Pirqé de R. Eliez. 43 end.

[7306]814 On Lam. v. 21, ed. Warsh. vol. iii. p. 77 a.

[7307]815 Tanch. on Ex. xv. 1, ed. Warsh. p. 86 b.

[7308]816 On Jer. xxxi. 9.

[7309]817 Tanch. on Gen. xiv. 2, ed. Warsh.

[7310]818 Sanh. 97 b 98 a.

[7311]819 The reader will find these discussions summarised at the

close of Appendix IX.

[7312]820 Sanh. 98 a and b.

[7313]821 See, on the whole subject, also Debar. R. 2.

[7314]822 We put aside, as universally repudiated, the opinion

expressed by one Rabbi, that Israel's Messianic era was past, the

promises having been fulfilled in King Hezekiah (Sanh. 98 b; 99 a).

[7315]823 See, in Appendix IX. the extracts from Sanh.

[7316]824 Sanh. 97 b.

[7317]825 Pirqé de R. Ehes. 32.

[7318]826 u. s. 30.

[7319]827 Comp. Pirqé de R. El. 48.

[7320]828 Pirqé de R. El. 28. The reasoning by which this duration of

the monarchies is derived from Lament. i. 13 and Zech. xiv. 7, is a

very curious specimen of Rabbinic argumentation.

[7321]829 Comp. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. p. 277.

[7322]830 Sanh. 98 b.

[7323]831 See Appendix IX.

[7324]832 Ab. Z. 5 a, Ber. R. 24.

[7325]833 Targum Pseudo-Jon on Gen. xlix. 1.

[7326]834 Midrash on Ps. xxxi. ed. Warsh. p. 41 a, lines 18 to 15 from

bottom.

[7327]835 Pesikta, ed. Buber, 47 b. 48 a, Sopher. xxi. Hal. 2. Shir.

haShir. R. ii. 8. ed. Warsh. vol. iii. p. 15 a.

[7328]836 Solitary opinions, however, place the future redemption in

the month Tishri (Tanch. on Ex. xii. 37, ed. Warsh. p. 81 b, line 2

from bottom.)

[7329]837 See the telling remarks of Oehler in Herzog's Real-Encykul.,

vol. ix. p. 417. We would add, that there is always a 'hereafter' of

further development in the history of the individual believer, as in

that of the Church - growing brighter and brighter, with increased

spiritual communication and knowledge, till at last the perfect light

is reached.

[7330]838 1 Cor. xiii. 9.

[7331]839 No reasonable doubt can be left on the mind, that the LXX.

translators have here the Messiah in view.

[7332]840 Ps. lxxii.

[7333]841 Ps. cx.

[7334]842 Ps. lxxii.

[7335]843 Is. ix. 6.

[7336]844 The criticism of Mr. Drummond on these three passages

(Jewish Messiah, pp. 290, 291) cannot be supported on critical

grounds.

[7337]845 Three, if not four, different renderings of the Targum on

Is. ix. 6 are possible. But the minimum conveyed to my mind implies

the premundane existence, the eternal continuance, and the superhuman

dignity of the Messiah. (See also the Targum on Micah v. 2.)

[7338]846 This is the view of Grimm, and more fully carried out by

Oehler. The argument of Hengstenberg, that the mention of such a

Messiah was restrained from fear of the heathen, does not deserve

serious refutation.

[7339]847 These exceptions are, according to Friedlieb (Die Sibyllin.

Weissag.) vv. 1-45, vv. 47-96 (dating from 40-31 before Christ), and

vv. 818-828. On the subject generally, see our previous remarks in

Book 1.

[7340]848 vv. 652-807.

[7341]849 vv. 285, 286.

[7342]850 v. 652.

[7343]851 Mr. Drummond defends (at pp. d 274, 275) Holtxmann's view,

that the expression applies to Simon the Maccabee, although on p. 291

he argues on the opposite supposition that the text refers to the

Messiah. It is difficult to understand, how on reading the whole

passage the hypothesis of Holtzmann could be entertained. While

referring to the 3rd Book of the Sib. Or., another point of

considerable interest deserves notice. According to the theory which

places the authorship of Daniel in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes -

or say about 165 b.c. - the 'fourth kingdom' of Daniel must be the

Grecian. But, on the other hand, such certainly was not the view

entertained by Apocalypts of the year 165, since the 3d Book of the

Sib. Or., which dates from precisely that period, not only takes

notice of the rising power of Rome, but anticipates the destruction of

the Grecian Empire by Rome, which in turn is to be vanquished by

Israel (vv. 175-195; 520-544; 638-807). This most important fact would

require to be accounted for by the opponents of the authenticity of

Daniel.

[7344]852 vv. 652-807.

[7345]853 I have purposely omitted all references to controverted

passages. But see Langen, D. Judenth. in Palest. pp. 401 &c.

[7346]854 ch. i.- xxxvi. and lxxii.-cv.

[7347]855 The next oldest portion, consisting of the so-called

Similitudes (ch xxxvii.- xxi.), excepting what are termed 'the

Noachic' parts, dates from about the time of Herod the Great.

[7348]856 Schürer (Lehrb. d. Neutest. Zitg. pp. 534, 535) has, I

think, consclusively shown that this portion of the Book of Enoch is

of Jewish authorship, and pre-Christian date. If so, it were deeply

interesting to follow its account of the Messiah. He appears by the

side of the Ancient of Days, His face like appearance of a man, and

yet so lovely, like that of one of the holy Angels. This 'Son of Man'

has, and with Him dwells, all righteousness; He reveals the treasures

of all that is hidden, being chosen by the Lord, is superior to all,

and destined to subdue and destroy all the powers and kingdoms of

wickedness (ch. xivi.). Although only revealed at the last, His Name

had been named before God, before sun or stars were created. He is the

staff on which the righteous lean, the light of nations, and the hope

of all who mourn in spirit. All are to bow down before Him, and adore

Him, and for this He was chosen and hidden with God before the world

was created, and will continue before Him for ever (ch. xlviii.). This

'Elect One' is to sit on the throne of glory, and dwell among His

saints. Heaven and earth would abide on the and only the saints would

abide on the renewed earth (ch. xiv.). He is mighty in all the secrets

of righteousness, and unrighteousness would flee as a shadow, because

His glory lasted from eternity to eternity, and His power from

generation to generation (ch. xlix.). Then would the earth, Hades, and

hell give up their dead, and Messiah, sitting on His throne, would

select and own the just, and open up all secrets of wisdom, amidst the

universal joy of ransomed earth (ch. li., lxi., lxii.).

[7349]857 lxii. 5.

[7350]858 For ex. xlviii. 2: lxii. 7; lxix 29.

[7351]859 cv. 2.

[7352]860 xc. 38.

[7353]861 in Ps. xi.

[7354]862 in Ps. xvii.

[7355]863 xviii.

[7356]864 xvii. 5.

[7357]865 v. 23.

[7358]866 v. 35.

[7359]867 v. 36.

[7360]868 v. 41.

[7361]869 vv. 42, 43.

[7362]870 v. 47.

[7363]871 vv. 25-35.

[7364]872 In illustration of this tendency we may quote the following

evidently polemical saying, of R. Abbahu. 'If any man saith to thee,

"I am God" he is a liar; "I am the Son of Man," he will at last repent

of it; "I go up to heaven," hath he said, and shall he not do it?'

[or, he hath said, and shall not make it good] (Jer. Taan. p. 65 b.

line 7 from bottom). This R. Abbahu (279-320 of our era) seems to have

largely engaged in controversy with Jewish Christians. Thus he sought

to argue against the Sonship of Christ, by commenting, as follows, on

Is. xliv. 6: ' "I am the first" - because He has no father; "I am the

last" - because He has no Son; "and beside me there is no God" -

because He has no brother (equal)' (Shem. R. 29, ed. Warsh. vol. ii.

p. 41 a, line 8 from bottom).

[7365]873 It is, to say the least, a pity that Mr. Drummond should

have imagined that the question could be so easily settled on the

premises which he presents.

[7366]874 xii. 32; xiii. 26, 52; xiv. 9.

[7367]875 The 4th Book of Esdras (in our Apocr. II. Esdras) dates from

the end of the first century of our era - and so does the Apocalypse

of Baruch.

[7368]876 lxx.9- lxxiv.

[7369]877 Ed. Lemb. p. 7 a

[7370]878 These are: the Throne of Glory, Messiah the King, the Torah,

(ideal) Israel, the Temple, repentance, and Gehenna.

[7371]879 Pirqé de R. E. 3; Midr.on Ps. xciii.1; Ps. 54 a; Nedar. 39

b; Ber. R. 1; 3 Tanch. on Numb. vii. 14, ed. Warsh. vol. ii Midr. on

Ps. 54 a; Nedar. 39 b; Ber. R. 1; Tanch. on Numb. vii. 14, ed. Warsh.

vol. ii. p. 56 b, at the bottom.

[7372]880 In Pirqé de R. El. and the other authorities these seven

things are: the Torah, Gehenna, Paradise, the Throne of Glory, the

Temple, repentance, and the Name of the Messiah.

[7373]881 In Ber. R. six things are mentioned: two actually created

(the Torah and the Throne of Glory), and four which came into His Mind

to create them (the Fathers, Israel, the Temple, and the Name of the

Messiah.

[7374]882 In Tanch, seven things are enumerated (the six as in Ber.

R., with the addition of repentance), 'and some say: also Paradise and

Gehenna.'

[7375]883 Jer. Ber. ii. 4, p. 5 a.

[7376]884 Sanh. 98 a; comp. also Jerus. Targ. on Ex. xii. 42; Pirqé de

R. El. 30, and other passages.

[7377]885 See for example Pesiqta, ed Buber, p. 49 b.

[7378]886 In that passage the time of Messiah's concealment is

calculated at forty-five days, from a comparison of Dan. xii. 11 with

v. 12.

[7379]887 Gen.. xxxviii. 1, 2.

[7380]888 Ber. R. 85, ed. Warsh. p. 151 b.

[7381]889 Mentioned in 1 Chr. iii. 24 6.

[7382]890 The comment on this passage is curiously mystical, but

clearly implies not only the pre-existence, but the superhuman

character of the Messiah.

[7383]891 Tanch. Par. To edoth, 14. ed. Warsh. p. 37 b.

[7384]892 Ber. R. 65 ed. Warsh. p. 114 b; Vayyikra R. 30, ed. W. vol.

iii. p. 47 a; Pes 5 a.

[7385]893 Yalkut ii. p. 56 c.

[7386]894 The whole of this very remarkable passage is given in

Appendix IX., in the notes on Is. xxv. 8; lx l; lxiv. 4; Jer. xxxi. 8.

[7387]895 Shem. R. 1, ed. W. vol. ii. p. 5 b; Tanch. Par. Tazrya, 8,

ed. W. vol. ii. p. 20 a.

[7388]896 Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 49 b; Midr. Ruth. Par. 5, ed. W. p.

43 b.

[7389]897 Sanh. 98 a.

[7390]898 Pirqé de R. El. 31, ed. Lemb. p. 38 a.

[7391]899 Pirqé de R. El. u. s., p. 39 a, close.

[7392]900 Bemid. R. 18, close of the Phar.

[7393]901 Ps. lxxii. 16.

[7394]902 According to the last clause of (English verson) Joel iii.

18 (Midr. on Eccles. i. 9 ed. Warsh, vol. iv. p. 80 b.)

[7395]903 Bemid. R. 14, ed. Warsh. p. 55 a.

[7396]904 Bemid. R. 13.

[7397]905 Yalkut on Numb. xxvii. 16, vol. i. p. 247 d.

[7398]906 This is the more noteworthy as, according Sotah 9 b, none in

Israel was so great as Moses, who was only inferior to the Almighty.

[7399]907 Tanch., Par. Toledoth 14.

[7400]908 Midr. Tehill. ed. Warsh. p. 30 b.

[7401]909 Ps. civ. 1.

[7402]910 Ps. xciii. 1.

[7403]911 Ps. xciii. 1.

[7404]912 Dan. vii. 9.

[7405]913 Is. lix. 17.

[7406]914 Is. lix. 17.

[7407]915 Is. lxiii.

[7408]916 Is. lxi. 10.

[7409]917 Ps. xxxi. 19.

[7410]918 Pesiqta. ed. Buber. pp. 149, a, b.

[7411]919 Midr. on Ps. xviii. 36, ed. Warsh. p. 27 a.

[7412]920 Midr. on Ps. cx. 1, ed. Warsh. p. 80 b.

[7413]921 Ber. R. 23, ed Warsh p. 45 b.

[7414]922 Gen. xix. 32.

[7415]923 Ber. R. 51 ed. Warsh. p. 95 a.

[7416]924 I am, of course, aware that certain Rabbinists explain the

expression 'Seed from another place,' as referring to the descent of

the Messiah from Ruth - a non-Israelite. But if this explanation could

be offered in reference to the daughters of Lot, it is difficult to

see its meaning in reference to Eve and the birth of Seth. The

connection there with the words (Gen. iv. 25), 'God hath appointed me

another Seed,' would be the very loosest.

[7417]925 Ber. R. 2; and 8; Vayyikra R. 14, ed. Warsh. vol. iii. p. 21

[7418]926 I am surprised, that Castelli (u. s. p. 207) should have

contended, that the reading in Ber. R. 8 and Vay. R. 14 should be 'the

Spirit of Adam.' For (1) the attempted correction gives neither sense,

nor proper meaning. (2) The passage Ber. R. 1 is not impugned; yet

that passage is the basis of the other two. (3) Ber. R. 8 must read,

'The Spirit of God moved on the deep - that is, the Spirit of Messiah

the King,' because the proof-passage is immediately added, 'and the

spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him,' which is a Messianic passage;

and because, only two lines before the impugned passage, we are told,

that Gen. i. 26, 1st clause, refers to the 'spirit of the first man.'

The latter remark applies also to Vayyikra R. 14, where the context

equally forbids the proposed correction.

[7419]927 It would be very interesting to compare with this the

statements of Philo as to the agency of the Logos in Creation. The

subject is very well treated by Riehm (Lehrbegr. d. Hebr. Br. pp.

414-420), although I cannot agree with all his conclusions.

[7420]928 Midr. on Lament. i 16, ed Warsh. p. 64 a, last line comp.

Pesiqta, p. 148 a; Midr. on Ps. xxi. and the very curious concessions

in a controvesy with a Christian recorded in Sanh. 38 b.

[7421]929 The whole of this passage, beginning at p. 147 b, is very

curious and deeply interesting. It would lead too far to quote it, or

other parallel passages which might be adduced. The passage in the

Midrash on Lament. i. 16 is also extremely interesting. After the

statement quoted in the text, there follows a discussion on the names

of the Messiah, and then the curious story about the Messiah having

already been born in Bethlehem.

[7422]930 Dan. vii. 13.

[7423]931 It will be noticed, that the cummulative argument presented

in the foregoing pages follows closely that in the first chapter of

the Epistle to the Hebrews; only, that the latter carries it up to its

final conclusion, that the Messiah was truly the Son of God, while it

has been our purpose simply to state, what was the expectation of the

ancient Synagogue, not what it should have been according to the Old

Testament.

[7424]932 Micah v. 2.

[7425]933 The advocates of the mythical theory have not answered, not

even faced or understood, what to us seems, on their hypothesis, an

insuperable difficulty. Granting, that Jewish expectancy would suggest

the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem, why invent such circumstances to

bring Mary to Bethlehem? Keim may be right in saying: 'The belief in

the birth at Bethlehem originated very simply' (Leben Jesu i. 2, p.

393); but all the more complicated and inexplicable is the origination

of the legend, which accounts for the journey thither of Mary and

Joseph.

[7426]934 In evidence of these feelings, we have the account of

Josephus of the consequences of the taxation of Cyrenius (Ant. xviii.

1. 1. Comp. Acts v. 37).

[7427]935 The arguments on what may be called the orthodox side have,

from different points of view, been so often and well stated -

latterly by Wieseler, Huschke, Zumpt, and Steinmeyer - and on the

other side almost ad nauseam by negative critics of every school, that

it seems unnecessary to go again over them. The reader will find the

whole subject stated by Canon Cook, whose views we substantially

adopt, in the 'Speaker's Commentary' (N.T. i. pp. 326-329). The

reasoning of Mommsen (Res gestae D. Aug. pp. 175, 176) does not seem

to me to affect the view taken in the text.

[7428]936 Comp. Acts v. 37.

[7429]937 For the textual explanation we again refer to Canon Cook,

only we would mark, with Steinmeyer, that the meaning of the

expression _geneto, in St. Luke ii. 2, is determined by the similar

use of it in Acts xi. 28, where what was predicted is said to have

actually taken place (_g_neto) at the time of Claudius Cæsar.

[7430]938 Comp. Huschke. Ueber d. z. Zeit d. Geb. J. C. gehalt. Census

pp. 119, 120. Most critics have written very confusedly on this point.

[7431]939 The reader will now be able to appreciate the value of

Keim's objections against such a Census, as involving a 'wahre

Volkswanderung' (!), and being 'eine Sache der Unmöglichkeit.'

[7432]940 St. Matt ii. 22.

[7433]941 St. Luke ii. 5.

[7434]942 This, of course, is only a conjecture; but I call it

'probable,' partly because one would naturally so arrange a journey of

several days, to make its stages as slow and easy as possible, and

partly from the circumstance, that, on their arrival, they found the

khan full, which would scarcely have been the case had they reached

Bethlehem early in the day.

[7435]943 Comp. the account of the roads, inns, &c. in the 'History of

the Jewish Nation,' p. 275; and the chapter on 'Travelling in

Palestine,' in 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ.'

[7436]944 The almond is called, in Hebrew, {hebrew}, 'the waker,' from

the word 'to be awake.' It is quite possible, that many of the

earliest spring flowers already made the landscape bright.

[7437]945 Jos. Ant. xiv. 13. 9; xv. 9. 4; War. i. 13. 8:21, 10.

[7438]946 Dr. Geikie indeed 'feels sure' that the kat_luma was not an

inn, but a guest-chamber, because the word is used in that sense in

St. Mark xiv. 14, Luke xxii. 11. But this inference is critically

untenable. The Greek word is of very wide application, and means (as

Schleusner puts it) 'omnis locus quieti aptus.' In the LXX. kat_luma

is the equivalent of not less than five Hebrew words, which have

widely different meanings. In the LXX. rendering of Ex. iv. 24 it is

used for the Hebrew {hebrew} which certainly cannot mean a

guest-chamber, but an inn. No one could imagine that. If private

hospitality had been extended to the Virgin-Mother, she would have

been left in such circumstances in a stable. The same term occurs in

Aramaic form, in Rabbinic writings, as {hebrew} or {hebrew}={hebrew}

kat_luma, an inn. Delitzsch, in his Hebrew N.T., uses the more common

{hebrew}. Bazaars and markets were also held in those hostelries;

animals killed, and meat sold there; also wine and cider; so that they

were a much more public place of resort than might at first be

imagined. Comp. Herzfeld. Handelsgesch. p. 325.

[7439]947 St. John xx. 31; comp. St. Luke i. 4.

[7440]948 Perhaps the best authenticated of all local traditions is

that which fixes on this cave as the place of the Nativity. The

evidence in its favour is well given by Dr. Farrar in his 'Life of

Christ.' Dean Stanley, however, and others, have questioned it.

[7441]949 In the curious story of His birth, related in the Jer.

Talmud (Ber. ii. 3), He is said to have been born in 'the royal castle

of Bethlehem;' while in the parallel narrative in the Midr. on Lament.

i. 16, ed. W. p. 64 b) the somewhat mysterious expression is used

{hebrew}. But we must keep in view the Rabbinic statement that, even

if a castle falls down, it is still called a castle (Yalkut, vol. ii.

p. 60 b).

[7442]950 Targum Pseudo-Jon. On Gen. xxxv. 21.

[7443]951 Shek. vii. 4.

[7444]952 In fact the Mishnah (Baba K. vii. 7) expressly forbids the

keeping of flocks throughout the land of Israel, except in the

wilderness - and the only flocks otherwise kept, would be those for

the Temple-services (Baba K. 80 a).

[7445]953 This disposes of an inapt quotation (from Delitzsch) by Dr.

Geikie. No one could imagine, that the Talmudic passages in question

could apply to such shepherds as these.

[7446]954 The mean of 22 seasons in Jerusalem amounted to 4.718 inches

in December, 5.479 in January, and 5.207 in February (see a very

interesting paper by Dr. Chaplin in Quart. Stat. of Pal. Explor. Fund,

January, 1883). For 1876-77 we have these startling figures: mean for

December, .490; for January, 1.595; for February, 8.750 - and,

similarly, in other years. And so we read: 'Good the year in which

Tebheth (December) is without rain' (Taan. 6 b). Those who have copied

Lightfoot's quotations about the flocks not lying out during the

winter months ought, at least, to have known that the reference in the

Talmudic passages is expressly to the flocks which pastured in 'the

wilderness' ({hebrew}). But even so, the statement, as so many others

of the kind, is not accurate. For, in the Talmud two opinions are

expressed. According to one, the 'Midbariyoth,' or 'animals of the

wilderness,' are those which go to the open at the Passovertime, and

return at the first rains (about November); while, on the other hand,

Rabbi maintains, and, as it seems, more authoritatively, that the

wilderness-flocks remain in the open alike in the hottest days and in

the rainy season - i.e. all the year round (Bezah 40 a). Comp. also

Tosephta Bezah iv. 6. A somewhat different explanation is given in

Jer. Bezah 63 b.

[7447]955 There is no adequate reason for questioning the historical

accuracy of this date. The objections generally made rest on grounds,

which seem to me historically untenable. The subject has been fully

discussed in an article by Cassel in Herzog's Real. Ency. xvii. pp.

588-594. But a curious piece of evidence comes to us from a Jewish

source. In the addition to the Megillath Taanith (ed. Warsh. p. 20 a),

the 9th Tebheth is marked as a fast day, and it is added, that the

reason for this is not stated. Now, Jewish chronologists have fixed on

that day as that of Christ's birth, and it is remarkable that, between

the years 500 and 816 a.d. the 25th of December fell no less than

twelve times on the 9th Tebheth. If the 9th Tebheth, or 25th December,

was regarded as the birthday of Christ, we can understand the

concealment about it. Comp. Zunz, Ritus d. Synag. Gottesd. p. 126.

[7448]956 In illustration we may here quote Shem. R. 2 (ed. W. vol.

ii. p. 8 a), where it is said that, wherever Michael appears, there

also is the glory of the Shekhinah. In the same section we read, in

reference to the appearance in the bush, that, 'at first only one

Angel came,' who stood in the burning bush, and after that the

Shekhinah came, and spoke to Moses from out the bush. (It is a curious

illustration of Acts ix. 7, that Moses alone is said in Jewish

tradition to have seen the vision. but not the men who were with him.)

Wetstein gives an erroneous reference to a Talmudic statement, to the

effect that, at the birth of Moses, the room was filled with heavenly

light. The statement really occurs in Sotah 12 a; Shem. R. 1; Yalkut

i. 51 c. This must be the foundation of the Christian legend, that the

cave, in which Christ was born, was filled with heavenly light.

Similarly, the Romish legend about the Virgin Mother not feeling the

pangs of maternity is derived from the Jewish legend, which asserts

the same of the mother of Moses. The same authority maintains, that

the birth of Moses remained unknown for three months, because he was a

child of seven months. There are other legends about the sinlessness

of Moses' father, and the maidenhood of his mother (at 103 years),

which remind us of Christian traditions.

[7449]957 According to tradition, the three blasts symbolically

proclaimed the Kingdom of God, the providence of God, and the final

judgment.

[7450]958 Curiously enough, the word strati_ is Hebraised in the same

connection {hebrew}. See Yalkut on Ps. xlv. (vol. ii. p. 105 a, about

the middle).

[7451]959 I have unhesitatingly retained the reading of the textus

receptus. The arguments in its favor are sufficiently set forth by

Canon Cook in his 'Revised Version of the First Three Gospels,' pp.

27, 32.

[7452]960 This appears to me implied in the emphatic statement, that

Mary - as I gather, herself - 'wrapped Him in swaddling clothes' (St.

Luke ii. 7, 12). Otherwise the remark would seem needless and

meaningless.

[7453]961 It seems difficult to understand how, on Dr. Geikie's

theory, the shepherds could have found the Infant-Saviour, since,

manifestly, they could not during that night have roused every

household in Bethlehem, to inquire whether any child had been born

among their guests.

[7454]962 The term diagnwr_zw more than to 'make known abroad.' Wahl

renders it 'ultro citroquenarroh;' Schleusner: 'divulgo aliquid ut

aliis innotescat, spargo rumorem.'

[7455]963 This may have prepared not only those who welcomed Jesus on

His presentation in the Temple, but filled many others with

expectancy.

[7456]964 The following remarkable extract from the Jerusalem Targum

on Ex. xii. 42 may interest the reader: -

'It is a night to be observed and exalted.... Four nights are there

written in the Book of Memorial. Night first: when the Memra of

Jehovah was revealed upon the world for its creation; when the world

was without form and void, and darkness was spread upon the face of

the deep, and the Memra of Jehovah illuminated and made it light; and

He called it the first night. Night second: when the Memra of Jehovah

was revealed unto Abraham between the divided pieces; when Abraham was

a hundred years, and Sarah was ninety years, and to confirm thereby

that which the Scripture saith - Abraham a hundred years, can he

beget? and Sarah, ninety years old, can she bear? Was not our father

Isaac thirty-seven years old at the time he was offered upon the

altar? Then the heavens were bowed down and brought low, and Isaac saw

their foundations, and his eyes were blinded owing to that sight; and

He called it the second night. The thrid night: when the Memra of

Jehovah was revealed upon the Egyptians, at the dividing of the night;

His right hand slew the first-born of the Egyptians, and His right

hand spared the first-born of Israel; to fulfil what the Scripture

hath said, Israel is My first-born well-beloved son. And He called it

the thrid night. Night the fourth: when the end of the world will be

accomplished, that it might be dissolved, the bands of wickedness

destroyed, and the iron yoke broken. Moses came forth from the midst

of the desert, and the King Messiah from the midst of Rome. This one

shall lead at the head of a Cloud, and that one shall lead at the head

of a Cloud; and the Memra of Jehovah will lead between both, and they

two shall come as one (Cachada).' (For explan. see vol. ii. p. 100,

note.)

[7457]965 1 Cor. xii. 3.

[7458]966 Ber. R. 44, ed. Warsh. p. 81 b.

[7459]967 St. John viii. 56.

[7460]968 St. Luke ii. 19, 51.

[7461]969 Numb. xviii. 16.

[7462]970 So Lundius, Jüd. Alterth. p.621, and Buxtorf, Lex. Talmud.

p. 1699. But I am bound to say, that this seems contrary to the

sayings of the Rabbis.

[7463]971 This disposes of the idea, that the Virgin-Mother was of

direct Aaronic or Levitic descent.

[7464]972 Bechor viii. 7.

[7465]973 Lev. xii.

[7466]974 Archdeacon Farrar is mistaken in supposing, that the

'thirty-three days' were counted 'after the circumcision.' The idea

must have arisen from a misunderstanding of the English version of

Lev. xii. 4. There was no connection between the time of the

circumcision of the child, and that of the purification of his mother.

In certain circumstances circumcision might have to be delayed for

days, in case of sickness, till recovery. It is equally a mistake to

suppose, that a Jewish mother could not leave the house till after the

forty days of her purification.

[7467]975 Comp. Sifra, ed. Weiss, p. 59 a and b; Maimonides, Yad

haChaz. Hal.Mechusre Capp., ed. Amst., vol. iii. p. 255 a and b.

[7468]976 Comp. Kerith. i. 7.

[7469]977 Jer. Sheq. 50 b.

[7470]978 There is no ground whatever for the objection which Rabbi

Löw (Lebensalter, p. 112) raises against the account of St. Luke.

Jewish documents only prove, that a mother need not personally attend

in the Temple; not that they did not do so, when attendance was

possible. The contrary impression is conveyed to us by Jewish notices.

[7471]979 The expression to_ kaqarismo_ a_t_n cannot refer to the

Purification of the Virgin and her Babe (Farrar), nor to that of the

Virgin and Joseph (Meyer), because neither the Babe nor Joseph needed,

nor were they included in, the purification. It can only refer to

'their' (i.e. the Jews') purification. But this does not imply any

Romish inferences (Sepp, Leben Jesu, ii. 1, p. 131) as to the

superhuman condition or origin of the Blessed Virgin; on the contrary,

the offering of the sin-offering points in the other direction.

[7472]980 Comp. the rubric and the prayers in Maimonides, Yad haChaz.

Hilch. Biccur. xi. 5.

[7473]981 So Dr. Geikie.

[7474]982 So Dr. Geikie, taking his account from Herzog's Real-Encykl.

The mistake about the mother being sprinkled with sacrificial blood

orginated with Lightfoot (Horæ Hebr. on St. Luke ii. 22). Later

writers have followed the lead. Tamid v. 6, quoted by Lightfoot,

refers only to the cleansing of the leper. The 'prayers' supposed to

be spoken, and the pronouncing clean by the priests, are the

embellishments of later writers, for which Lightfoot is not

responsible.

[7475]983 According to Sifra (Par. Tazria, Per. iv. 3): 'Whenever the

sin-offering is changed, it precedes [as on ordinary occasions] the

burnt-offering; but when the burnt-offering is changed [as on this

occasion], it precedes the sin-offering.'

[7476]984 But this precise spot was not matter of absolute necessity

(Seb. vi. 2). Directions are given as to the manner in which the

priest was to perform the sacrificial act.

[7477]985 Kinnim i. 1. If the sin-offering was a four-footed animal,

the blood was sprinkled above the red line.

[7478]986 Sebach. vi. 5.

[7479]987 Comp. Kerith. i. 7.

[7480]988 Sheq. iv. 9.

[7481]989 Sheq. v. 1.

[7482]990 Comp. St. Matt. vi. 2. See 'The Temple and its Services,' &

c. pp. 26, 27.

[7483]991 Comp. Shekal. vi. 5, the Commentaries, and Jer. Shek. 50 b.

[7484]992 Tosepht. Sheq. iii. 2.

[7485]993 According to Dr. Geikie, 'the Golden Gate at the head of the

long flight of steps that led to the valley of the Kedron opened into

the Court of the Women.' But there was no Golden Gate, neither was

there any flight of steps into the valley of the Kedron, while between

the Court of the Women and any outer gate (such as could have led into

Kedron), the Court of the Gentiles and a colonnade must have

intervened.

[7486]994 Or else, 'the gate of the firstlings.' Comp. generally, 'The

Temple, its Ministry and Services.'

[7487]995 This they could not have done from the elevated platform on

which they commonly worshipped.

[7488]996 This is stated by the Rabbis to have been the object of the

burnt-offering. That suggested for the sin-offering is too ridiculous

to mention. The language used about the burnt-offering reminds us of

that in the exhortation in the office for the 'Churching of Women:'

'that she might be stirred up to give thanks to Almighty God, Who has

delivered her from the pains and perils of childbirth ({hebrew}),

which is matter of miracle.' (Comp. Hottingerus, Juris Hebr. Leges,

ed. Tiguri, p. 233.)

[7489]997 Comp. Josephus, Ant. xii. 2. 5.

[7490]998 The expression e_lab_v, unquestionably refers to 'fear of

God.' Comp. Delitzsch, Hebr. Br. pp. 191, 192; and Grimm, Clavis N. T.

p. 180 b.

[7491]999 The expression {hebrew} 'consolation,' for the great

Messianic hope - whence the Messianic title of Menachem - is of very

frequent occurrence (so in the Targum on Isaiah and Jeremiah, and in

many Rabbinical passages). Curiously enough, it is several times put

into the mouth of a Simeon (Chag. 16 b; Macc. 5 b; Shev. 34 a) -

although, of course, not the one mentioned by St. Luke. The

suggestion, that the latter was the son of the great Hillel and the

father of Gamaliel, St. Paul's teacher, though not impossible as

regards time, is unsupported, though it does seem strange that the

Mishnah has nothing to say about him: 'lo niscar bamishnah.'

[7492]1000 The mention of the 'Holy Spirit,' as speaking to

individuals, is frequent in Rabbinic writings. This, of course, does

not imply their belief in the Personality of the Holy Spirit (comp.

Bemidb. R. 15; 20; Midr. on Ruth ii. 9; Yalkut, vol. i. pp. 221 b and

265 d).

[7493]1001 The Talmud (Ber.last page) has a curious conceit, to the

effect that, in taking leave of a person, one ought to say: 'Go to

peace,' not 'in peace' ({hebrew}, not {hebrew}), the former having

been said by Jethro to Moses (Ex. iv. 18), on which he prospered; the

latter by David to Absalom (2 Sam. xv. 9), on which he perished. On

the other hand, on taking leave of a dead friend, we are to say 'Go in

peace,' according to Gen. xv.15, and not 'Go to peace.'

[7494]1002 The expression _pol_ein, absolvere, liberare, demittere, is

most graphic. It corresponds to the Hebrew {hebrew}, which is also

used of death; as in regard to Simeon the Just, Menach. 109 b; comp.

Ber. 17 a; Targum on Cant. i. 7.

[7495]1003 Godet seems to strain the meaning of swt_rion, when he

renders it by the neuter of the adjective. It is frequently used in

the LXX. for {hebrew}.

[7496]1004 St. Luke ii. 29-32.

[7497]1005 Is. viii. 14.

[7498]1006 dialogism_v, generally used in an evil sense.

[7499]1007 The verb _nqomologe_sqai may mean responsive praise, or

simply praise ({hebrew}) which in this case, however, would equally be

'in response' to that of Simeon, whether responsive in form or not.

[7500]1008 The whole subject of 'genealogies' is briefly, but well

treated by Hamburger, Real Encykl., section ii. pp. 291 &c. It is a

pity, that Hamburger so often treats his subject from a

Judaeo-apologetic standpoint.

[7501]1009 Bar. R. 71, ed. Warsh.p. 131 b end; 99. p. 179 a, lines 13

and 12 from bottom.

[7502]1010 It is scarcely necessary to discuss the curious suggestion,

that Anna actually lived in the Temple. No one, least of all a woman,

permanently resided in the Temple, though the High Priest had chambers

there.

[7503]1011 It is scarcely necessary to point out, how evidential this

is of the truthfulness of the Gospel-narrative. In this respect also

the so-called Apocryphal Gospels, with their gross and often repulsive

legendary adornments, form a striking contrast. I have purposely

abstained from reproducing any of these narratives, partly because

previous writers have done so, and partly because the only object

served by repeating, what must so deeply shock the Christian mind,

would be to point the contrast between the canonical and the

Apocryphal Gospels. But this can, I think, be as well done by a single

sentence, as by pages of quotations.

[7504]1012 The evidence on this point is furnished by J. G. Müller in

Herzog's Real-Enc., vol. viii. p. 682. The whole subject of the visit

of the Magi is treated with the greatest ability and learning (as

against Strauss) by Dr. Mill ('On the Mythical Interpretation of the

Gospels,' part ii. pp. 275 &c.).

[7505]1013 So also in Acts viii. 9; xiii. 6, 8.

[7506]1014 They are variously stated as twelve (Aug. Chrysost.) and

three, the latter on account of the number of the gifts. Other legends

on the subject need not be repeated.

[7507]1015 Mill, u. s., p. 303.

[7508]1016 There is no historical evidence that at the time of Christ

there was among the nations any widespread expectancy of the Advent of

a Messiah in Palestine. Where the knowledge of such a hope existed, it

must have been entirely derived from Jewish sources. The allusions to

it by Tacitus (Hist. v. 13) and Suetonius (Vesp. 4) are evidently

derived from Josephus, and admittedly refer to the Flavian dynasty,

and to a period seventy years or more after the Advent of Christ. 'The

splendid vaticination in the Fourth Eclogue of Virgil,' which

Archdeacon Farrar regards as among the 'unconscious prophecies of

heathendom,' is confessedly derived from the Cumaean Sibyl, and based

on the Sibylline Oracles, book iii. lines 784-794 (ed. Friedlieb, p.

86; see Einl. p. xxxix.). Almost the whole of book iii., inclusive of

these verses, is of Jewish authorship, and dates probably from about

160 b.c. Archdeacon Farrar holds that, besides the above references,

'there is ample proof, both in Jewish and Pagan writings, that a

guilty and weary world was dimly expecting the advent of its

Deliverer.' But he offers no evidence of it, either from Jewish or

Pagan writings.

[7509]1017 Comp. Mill, u.s., p. 308, note 66. The grounds adduced by

some are such references as to Is. viii. 4; Ps. lxxii. 10, &c.; and

the character of the gifts.

[7510]1018 Comp. the account of this Jewish monarchy in the 'History

of the Jewish Nation,' pp. 67-71; also Remond's Vers. e. Gesch. d.

Ausbreit. d. Judenth. pp. 81 &c.; and Jost, Gesch. d. Isr. vol. v. pp.

236 &c.

[7511]1019 This is the correct rendering, and not, as in A.V., 'in the

East,' the latter being expressed by the plural of _natol_, in v. 1,

while in vv. 2 and 9 the word is used in the singular.

[7512]1020 Schleusner has abundantly proved that the word _st_r,

though primarily meaning a star, is also used of constellations,

meteors, and comets - in short, has the widest application: 'omne

designare, quod aliquem splendorem habet et emitit' (Lex. in N.T., t.

i. pp. 390, 391).

[7513]1021 Not, as in the A.V., 'to worship,' which at this stage of

the history would seem most incongruous, but as an equivalent of the

Hebrew {hebrew}, as in Gen. xix. 1. So often in the LXX. and by

profane writers (comp. Scheleusner, u. s., t. ii. pp. 749, 750, and

Vorstius, De Hebraismis N.T. pp. 637-641).

[7514]1022 This is the view generally, but as I think erroneously,

entertained. Any Jew would have told them, that the Messiah was not to

be born in Jerusalem. Besides, the question of the Magi implies their

ignorance of the 'where' of the Messiah.

[7515]1023 Christian writers on these subjects have generally

conjoined the so-called 'woes of the Messiah' with His first

appearance. It seems not to have occurred to them, that, if such had

been the Jewish expectation, a preliminary objection would have lain

against the claims of Jesus from their absence.

[7516]1024 As reported in St. Matt. xxiv. 3-29.

[7517]1025 Their feelings on this matter would be represented, mutatis

mutandis, by the expressions in the Sanhedrin, recorded in St. John

xi. 47-50.

[7518]1026 Both Meyer and Weiss have shown, that this was not a

meeting of the Sanhedrin, if, indeed, that body had anything more than

a shadowy existence during the reign of Herod.

[7519]1027 The question propounded by Herod (v. 4), 'where Christ

should be born,' is put neither in the past nor in the future, but in

the present tense. In other words, he laid before them a case - a

theological problem, but not a fact, either past or future.

[7520]1028 St. Matt. ii. 7.

[7521]1029 v. 16.

[7522]1030 Jer. Ber. ii. 4, p. 5 a.

[7523]1031 In point of fact, the Talmud expressly lays it down, that

'whosoever targums a verse in its closely literal form [without due

regard to its meaning], is a liar.' (Kidd. 49 a; comp. on the subject

Deutsch's 'Literary Remains,' p. 327).

[7524]1032 St. Matt. ii. 6.

[7525]1033 The general pinciple, that St. Matthew rendered Mic. v. 2

targumically, would, it seems, cover all the differences between his

quotation and the Hebrew text. But it may be worth while, in this

instance at least, to examine the differences in detail. Two of them

are trivial, viz., 'Bethlehem, land of Juda,' instead of 'Ephratah;'

'princes' instead of 'thousands,' though St. Matthew may, possibly,

have pointed {hebrew} ('princes'), instead of {hebrew} as in our

Hebrew text. Perhaps he rendered the word more correctly than we do,

since {hebrew} means not only a 'thousand' but also a part of a tribe

(Is. lx. 22), a clan, or Beth Abh (Judg. vi. 15); comp. also Numb. i.

16; x. 4, 36; Deut. xxxiii. 17; Josh. xxii. 21, 30; i Sam. x. 19;

xxiii. 23; in which case the personification of these 'thousands'

(=our 'hundreds') by their chieftains or 'princes' would be a very apt

Targumic rendering. Two other of the divergences are more important,

viz., (1) 'Art not the least,' instead of 'though thou be little.' But

the Hebrew words have also been otherwise rendered: in the Syriac

interrogatively ('art thou little?'), which suggests the rendering of

St. Matthew; and in the Arabic just as by St. Matthew (vide Pocock,

Porta Mosis, Notæ, c. ii.; but Pocock does not give the Targum

accurately). Credner ingeniously suggested, that the rendering of St.

Matthew may have been caused by a Targumic rendering of the Hebrew

{hebrew} by {hebrew}; but he does not seem to have noticed, that this

is the actual rendering in the Targum Jon. on the passage. As for the

second and more serious divergence in the latter part of the verse, it

may be best here simply to give for comparison the rendering of the

passage in the Targum Jonathan: 'Out of thee shall come forth before

Me Messiah to exercise rule over Israel.'

[7526]1034 Not necessarily by night, as most writers suppose.

[7527]1035 So correctly, and not 'in the East,' as in A.V.

[7528]1036 Proof of this is abundantly furnished by Wetstein, Nov.

Test. t. i. pp. 247 and 248.

[7529]1037 v. 11.

[7530]1038 2 Cor. v 16

[7531]1039 In this seems to lie the strongest condemnation of Romish

and Romanising tendencies, that they ever seek to present - or,

perhaps, rather obtrude - the external circumstances. It is not thus

that the Gospel most fully presents to us the spiritual, nor yet thus

that the deepest and holiest impressions are made. True religion is

ever objectivistic, sensuous subjectivistic.

[7532]1040 Archdeacon Farrar.

[7533]1041 Numb. xxiv. 17.

[7534]1042 Strauss (Leben Jesu, i. pp. 224-249) finds a legendary

basis for the Evangelic account in Numb. xxiv. 17, and also appeals to

the legendary stories of profane writers about stars appearing at the

birth of great men.

[7535]1043 lx. 6 last clauses.

[7536]1044 Keim (Jesu von Nazara, i. 2, p. 377) drops the appeal to

legends of profane writers, ascribes only a secondary influence to

Numb. xxiv. 17, and lays the main stress of 'the legend' on Is. lx. -

with what success the reader may judge.

[7537]1045 Can it be imagined thatany person would invent such a

'legend' on the strength of Is. lx. 6? On the other hand, if the event

really took place, it is easy to understand how Christian symbolism

would - though uncritically - have seen an adumbration of it in that

prophecy.

[7538]1046 The 'multitude of camels and dromedaries,' the 'flocks of

Kedar and the rams of Nebaioth' (v. 7), and 'the isles,' and 'the

ships of Tarshish' (v. 9).

[7539]1047 The subject of Jewish astrology is well treated by Dr.

Hamburger, both in the first and second volumes of his Real-Encykl.

The ablest summary, though brief, is that in Dr. Gideon Brecher's

book, 'Das Transcendentale im Talmud.' Gfrörer is, as usually,

one-sided, and not always trustworthy in his translations. A curious

brochure by Rabbi Thein (Der Talmud, od. das Prinzip d. planet.

Elinfl.) is one of the boldest attempts at special pleading, to the

ignoration of palpable facts on the other side. Hausrath's dicta on

this subject are, as on many others, assertions unsupported by

historical evidence.

[7540]1048 Deb. R. 8.

[7541]1049 Comp. Shabb. 75 a.

[7542]1050 I cannot, however, see that Buxtorf charges so many Rabbis

with giving themselves to astrology as Dr. Geikie imputes to him - nor

how Humboldt can be quoted as corroborating the Chinese record of the

appearance of a new star in 750 (see the passage in the Cosmos, Engl.

transl. vol. i. pp. 92, 93).

[7543]1051 See for ex. Jos. War vi. 5. 3.

[7544]1052 Shabb. 156 a.

[7545]1053 Shabb, u. s.

[7546]1054 Moed K. 16 a.

[7547]1055 Shabb. 145 b; 146 a comp. Yeb. 103 b.

[7548]1056 Moed K. 28 a.

[7549]1057 Comp. Baba K. 2 b; Shabb. 121 b.

[7550]1058 Ned. 39 b.

[7551]1059 Jewish astronomy distinguishes the seven planets (called

'wandering stars'); the twelve signs of the Zodiac, Mazzaloth (Aries,

Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius,

Capricornus, Aquarius, Pisces) - arranged by astrologers into four

trigons: that of fire (1, 5, 9); of earth (2, 6, 10); of air (3, 7,

11); and of water (4, 8, 12); and the stars. The Kabbalistic book

Raziel (dating from the eleventh century) arranges them into three

quadrons. The comets, which are called arrows or star-rods, proved a

great difficulty to students. The planets (in their order) were:

Shabbathai (the Sabbatic, Saturn); Tsedeq (righteousness, Jupiter);

Maadim (the red, blood-coloured, Mars); Chammah (the Sun); Nogah

(splendour, Venus); Cokhabh (the star, Mercury); Lebhanah (the Moon).

Kabbalistic works depict our system as a circle, the lower arc

consisting of Oceanos, and the upper filled by the sphere of the

earth; next comes that of the surrounding atmosphere; then

successively the seven semicircles of the planets, each fitting on the

other - to use the Kabbalistic illustration - like the successive

layers in an onion (see Sepher Raziel, ed. Lemb. 1873, pp. 9 b, 10 a).

Day and night were divided each into twelve hours (from 6 a.m. to 6

p.m., and from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.). Each hour was under the influence of

successive planets: thus, Sunday, 7 a.m., the Sun; 8 a.m., Venus; 9

a.m., Mercury; 10 a.m., Moon; 11 a.m., Saturn; 12 a.m., Jupiter, and

so on. Similarly, we have for Monday, 7 a.m., the Moon, &c.; for

Tuesday, 7 a.m., Mars; for Wednesday, 7 a.m., Mercury; for Thursday, 7

a.m., Jupiter; for Friday, 7 a.m., Venus; and for Saturday, 7 a.m.,

Saturn. Most important were the Tequphoth, in which the Sun entered

respectively Aries (Tek. Nisan, spring-equinox, 'harvest'), Cancer

(Tek. Tammuz, summer solstice, 'warmth'), Libra (Tek. Tishri,

autumn-equinox, seed-time), Capricornus (Tek. Tebheth,

winter-solstice, 'cold'). Comp. Targ. Pseudo-Jon. on Gen. viii. 22.

From one Tequphah to the other were 91 days 7½ hours. By a beautiful

figure the sundust is called 'filings of the day' (as the word x_sma -

that which falls off from the sunwheel as it turns (Yoma 20 b).

[7552]1060 Erub. 56 a: Ber. R. 10.

[7553]1061 'Der Stern der Weisen,' Copenhagen, 1827. The tractate,

though so frequently quoted, seems scarcely to have been sufficiently

studied, most writers having apparently rather read the references to

it in Ideler's Handb. d. Math. u techn. Chronol. Münter's work

contains much that is interesting and important.

[7554]1062 In 747 a.u.c., or 7 b.c.

[7555]1063 Born 1439 died 1508.

[7556]1064 To form an adequate conception of the untrustworthiness of

such a testimony, it is necessary to study the history of the

astronomical and astrological pursuits of the Jews during that period,

of which a masterly summary is given in Steinschneider's History of

Jewish Literature (Ersch u. Gruber, Encykl. vol. xxvii.). Comp. also

Sachs, Relig. Poes. d. Juden in Spanien, pp. 230 &c.

[7557]1065 By Dr. Jellinek, in a work in six parts, entitled 'Beth

ha-Midrash,' Leipz, and Vienna, 1853-1878.

[7558]1066 Jellinek, Beth ha-Midrash, fasc. iii. p. 8.

[7559]1067 It would, of course, be possible to argue, that the

Evangelic account arose from this Jewish tradition about the

appearance of a star two years before the birth of the Messiah. But ut

has been already shown, that the hypothesis of a Jewish legendary

origin is utterly untenable. Besides, if St. Matthew ii. had been

derived from this tradition, the narrative would have been quite

differently shaped, and more especially the two years' interval

between the rising of the star and the Advent of the Messiah would

have been emphasized, instead of being, as now, rather matter of

inference.

[7560]1068 The chief writers on the subject have been: Münter (u.s.),

Ideler (u.s.). and Wieseler (Chronol. Synopse d. 4 Evang. (1843), and

again in Herzog's Real-Enc. vol. xxi p. 544, and finally in his Beitr.

z. Würd. d Ev. 1869). In our own country, writers have, since the

appearance of Professor Pritchard's art. ('Star of the Wise Men') in

Dr. Smith's Bible Dict. vol. iii., generally given up the astronomical

argument, without, however, clearly indicating whether they regard the

star as a miraculous guidance. I do not, of course, presume to enter

on an astronomical discussion with Professor Pritchard; but as his

reasoning proceeds on the idea that the planetary conjunction of 747

a.u.c., is regarded as 'the Star of the Magi,' his arguments do not

apply either to the view presented in the text nor even to that of

Wieseler. Besides, I must guard myself against accepting his

interpretation of the narrative in St. Matthew.

[7561]1069 De Stella Nova &c., Pragæ, 1606.

[7562]1070 Cosmos. vol. i. p. 92.

[7563]1071 By the astronomer, Dr. Goldschmidt. (See Wieseler, Chron.

Syn. p. 72.).

[7564]1072 A somewhat different view is presented in the laborious and

learned edition of the New Testament by Mr. Brown McClellan (vol. i.

pp, 400-402).

[7565]1073 Our A.V. curiously translates in v. 11, 'treasures,'

instead of 'treasury-cases.' The expression is exactly the same as in

Deut. xxviii. 12, for which the LXX. use the same words as the

Evangelist. The expression is also used in this sense in the Apocr.

and by profane writers. Comp. Wetstein and Meyer ad locum. Jewish

tradition also expresses the expectancy that the nations of the world

would offer gifts unto the Messiah. (Comp. Pes. 118 b; Ber. R. 78.).

[7566]1074 So not only in ancient hymns (by Sedulius, Juvencus, and

Claudian), but by the Fathers and later writers. (Comp. Sepp, Leben

Jesu, ii. 1, pp. 102, 103.)

[7567]1075 So Archdeacon Farrar rightly computes it.

[7568]1076 An illustrative instance of the ruthless destruction of

whole families on suspicion that his crown was in danger, occurs in

Ant. xv. 8. 4. But the suggestion that Bagoas had suffered at the

hands of Herod for Messianic predictions is entirely an invention of

Keim. (Schenkel, Bibel Lex., vol. iii. p. 37. Comp. Ant. xvii. 2. 4.)

[7569]1077 There are, in Josephus' history of Herod, besides

omissions, inconsistencies of narrative, such as about the execution

of Mariamme (Ant. xv. 3, 5-9 &c.; comp. War i. 22. 3, 4), and of

chronology (as War i. 18. 2, comp. v. 9. 4; Ant. xiv. 16. 2, comp. xv.

1. 2, and others.)

[7570]1078 Comp. on article on Josephus in Smith and Wace's Dict. of

Christian Biogr.

[7571]1079 Hos. xi. 1.

[7572]1080 Jer. xxxi. 15.

[7573]1081 See the evidence for it summarized in 'Sketches of Jewish

Social Life in the Days of Christ,' p. 60.

[7574]1082 Jer. xi. 1.

[7575]1083 In point of fact the ancient Synagogue did actually apply

to the Messiah Ex. iv. 22, on which the words of Hosea are based. See

the Midrash on Ps. ii. 7. The quotation is given in full in our

remarks on Ps. ii. 7 in Appendix IX.

[7576]1084 And yet Keim speaks of his Hochherzigkeit and natürlicher

Edelsinn! (Leben Jesu, i. 1. p. 184.) A much truer estimate is that of

Schürer, Neutest. Zeitgesch. pp. 197, 198.

[7577]1085 See the horrible description of his living death in Jos.

Ant. xvii. 6. 5.

[7578]1086 See the calculation in Wiesler's Synopse, pp. 56 and 444.

The 'Dissertatio de Herode Magno,' by J.A. van der Chijs (Leyden,

1855), is very clear and accurate. Dr. Geikie adopts the manifest

mistake of Caspari, that Herod died in January, 753, and holds that

the Holy Family spent three years in Egypt. The repeated statement of

Josephus that Herod died close upon the Passover should have sufficed

to show the impossibility of that hypothesis. Indeed, there is

scarcely any historical date on which competent writers are more

agreed than that of Herod's death. See Schürer, Neutest. Zeitg., pp.

222, 223.

[7579]1087 Meg. Taan xi, 1, ed Warsh, p. 16 a.

[7580]1088 The Megillath Taanith itself, or 'Roll of Fasts,' does not

mention the death of Herod. But the commentator adds to the dates 7th

Kislev (Nov.) and 2nd Shebhat (Jan.), both manifestly incorrect, the

notice that Herod had died - on the 2nd Shebhat, Jannai also - at the

same time telling a story about the incarceration and liberatio of

'seventy of the Elders of Israel,' evidently a modification of

Josephus' account of what passed in the Hiprodrome of Jericho.

Accordingly, Grätz (Gesch. vol. iii. p. 427) and Derenbourg (pp. 101,

164) have regarded the 1st of Shebhat as really that of Herod's death.

But this is impossible; and we know enough of the historical

inaccuracy of the Rabbis not to attach any serious importance to their

precise dates.

[7581]1089 Jos. War i. 23. 5.

[7582]1090 Jos. Ant. xvii. 6. 1; War i. 32. 7.

[7583]1091 Herod had married no less than ten times. See his

genealogical table.

[7584]1092 Batanæa, Trachonitis, Auranitis, and Panias.

[7585]1093 Jos. War i. 23. 5.

[7586]1094 Ant. xvii 8. 2.

[7587]1095 Ant. xvii 8. 4; 9. 5.

[7588]1096 Ant. xvii 8. 4.

[7589]1097 Ant. xvii. 9. 1-3.

[7590]1098 Ant. xvii. 11. 1; War ii. 6. 1.

[7591]1099 I cannot conceive on what ground Keim (both in Schenkel's

Bible Lex, and in his 'Jesu von Nazara') speaks of him as a pretender

to the throne.

[7592]1100 This may have been the historical basis of the parable of

our Lord in St. Luke xix. 12-27.

[7593]1101 The revenues of Antipas were 200 talents, and those of

Philip 100 talents.

[7594]1102 This is admitted even by Braun (Söhne d. Herodes, p. 8).

Despite its pretentiousness this tractate is untrustworthy, being

written in a party spirit (Jewish).

[7595]1103 We gather this from the expression, 'When he heard that

Archelaus did reign.' Evidently Joseph had not heard who was Herod's

successor, when he left Egypt. Archdeacon Farrar suggests, that the

expression 'reigned' ('as a king,' basile_ei - St. Matt. ii. 22)

refers to the period before Augustus had changed his title from 'King'

to Ethnarch. But this can scarcely be pressed, the word being used of

other rule than that of a king, not only in the New Testament and in

the Apocrypha, but by Josephus, and even by classical writers.

[7596]1104 The language of St. Matthew (ii. 22, 23) seems to imply

express Divine direction not to enter the territory of Judæa. In that

case he would travel along the coast-line till he passed into Galilee.

The impression left is, that the settlement at Nazareth was not of his

own choice.

[7597]1105 St. Luke ii. 40.

[7598]1106 Yeled, the newborn babe, as in Is. ix. 6; Yoneq, the

suckling, Is. xi. 8; Olel, the suckling beginning to ask for food,

Lam. iv. 4; Gamul, the weaned child, Is. xxviii. 9; Taph, the child

clinging to its mother, Jer. xl. 7; Elem, a child becoming firm; Naar,

the lad, literally, 'one who shakes himself free;' and Bachur, the

ripened one. (See 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 103. 104.)

[7599]1107 This is still the common, almost universal, designation of

Christ among the Jews.

[7600]1108 Comp. ch. iv. of this book.

[7601]1109 In accordance with Jer. xxiii. 5; xxxiii. 15; and

especially Zech. iii 18.

[7602]1110 See Appendix IX.

[7603]1111 So in Be R. 76.

[7604]1112 Comp. Buxtorf, Lexicon Talm. p. 1383.

[7605]1113 All this becomes more evident by Delitzsch's ingenious

suggestion (Zeitschr. fur luther. Theol. 1876, part iii. p. 402), that

the real meaning, though not the literal rendering, of the words of

St. Matthew, would be {hebrew} - 'for Nezer ['branch'] is His Name.'

[7606]1114 One of the most absurdly curious illustrations of this is

the following: 'He who blows his nose in the presence of his Rabbi is

worthy of death' (Erub, 99 a, line 11 from bottom). The dictum is

supported by an alteration in the reading of Prov. viii. 36.

[7607]1115 Galilee covered the ancient possessions of Issachar,

Zebulun, Naphtali, and Asher. 'In the time of Christ it stretched

northwards to the possessions of Tyre on the one side, and to Syria on

the other. On the south it was bounded by Samaria - Mount Carmel on

the Western, and the district of Scythopolis on the eastern side,

being here landmarks; while the Jordan and the Lake of Gennesaret

formed the general eastern boundary line.' (Sketches of Jewish Soc.

Life. p. 33.) It was divided into Upper and Lower Galilee - the former

beginning 'where sycomores (not our sycamores) cease to grow.' Fishing

in the Lake of Galilee was free to all (Baba K. 81 b).

[7608]1116 {hebrew} 'cantankerous' (?), Ned. 48 a.

[7609]1117 Siphré on Numb. x. 19, ed. Friedmann, 4 a; Chag. 14 a.

[7610]1118 Of which Jochanan, the son of Nuri, may here be regarded as

the exponent.

[7611]1119 As in the relation between bridegroom and bride, the

cessation of work the day before the Passover, &c.

[7612]1120 As in regard to animals lawful to be eaten, vows, &c.

[7613]1121 The doctrinal, or rather Halakhic, differences between

Galilee and Judæa are partially noted by Lightfoot (Chronoger. Matth.

praem. lxxxvi.), and by Hamburger (Real-Enc. i. p. 395).

[7614]1122 See Deutsch's Remains, p. 358.

[7615]1123 The differences of pronunciation and language are indicated

by Lightfoot (u.s. lxxxvii.), and by Deutsch (u. s. pp. 357, 358).

Several instances of ridiculous mistakes arising from it are recorded.

Thus, a woman cooked for her husband two lentils ({hebrew})instead of

two feet (of an animal, {hebrew}) as desired (Nedar. 66 b). On another

occasion a woman malpronounced 'Come, I will give thee milk,' into

'Companion, butter devour thee!' (Erub. 53 b). In the same connection

other similar stories are told. Comp. also Neubauer, Geogr. du Talmud,

p. 184, G. de Rossi, della lingua prop. di Cristo, Dissert. I. passim.

[7616]1124 Erub. 53 b.

[7617]1125 The Rabbi asked: What road leads to Lydda? - using four

words. The woman pointed out that, since it was not lawful to multiply

speech with a woman, he should have asked: Whither to Lydda? - in two

words.

[7618]1126 In fact, only four great Galilean Rabbis are mentioned. The

Galileans are said to have inclined towards mystical (Kabbalistic?)

pursuits.

[7619]1127 Gelpke, Jugendgesch, des Herrn, has, at least in our days,

little value beyond its title.

[7620]1128 The words 'in spirit' are of doubtful authority. But their

omission can be of no consequence, since the 'waxing strong' evidently

refers to the mental development, as the subsequent clause shows.

[7621]1129 St. Luke ii. 40.

[7622]1130 Deut. xxi. 18-21.

[7623]1131 Prov. xxx. 17.

[7624]1132 See the notice of these rites at the circumcision of John

the Baptist, in ch. iv. of his Book.

[7625]1133 Peah i. 1.

[7626]1134 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 86-160, the

literature there quoted: Duschak, Schulgesetzgebung d. alten Isr.; and

Dr. Marcus, Pædagog. d. Isr. Volkes.

[7627]1135 Ber. 63 b.

[7628]1136 The counterpart is in Ecclus. xxx.

[7629]1137 Besides the holy women who are named in the Gospels, we

would refer to the mothers of Zebedee's children and of Mark, to

Dorcas, Lydia, Lois, Eunice, Priscilla, St. John's 'elect lady,' and

others.

[7630]1138 On which Deut.vi. 4-9 and xi. 13-21 were inscribed.

[7631]1139 Jos. Ant. iv. 8. 13; Ber.iii. 3; Megill. i. 8; Moed K. iii.

[7632]1140 Ps. cxxi. 8.

[7633]1141 Some of its customs almost remind us of our 5th of

November.

[7634]1142 The word br_fov has no other meaning than that of 'infant'

or 'babe.'

[7635]1143 2 Tim. iii. 15; i. 5.

[7636]1144 Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 16. 31.

[7637]1145 Jos. Ag. Apion ii. 19.

[7638]1146 Jos. Ag. Apion ii. 26; comp. 1. 8, 12; ii. 27.

[7639]1147 Kidd, 29 a.

[7640]1148 Sanh. 99 b.

[7641]1149 Kidd, 30 a.

[7642]1150 Meg. 6 b.

[7643]1151 Sot. 22 a.

[7644]1152 Succ. 42 a.

[7645]1153 The Shema.

[7646]1154 Ab. iii. 9

[7647]1155 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 159 &c. The

enigmatic mode of wording and writing was very common. Thus, the year

is marked by a verse, generally from Scripture, which contains the

letters that give the numerical value of the year. These letters are

indicated by marks above them.

[7648]1156 Ps. cxiii. - cxviii.

[7649]1157 Baba B. 21 a; Keth. 50 a.

[7650]1158 Jos. Ant. xvii. 6. 2.

[7651]1159 Baba B. 21 a.

[7652]1160 Yebam. 61 a; Yoma 18 a.

[7653]1161 He was succeeded by Matthias, the son of Theophilos, under

whose Pontificate the war against Rome began.

[7654]1162 Shabb. 119 b.

[7655]1163 Sanh. 17 b.

[7656]1164 Shabb. u.s.

[7657]1165 Shabb. 127 a; Moed K. 16. a.

[7658]1166 Among the names by which the schools are designated there

is also that of Ischoli, with its various derivations, evidently from

the Greek scol_, schola.

[7659]1167 Is. xxx. 20.

[7660]1168 The proof-passages from the Talmud are collated by Dr.

Marcus (Pædagog. d. Isr. Volkes, ii. pp. 16, 17).

[7661]1169 For example, Shabb. 11 a.

[7662]1170 Ab. v. 21.

[7663]1171 Altingius (Academic. Dissert. p. 335) curiously suggests,

that this was done to teach a child its guilt and the need of

justification. The Rabbinical interpretation (Vayyikra R. 7) is at

least equally far-fetched: that, as children are pure and sacrifices

pure, it is fitting that the pure should busy themselves with the

pure. The obvious reason seems, that Leviticus treated of the

ordinances with which every Jew ought to have been acquainted.

[7664]1172 1 Macc. i. 57; comp. Jos. Ant. xii. 5. 4.

[7665]1173 Jer. Meg. iii. 1, p. 73 d.

[7666]1174 Herzfeld (Gesch. d. V. Isr. iii. p. 267, note) strangely

misquotes and misinterprets this matter. Comp. Dr. Müller, Massech.

Sofer. p. 75.

[7667]1175 Sopher. v. 9, p. 25 b; Gitt. 60 a; Jer. Meg. 74 a; Tos.

Yad. 2.

[7668]1176 The most painful instances of these are the legendary

accounts of the early history of Christ in the Apocryphal Gospels

(well collated by Keim, i. 2, pp. 413-468, passim). But later writers

are unfortunately not wholly free from the charge.

[7669]1177 I must here protest against the introduction of imaginary

'Evening Scenes in Nazareth,' when, according to Dr. Geikie, 'friends

or neighbours of Joseph's circle would meet for an hour's quiet

gossip.' Dr. Geikie here introduces as specimens of this 'quiet

gossip' a number of Rabbinic quotations from the German translation in

Dukes' 'Rabbinische Blumenlese.' To this it is sufficient answer: 1.

There were no such learned Rabbis in Nazareth. 2. If there had been,

they would not have been visitors in the house of Joseph. 3. If they

had been visitors there, they would not have spoken what Dr. Geikie

quotes from Dukes, since some of the extracts are from mediæval books

and only one a proverbial expression. 4. Even if they had so spoken,

it would at least have been in the words which Dukes has translated,

without the changes and additions which Dr. Geikie has introduced in

some instances.

[7670]1178 St. Luke iv. 16.

[7671]1179 See Book III., the chapter on 'The Synagogue of Nazareth.'

[7672]1180 St. Matt. v. 18.

[7673]1181 St. Luke xvi. 17.

[7674]1182 This may be gathered even from such an expression as 'One

iota, or one little hook' - not 'tittle' as in the A.V.

[7675]1183 Ps. ixxxvii. 5-7.

[7676]1184 Ps. cxxii. 1-5.

[7677]1185 Ab. v. 21.

[7678]1186 Yoma 82 a.

[7679]1187 Comp. also Maimonides, Hilkh. Chag. ii. The common

statement, that Jesus went to the Temple because He was 'a Son of the

Commandment,' is obviously erroneous. All the more remarkable, on the

other hand, is St. Luke's accurate knowledge of Jewish customs, and

all the more antithetic to the mythical theory the circumstance, that

he places this remarkable event in the twelfth year of Jesus' life,

and not when He became 'a Son of the Law.'

[7680]1188 We take as the more correct reading that which puts the

participle in the present tense (_nabain_ntwn), and not in the aorist.

[7681]1189 Jer Kidd. 61 c.

[7682]1190 From 4 b.c.to 6 a.d.

[7683]1191 The Romans were tolerant of the religion of all subject

nations - excepting only Gaul and Carthage. This for reasons which

cannot here be discussed. But what rendered Rome so obnoxious to

Palestine was the cultus of the Emperor, as the symbol and

impersonation of Imperial Rome. On this cultus Rome insisted in all

countries, not perhaps so much on religious grounds as on political,

as being the expression of loyalty to the empire. But in Judæa this

cultus necessarily met resistance to the death. (Comp.

Schneckenburger, Neutest. Zeitgesch. pp. 40-61.)

[7684]1192 6-11 (?) a.d.

[7685]1193 Acts v. 37; Jos. Ant. xviii. 1. 1.

[7686]1194 This view, for which there is no historic foundation, is

urged by those whose interest it is to deny the possibility of a

census during the reign of Herod.

[7687]1195 That these were the sole grounds of resistance to the

census, appears from Jos. Ant. xviii. 1. 1, 6.

[7688]1196 As unquestionably they did.

[7689]1197 Ant. xviii. 1. 6.

[7690]1198 Ant. xviii. 1. 6.

[7691]1199 u.s. and Jew. War vii. 10. 1.

[7692]1200 {hebrew}

[7693]1201 Ex. xv. 11

[7694]1202 Judg. xi. 3-6.

[7695]1203 The Talmud is never to be trusted as to historical details.

Often it seems purposely to alter, when it intends the experienced

student to read between the lines, while at other times it presents a

story in what may be called an allegorical form.

[7696]1204 Ant. xiv. 9. 2-5.

[7697]1205 Sanh. 19 a.

[7698]1206 Yoma 39 b.

[7699]1207 The designation 'Lebanon' is often applied in Talmudic

writings to the Temple.

[7700]1208 Midr. R. on Lament. i. 5; ed. Warsh. vol. iii.p. 60 a.

[7701]1209 Ab. de R. Nathan 4.

[7702]1210 Comp. Ab ii. 5.

[7703]1211 Shabb. 31 a.

[7704]1212 Ber. R. 70.

[7705]1213 This celebrated meeting, of which, however, but scant and

incoherent notices are left us (Shabb. i. 7 and specially in the Jer.

Talmud on the passage p. 3 c, d; and Shabb. 17 a; Tos. Shabb. i. 2),

took place in the house of Chananyah, ben Chizqiyah, ben Garon, a

noted Shammaite. On arriving, many of the Hillelites were killed in

the lower room, and then a majority of Shammaites carried the

so-called eighteen decrees. The first twelve forbade the purchase of

the most necessary articles of diet from Gentiles; the next five

forbade the learning of their language, declared their testimony

invalid, and their offerings unlawful, and interdicted all intercourse

with them; while the last referred to first fruits. It was on the

ground of these decrees that the hitherto customary burnt-offering for

the Emperor was intermitted, which was really a declaration of war

against Rome. The date of these decrees was probably about four years

before the destruction of the Temple (See Grätz, Gesch. d. Juden, vol.

iii. pp. 494-502). These decrees were carried by the influence of R.

Eleazar, son of Chananyah the High-Priest, a very wealthy man, whose

father and brother belonged to the opposite or peace party. It was on

the proposal of this strict Shammaite that the offering for the

Emperor was intermitted (Jos. Jew. War ii. 17. 2, 3). Indeed, it is

impossible to over-estimate the influence of these Shammaite decrees

on the great war with Rome. Eleazar, though opposed to the extreme

party, one of whose chiefs he took and killed, was one of the leaders

of the national party in the war (War ii. 17. 9, 10). There is,

however, some confusion about various persons who bore the same name.

It is impossible in this place to mention the various Shammaites who

took part in the last Jewish war. Suffice it to indicate the tendency

of that School.

[7706]1214 Acts iv. 6.

[7707]1215 See the list of High-Priests in Appendix VI.

[7708]1216 The Boethusians furnished no fewer than four High-Priest

during the period between the reign of Herod and that of Agrippa I.

(41 a.d.).

[7709]1217 Ant. xviii. 1. 1.

[7710]1218 Ant. xviii. 2. 1.

[7711]1219 Ant. xviii. i. 1.

[7712]1220 Acts v. 37.

[7713]1221 Ant. xx. 5. 2.

[7714]1222 Jewish War ii. 17. 8 and 9.

[7715]1223 Jewish War, vii. 7-9.

[7716]1224 9-12 a.d.

[7717]1225 12-15 a.d.

[7718]1226 15-26 a.d.

[7719]1227 Ps. xlii. Is. xxx. 29.

[7720]1228 A.V. 'Degrees;' Ps. cxx.-cxxxiv.

[7721]1229 It seems, however, that the Feast of Pentecost would see

even more pilgrims - at least from a distance - in Jerusalem, than

that of the Passover (comp. Acts ii. 9-11).

[7722]1230 St. Luke xix. 41.

[7723]1231 So according to the Rabbis; Josephus does not mention it.

In general, the account here given is according to the Rabbis.

[7724]1232 These tunnels were divided by colonnades respectively into

three and into two, the double colonnade being probably used by the

priests, since its place of exit was close to the entrance into the

Court of the Priests.

[7725]1233 Jos. War vi. 3. 2.

[7726]1234 Sanh. xi. 2.

[7727]1235 St. John ii. 14; St. Matt. xxi. 12; Jerus. Chag. p. 78 a;

comp. Neh. xiii. 4 &c.

[7728]1236 The question what was sold in this 'market' and its

relation to 'the bazaar' of the family of Annas (the Chanuyoth beney

Chanan) will be discussed in a later part.

[7729]1237 The question as to their names and arrangement is not

without difficulty. The subject is fully treated in 'The Temple and

its Services.' Although I have followed in the text the arrangements

of the Rabbis, I must express my grave doubts as to their historical

trustworthiness. It seems to me that the Rabbis always give rather the

ideal than the real - what, according to their theory, should have

been, rather than what actually was.

[7730]1238 Acts iii. 2.

[7731]1239 For a full description, I must refer to 'The Temple, its

Ministry and Services at the time of Jesus Christ.' Some repetition of

what had been alluded to in previous chapters has been unavoidable in

the present description of the Temple.

[7732]1240 Although comparatively few really great authorities in

Jewish Canon Law lived at that time, more than a dozen names could be

given of Rabbis celebrated in Jewish literature, who must have been

His contemporaries at one or another period of His life.

[7733]1241 So according to the Rabbis generally. Comp. Hoffmann, Abh.

ii. d. pent. Ges. pp. 65, 66.

[7734]1242 St. Luke ii. 43.

[7735]1243 In fact, an attentive consideration of what in the tractate

Moed K. (comp. also Chag. 17 b), is declared to be lawful occupation

during the half-holydays, leads us to infer that a very large

proportion must have returned to their homes.

[7736]1244 For a full discussion of this important question, see

Appendix X.: 'The Supposed Temple-Synagogue.'

[7737]1245 Sanh. 88 b.

[7738]1246 Comp. Jer. Ber. iv. p. 7 d, and other passages.

[7739]1247 The expression s_nesiv means originally concursus, and (as

Schleusner rightly puts it) intelligentia in the sense of perspicacia

qua res probe cognitae subtiliter ac diligenter a se invicem

discernuntur. The LXX. render by it no less than eight different

Hebrew terms.

[7740]1248 The primary meaning of the verb, from which the word is

derived, is secerno, discerno.

[7741]1249 Jer. Pes. vi. 1; Pes.66 a.

[7742]1250 St. Matt. xxii. 42-45.

[7743]1251 Jos. Ant. xv. 8. 5.

[7744]1252 According to Jer. Ab. Z. 44 d, the soil, the fountains, the

houses, and the roads of Samaria were 'clean.'

[7745]1253 Maas. Sh. v. 2.

[7746]1254 This is implied in the use of the present participle.

[7747]1255 The first day would be that of missing Him, the second that

of the return, and the third that of the search in Jerusalem.

[7748]1256 The expression _n to_v to_ patr_v mou may be equally

rendered, or rather supplemented, by 'in My Father's house,' and

'about My Father's business.' The former is adopted by most modern

commentators. But (1) it does not accord with the word that must be

supplemented in the two analogous passages in the LXX. Neither in

Esth. vii. 9, nor in Ecclus. xlii. 10, is it strictly 'the house.' (2)

It seems unaccountable how the word 'house' could have been left out

in the Greek rendering of the Aramæan words of Christ - but quite

natural, if the word to be supplemented was 'things' or 'business.'

(3) A reference to the Temple as His Father's house could not have

seemed so strange on the lips of Jesus - nor, indeed, of any Jewish

child - as to fill Joseph and Mary with astonishment.

[7749]1257 The voluntariness of His submission is implied by the

present part. mid. of the verb.

[7750]1258 The Authorised Version renders 'sayings.' But I think the

expression is clearly equivalent to the Hebrew {hebrew} all these

things. St. Luke uses the word {hebrew} in that sense in i. 65; ii.

15, 19, 51; Acts v. 32; x.37; xiii. 42.

[7751]1259 St. Luke ii. 52.

[7752]1260 Comp. Philo in Flacc.ed. Fcf. p. 977 &c.

[7753]1261 For details as to dress, food, and manners in Palestine, I

must refer to other parts of this book.

[7754]1262 Comp. St. Matt. i. 24; St. Luke ii. 7; St. Matt. xii. 46;

xiii. 55, 56; St. Mark iii. 31; vi. 3; Acts i. 14; 1 Cor. ix. 5; Gal.

i. 19.

[7755]1263 The question of the real relationship of Christ to His

'brothers' has been so often discussed in the various Cyclopaedias

that it seems unnecessary here to enter upon the matter in detail. See

also Dr. Lightfoot's Dissertation in his Comment. on Galat. pp.

282-291.

[7756]1264 I regard this Simon (Zelotes) as the son of Clopas (brother

of Joseph, the Virgin's husband) and of Mary. For the reasons of this

view, see Book III. ch. xvii. and Book V. ch. xv.

[7757]1265 St. Luke vi. 15; Acts i.13.

[7758]1266 St. Mark iii. 18.

[7759]1267 St. Jude xv. 14, 15 to the book of Enoch, and v. 9 probably

to the Assum. of Moses.

[7760]1268 On the maternal side. We read St. John xix. 25 as

indicating four women - His Mother's sister being Salome, according to

St. Mark xv. 40.

[7761]1269 Comp. St. Matt. xiii. 55; St. John vi. 42.

[7762]1270 See the chapter on 'Trades and Tradesmen,' in the 'Sketches

of Jewish Social Life.'

[7763]1271 Comp. Ab. i. 10; Kidd. 29 b1.

[7764]1272 Comp. this subject in Döllinger, 'Heidenthum u. Judenthum,'

in regard to the Greeks, p. 692; in regard to the Romans, pp. 716-722:

in regard to education and its abominations, pp. 723-726. Nothing can

cast a more lurid light on the need for Christianity, if the world was

not to perish of utter rottenness, than a study of ancient Hellas and

Rome, as presented by Döllinger in his admirable work.

[7765]1273 Even the poetic conception of the painter can only furnish

his own ideal, and that of one special mood. Speaking as one who has

no claim to knowledge of art, only one picture of Christ ever really

impressed me. It was that of an 'Ecce Homo,' by Carlo Dolci, in the

Pitti Gallery at Florence. For an account of the early pictorial

representations, comp. Gieseler. Kirchengesch. i. pp. 85, 86.

[7766]1274 Of these there are, alas! only too many. The reader

interested in the matter will find a good summary in Keim, i. 2, pp.

460-463. One of the few noteworthy remarks recorded is this

description of Christ, in the spurious Epistle of Lentulus, 'Who was

never seen to laugh, but often to weep.'

[7767]1275 Instead of detailed quotations I would here generally refer

to works on Roman history, especially to Friedländer's

Sittengeschichte Roms, and to Döllinger's exhaustive work, Heidenthum

and Judenthum.

[7768]1276 The only thorough resistance to this worship came from

hated Judæa, and, we may add, from Britain (Döllinger, p. 611).

[7769]1277 From the time of Cæsar to that of Diocletian, fifty-three

such apotheoses took place, including those of fifteen women belonging

to the Imperial families.

[7770]1278 One of the most painful, and to the Christian almost

incredible, manifestations of religious decay was the unblushing

manner in which the priests practised imposture upon the people.

Numerous and terrible instances of this could be given. The evidence

of this is not only derived from the Fathers, but a work has been

preserved in which formal instructions are given, how temples and

altars are to be constructed in order to produce false miracles, and

by what means impostures of this kind may be successfully practised.

(Comp. 'The Pneumatics of Hero,' translated by B. Woodcroft.) The

worst was, that this kind of imposture on the ignorant populace was

openly approved by the educated. (Döllinger, p. 647.)

[7771]1279 This seems the full meaning of the word, St. Luke i. 80.

Comp. Acts i. 24 (in the A. V. 'shew').

[7772]1280 The plural indicates that St. John was not always in the

same 'wilderness.' The plural form in regard to the 'wilderness which

are in the land of Israel,' is common in Rabbinic writings (comp. Baba

K. vii. 7 and the Gemaras on the passage). On the fulfilment by the

Baptist of Is. xl. 3, see the discussion of that passage in Appendix

XI.

[7773]1281 St. Luke i. 80.

[7774]1282 Godet has, in a few forcible sentences, traced what may be

called not merely the difference, but the contrast between the

teaching and aims of the Essenes and those of John.

[7775]1283 Ab.Zar.2 b.

[7776]1284 Probably about Easter, 26 a.d.

[7777]1285 Till quite lately, those who impugn the veracity of the

Gospels - Strauss, and even Keim - have pointed to this notice of

Lysanias as an instance of the unhistorical character of St. Luke's

Gospel. But it is now admitted on all hands that the notice of St.

Luke is strictly correct; and that, besides the other Lysanias, one of

the same name had reigned over Abilene at the time of Christ. Comp.

Wieseler, Beitr. pp. 196-204, and Schürer in Riehm's Handwörterb, p.

931.

[7778]1286 Philo, ed. Frcf., Leg. 1015.

[7779]1287 u. s. 1031, 1041.

[7780]1288 Suet. Tiber. 69.

[7781]1289 Philo, u.s. 1034.

[7782]1290 Jos. Ant. xviii. 3. 1, 2.

[7783]1291 St. Luke xiii. 1.

[7784]1292 Ant. xviii. 4. 1, 2.

[7785]1293 Philo, Leg. 1033.

[7786]1294 The Procurators were Imperial financial officers, with

absolute power of government in smaller territories. The office was

generally in the hands of the Roman knights, which chiefly consisted

of financial men, bankers, chief publicans, &c. The order of

knighthood had sunk to a low state, and the exactions of such a rule,

especially in Judea, can better be imagined than described. Comp. on

the whole subject, Friedländer, Sittengesch. Rom, vol. i. p. 268 &c.

[7787]1295 Pes. 57 a.

[7788]1296 Annas, either Chanan ({hebrew}), or else Chana or Channa, a

common name. Professor Delitzsch has rightly shown that the Hebrew

equivalent for Caiaphas is not Keypha ({hebrew}) = Peter, but Kayapha

({hebrew}), or perhaps rather - according to the reading Ka_fav -

{hebrew}, Kaipha, , or Kaiphah. The name occurs in the Mishnah as

Kayaph [so, and not Kuph, correctly] (Parah iii. 5). Professor

Delitzsch does not venture to explain its meaning. Would it be too

bold to suggest a derivation from {hebrew}, and the meaning to be: He

who is 'at the top?'

[7789]1297 Jos. Ant. xx. 8. 8.

[7790]1298 Yoma 35 b.

[7791]1299 Pes. u.s.

[7792]1300 If we may take a statement in the Talmud, where the same

word occurs, as a commentary.

[7793]1301 Tos. Set. xiv.

[7794]1302 St. John vii. 50-52.

[7795]1303 St. John xi. 47-50.

[7796]1304 Jos. Jewish War vi. 2. 2.

[7797]1305 I do not, however, feel sure that the word 'high-priests'

in this passage should be closely pressed. It is just one of those

instances in which it would suit Josephus to give such a grandiose

title to those who joined the Romans.

[7798]1306 This only in St. Luke.

[7799]1307 St. John xi. 49.

[7800]1308 St. John xviii. 13.

[7801]1309 Wieseler has, I think, satisfactorily established this.

Comp. Beitr. pp. 191-194.

[7802]1310 779 a.u.c.

[7803]1311 St. Luke speaks of Christ being 'about thirty years old' at

the time of His baptism. If John began His public ministry in the

autumn, and some months elapsed before Jesus was baptized, our Lord

would have just passed His thirtieth year when He appeared at

Bethabara. We have positive evidence that the expression 'about'

before a numeral meant either a little more or a little less than that

exact number. See Midr. on Ruth i. 4 ed. Warsh. p. 39 b.

[7804]1312 Here tradition, though evidently falsely, locates the

Baptism of Jesus.

[7805]1313 St. Luke iii. 3.

[7806]1314 St. John i. 28.

[7807]1315 In reference not only to this point, but in general, I

would refer to Bishop Lightfoot's masterly essay on the Essenes in his

Appendix to his Commentary on Colossians (especially here, pp. 388,

400). It is a remarkable confirmation of the fact that, if John had

been an Essene, his food could not have been 'locusts' that the Gospel

of the Ebionites, who, like the Essenes, abstained from animal food,

omits the mention of the 'locusts,' of St. Matt. iii. 4. (see Mr.

Nicholson's 'The Gospel of the Hebrews,' pp. 34, 35). But proof

positive is derived from Jer. Nedar. 40 b, where, in case of a vow of

abstinence from flesh, fish and locusts are interdicted.

[7808]1316 2 Kings i. 3.

[7809]1317 Our A.V. wrongly translates 'a hairy man,' instead of a man

with a hairy (camel's hair) raiment.' This seems afterwards to have

become the distinctive dress of the prophets (comp. Zech. xiii. 4).

[7810]1318 Keim beautifully designates it: Das Lieblingswort Jesu.

[7811]1319 Rom. xvi. 25, 26; Eph. i. 9; Col. i. 26, 27.

[7812]1320 If, indeed, in the preliminary dispensation these two can

be well separated.

[7813]1321 I confess myself utterly unable to understand, how anyone

writing a History of the Jewish Church can apparently eliminate from

it what even Keim designates as the 'treibenden Gedanken des Alten

Testaments' - those of the Kingdom and the King. A Kingdom of God

without a King; a Theocracy without the rule of God; a perpetual

Davidic Kingdom without a 'Son of David' - these are antinomies (to

borrow the term of Kant) of which neither the Old Testament, the

Apocrypha, the Pseudepigraphic writings, nor Rabbinism were guilty.

[7814]1322 xiv. 9.

[7815]1323 'And the Lord shall be King over all the earth: in that day

shall there be one Lord, and His Name one.'

[7816]1324 vii. 13, 14.

[7817]1325 'I saw in the night visions, and, behold, One like the Son

of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of

Days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him

dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and

languages, should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion,

which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be

destroyed.'

[7818]1326 St. John xvii. 33-37.

[7819]1327 Occasionally we find, instead of Malkhuth Shamayim

('Kingdom of Heaven'), Malkhutha direqiya ('Kingdom of the

firmament'), as in Ber. 58 a, Shebhu. 35 b. But in the former passage,

at least, it seems to apply rather to God's Providential government

than to His moral reign.

[7820]1328 The Talmud (Shebhu. 35 b) analyses the various passages of

Scripture in which it is used in a sacred and in the common sense.

[7821]1329 In St. Matthew the expression occurs thirty-two times; six

times that of 'the Kingdom;' five times that of 'Kingdom of God.'

[7822]1330 As in Shebhu 35 b; Ber. R. 9, ed Warsh, pp. 19 b, 20 a.

[7823]1331 As in the Targum on Ps. xiv. 7, and on Is. liii. 10.

[7824]1332 As in Targum on 1 Kings iv. 33 (v. 13).

[7825]1333 The distinction between the Olam habba (the world to come),

and the Athid labho (the age to come), is important. It will be more

fully referred to by-and-by. In the meantime, suffice it, that the

Athid labho is the more specific designation of Messianic times. The

two terms are expressly distinguished, for example, in Mechilta (ed.

Weiss), p. 74 a, lines 2, 3.

[7826]1334 For example, in Ber. R. 88, ed. Warsh. p. 157 a.

[7827]1335 Targ. PseudoJon. on Ex. xl. 9, 11.

[7828]1336 Jer. Targ. on Gen. iii. 15; Jer. and PseudoJon. Targ on

Numb. xxiv. 14.

[7829]1337 This will be more fully explained and shown in the sequel.

For the present we refer only to Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 75 d, and the

Midr. on Ruth ii. 14.

[7830]1338 The whole subject is fully treated in Book V. ch. vi.

[7831]1339 So expressly in Mechilta, p. 75 a; Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 14

a, last line.

[7832]1340 Ber. ii. 2.

[7833]1341 The Shema, which was repeated twice every day, was regarded

as distinctive of Jewish profession (Ber. iii. 3).

[7834]1342 For example, Ber. 13 b, 14 b; Ber. ii. 5; and the touching

story of Rabbi Akiba thus taking upon himself the yoke of the Law in

the hour of his martyrdom, Ber. 61 b.

[7835]1343 In Ber. 14 b, last line, and 15 a, first line, there is a

shocking definition of what constitutes the Kingdom of Heaven in its

completeness. For the sake of those who would derive Christianity from

Rabbinism. I would have quoted it, but am restrained by its profanity.

[7836]1344 So often Comp. Siphré p. 142 b, 143 b.

[7837]1345 Ber. R. 98.

[7838]1346 Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 43 a.

[7839]1347 Midr. on 1 Sam. viii 12; Midr. on Eccl. i. 18.

[7840]1348 In Yalkut ii. p. 178 a.

[7841]1349 Zech. xiv. 9.

[7842]1350 The same passage is similarly referred to in the Midr. on

Song. ii. 12, where the words 'the time of the singing has come,' are

paraphrased; 'the time of the Kingdom of Heaven that it shall be

manifested, hath come' (in R. Martini Pugio Fidei, p. 782).

[7843]1351 Midr. on 1 Sam. viii. 7. Comp. also generally Midr. on Ps.

cxlvii. 1.

[7844]1352 As in Shabb. 63 a, where at least three differences between

them are mentioned. For, while all prophecy pointed to the days of the

Messiah, concerning the world to come we are told (Is. lxiv. 4) that

'eye hath not seen, &c.'; in the days of the Messiah weapons would be

borne, but not in the world to come; and while Is. xxiv. 21 applied to

the days f the Messiah, the seemingly contradictory passage, Is. xxx.

26, referred to the world to come. In Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Exod.

xvii. 16, we read of three generations: that of this world, that of

the Messiah, and that of the world to come (Aram: Alma deathey=olam

habba). Comp. Ar. 13 b, and Midr. on Ps. lxxxi. 2 (3 in A.V.), ed.

Warsh. p. 63 a, where the harp of the Sanctuary is described as of

seven strings (according to Ps. cxix. 164); in the days of the Messiah

as of eight strings (according to the inscription of ps. xii.); and in

the world to come (here Athid labho) as of ten strings (according to

Ps. xcii. 3). The references of Gfrörer (Jahrh. d. Heils, vol. ii. p.

213) contain, as not unfrequently, mistakes. I may here say that

Rhenferdius carries the argument about the Olam habba, as

distinguished from the days of the Messiah, beyond what I believe to

be established. See his Dissertation in Meuschen, Nov. Test. pp. 1116

&c.

[7845]1353 It is difficult to conceive, how the idea of the identity

of the Kingdom of God with the Church could have originated. Such

parables as those about the Sower, and about the Net (St. Matt. xiii.

3-9; 47, 48), and such admonitions as those of Christ to His disciples

in St. Matt. xix. 12; vi. 33; and vi. 10, are utterly inconsistent

with it.

[7846]1354 St. John iii. 3.

[7847]1355 in ver. 5.

[7848]1356 The passage which seems to me most fully to explain the

import of baptism, in its subjective bearing, is 1 Peter, iii. 21,

which I would thus render: 'which (water) also, as the antitype, now

saves you, even baptism; not the putting away of the filth of the

flesh, but the inquiry (the searching, perhaps the entreaty), for a

good conscience towards God, through the resurrection of Christ.' It

is in this sense that baptism is designated in Tit. iii. 5, as the

'washing,' or 'bath of regeneration,' the baptized person stepping out

o the waters of baptism with this openly spoken new search after a

good conscience towards God; and in this sense also that baptism - not

the act of baptizing, nor yet that of being baptized - saves us, but

this through the Resurrection of Christ. And this leads us up to the

objective aspect of baptism. This consists in the promise and the gift

on the part of the Risen Saviour, Who, by and with His Holy Spirit, is

ever present with his Church. These remarks leave, of course, aside

the question of Infant-Baptism, which rests on another and, in my view

most solid basis.

[7849]1357 In this view the expression occurs thirty-four times, viz:

St. Matt. vi. 33; xii. 28; xiii. 38; xix. 24; xxi. 31; St. Mark i. 14;

x. 15, 23, 24, 25; xii. 34; St. Luke i. 33; iv. 43; ix. 11; x. 9, 11;

xi. 20; xii. 31; xvii. 20, 21; xviii. 17, 24, 25, 29; St. John iii. 3;

Acts i. 3; viii. 12; xx. 25; xxviii. 31; Rom. xiv. 17; 1 Cor. iv. 20;

Col. iv. 11; 1 Thess. ii. 12; Rev. i. 9.

[7850]1358 As in the following seventeen passages, viz.: St. Matt.

iii. 2; iv. 17, 23; v. 3, 10; ix. 35; x. 7; St. Mark i. 15; xi. 10;

St. Luke viii. 1; ix. 2; xvi. 16; xix. 12, 15; Acts i. 3; xxviii. 23;

Rev. i. 9.

[7851]1359 As in the following eleven passages: St. Matt. xi. 11;

xiii. 41; xvi. 19; xviii. 1; xxi. 43; xxiii. 13; St. Luke vii. 28; St.

John iii. 5; Acts i. 3; Col. i. 13; Rev. i. 9.

[7852]1360 As in the following twenty-four passages: St. Matt. xi. 12;

xiii. 11, 19, 24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52; xviii. 23; xx. 1; xxii. 2;

xxv. 1, 14; St. Mark iv. 11, 26, 30; St. Luke viii. 10; ix. 62; xiii.

18, 20; Acts i. 3; Rev. i. 9.

[7853]1361 As in the following twelve passages: St. Mark xvi. 28; St.

Mark ix. 1; xv. 43; St. Luke ix. 27; xix. 11; xxi. 31; xxii. 16, 18;

Acts i. 3; 2 Tim. iv. 1; Heb. xii. 28; Rev. i. 9.

[7854]1362 As in the following thirty-one passages: St. Matt. v. 19,

20; vii. 21; viii. 11; xiii. 43; xviii. 3; xxv. 34; xxvi. 29; St. Mark

ix. 47; x. 14; xiv. 25; St. Luke vi. 20; xii. 32; xiii. 28, 29; xiv.

15; xviii. 16; xxii. 29; Acts i. 3; xiv. 22; 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; xv. 24,

50; Gal. v. 21; Eph. v. 5; 2 Thess. i. 5; St. James ii. 5; 2 Peter i.

11; Rev. i. 9; xii. 10.

[7855]1363 The term 'repentance' includes faith in Christ, as in St.

Luke xxiv. 47; Acts v. 31.

[7856]1364 iii. 18.

[7857]1365 I cannot, with Schöttgen and others, regard the expression

'generation of vipers' as an allusion to the filthy legend about the

children of Eve and the serpent, but believe that it refers to such

passages as Ps. lviii. 4.

[7858]1366 In proof that such was the common view, I shall here refer

to only a few passages, and these exclusively from the Targumum: Jer.

Targ. on Gen. xlix. 11; Targ. on Is. xi. 4; Targ. on Amos ix. 11;

Targ. on Nah. i. 6; on Zech. x. 3, 4. See also Ab. Z. 2 b, Yalkut i.

p. 64 a; also 56 b (where it is shown how plagues exactly

corresponding to those of Egypt were to come upon Rome).

[7859]1367 Jer. Taan. 64 a.

[7860]1368 St. John viii. 33, 39, 53.

[7861]1369 'Everything comes to Israel on account of the merits of the

fathers' (Siphré on Deut. p. 108 b). In the same category we place the

extraordinary attempts to show that the sins of Biblical personages

were not sins at all, as in Shabb. 55 b, and the idea of Israel's

merits as works of supererogation (as in Baba B. 10 a).

[7862]1370 I will not mention the profane device by which apostate and

wicked Jews are at that time to be converted into non-Jews.

[7863]1371 Ber. R. 48; comp. Midr. on Ps. vi. 1; Pirké d. R. Elies. c.

29; Shem. R. 19 Yalkut i. p. 23 b.

[7864]1372 Baba Mez. vii. 1; Baba K. 91 a.

[7865]1373 Jer. Chag. 76 a.

[7866]1374 Ber. R. 39.

[7867]1375 Shem R. 44.

[7868]1376 Vayyikra R. 36.

[7869]1377 Ber. 7 b.

[7870]1378 Shabb. 55 a; comp Beer, Leben Abr. p. 88.

[7871]1379 Professor Wünsche quotes an inapt passage from Shabb. 89 b,

but ignores, or is ignorant of the evidence above given.

[7872]1380 Ber. R. ed. Warsh. p. 80 b, par. 44.

[7873]1381 Perhaps with reference to Is. ii. 1, 2.

[7874]1382 Lightfoot aptly points out a play on the words 'children' -

banim - and 'stones' - abhanim. Both words are derived from bana, to

build, which is also used by the Rabbis in a moral sense like our own

'upbuilding,' and in that of the gift of adoption of children. It is

not necessary, indeed almost detracts from the general impression, to

see in the stones an allusion to the Gentiles.

[7875]1383 Thus the view that charity delivered from Gehenna was very

commonly entertained (see, for example, Baba B. 10 a). Similarly, it

was the main charge against the publicans that they exacted more than

their due (see, for example, Baba K. 113 a). The Greek _y_nion, or

wage of the soldiers, has its Rabbinic equivalent of Afsanya (a

similar word also in the Syriac).

[7876]1384 For ex. Jer. Taan. 64 a.

[7877]1385 Volkmar is mistaken in regarding this as the duty of the

house-porter towards arriving guests. It is expressly mentioned as one

of the characteristic duties of slaves in Pes. 4 a; Jer Kidd. i. 3;

Kidd. 22 b. In Kethub. 96 a it is described as also the duty of a

disciple towards his teacher. In Mechilta on Ex. xxi. 2 (ed. Weiss, p.

82 a) it is qualified as only lawful for a teacher so to employ his

disciple, while, lastly, in Pesiqta x. it is described as the common

practice.

[7878]1386 Godet aptly calls attention to the use of the preposition

in here, while as regards the baptism of water no preposition is used,

as denoting merely an instrumentality.

[7879]1387 The same writer points out that the want of the preposition

before 'fire' shows that it cannot refer to the fire of judgment, but

must be a further enlargement of the word 'Spirit.' Probably it

denotes the negative or purgative effect of this baptism, as the word

'holy' indicates its positive and sanctifying effect.

[7880]1388 The expression 'baptism of fire' was certainly not unknown

to the Jews. In Sanh. 39 a (last lines) we read of an immersion of God

in fire, based on Is. lxvi. 15. An immersion or baptism of fire is

proved from Numb. xxxi. 23. More apt, perhaps, as illustration is the

statement, Jer. Sot. 22 d, that the Torah (the Law) its parchment was

white fire, the writing black fire, itself fire mixed with fire, hewn

out of fire, and given by fire, according to Deut. xxxiii. 2.

[7881]1389 This is the meaning of _sbestov. The word occurs only in

St. Matt. iii. 12; St. Luke iii. 17; St. Mark ix. 43, 45 (?), but

frequently in the classics. The question of 'eternal punishment' will

be discussed in another place. The simile of the fan and the garner is

derived from the Eastern practice of threshing out the corn in the

open by means of oxen, after which, what of the straw had been

trampled under foot (not merely the chaff, as in the A.V.) was burned.

This use of the straw for fire is referred to in the Mishnah, as in

Shabb. iii. 1; Par. iv. 3. But in that case the Hebrew equivalent for

it is {hebrew} (Qash) - as in the above passages, and not Tebhen

(Meyer), nor even as Professor Delitzsch renders it in his Hebrew

N.T.: Mots. The three terms are, however, combined in a curiously

illustrative parable (Ber. R. 83), referring to the destruction of

Rome and the preservation of Israel, when the grain refers the straw,

stubble, and chaff, in their dispute for whose sake the field existed,

to the time when the owner would gather the corn into his barn, but

burn the straw, stubble, and chaff.

[7882]1390 For a full discussion of the question of the baptism of

proselytes, see Appendix XII.

[7883]1391 The following very significant passage may here be quoted:

'A man who is guilty of sin, and makes confession, and does not turn

from it, to whom is he like? To a man who has in his hand a defiling

reptile, who, even if he immerses in all the waters of the world, his

baptism avails him nothing; but let him cast it from his hand, and if

he immerses in only forty seah of water, immediately his baptism

avails him.' On the same page of the Talmud there are some very apt

and beautiful remarks on the subject of repentance (Taan. 16 a,

towards the end).

[7884]1392 Comp. Gen. xxxv. 2

[7885]1393 Ex. xix. 10, 14.

[7886]1394 It is remarkable, that Maimonides traces even the practice

of baptizing proselytes to Ex. xix. 10, 14 (Hilc Issurey Biah xiii. 3;

Yad haCh. vol. ii. p. 142 b). He also gives reasons for the 'baptism'

of Israel before entering into covenant with God. In Kerith, 9 a 'the

baptism' of Israel is proved from Ex. xxiv. 5, since every sprinkling

of blood was supposed to be preceded by immersion. In Siphré on Numb.

(ed. Weiss, p. 30 b) we are also distinctly told of 'baptism' as one

of the three things by which Israel was admitted into the Covenant.

[7887]1395 This may help us, even at this stage, to understand why our

Lord, in the fulfilment of all righteousness, submitted to baptism. It

seems also to explain why, after the coming of Christ, the baptism of

John was alike unavailing and even meaningless (Acts xix. 3-5).

Lastly, it also shows how he that is least in the Kingdom of God is

really greater than John himself (St. Luke vii. 28).

[7888]1396 It may be said that the fundamental tendency of Rabbinism

was anti-sacrificial, as regarded the value of sacrifices in

commending the offerer to God. After the destruction of the Temple it

was, of course, the task of Rabbinism to show that sacrifices had no

intrinsic importance, and that their place was taken by prayer,

penitence, and good works. So against objectors on the ground of Jer.

xxxiii. 18 - but see the answer in Yalkut on the passage (vol. ii. p.

67 a, towards the end) dogmatically (Bab. B. 10 b; Vayyikra R. 7, ed.

Warsh. vol. iii. p. 12 a): 'he that doeth repentance, it is imputed to

him as if he went up to Jerusalem, built the Temple and altar, and

wrought all the sacrifices in the Law'; and in view of the cessation

of sacrifices in the 'Athid.labho' (Vay, u.s.; Tanch. on Par.

Shemini). Soon, prayer or study were put even above sacrifices (Ber.

32 b; Men. 110 a), and an isolated teacher went so far as to regard

the introduction of sacrificial worship as merely intended to preserve

Israel from conforming to heathen worship (Vayyikra R. 22, u. s. p. 34

b, close). On the other hand, individuals seemed to have offered

sacrifices even after the destruction of the Temple (Eduy. viii. 6;

Mechilta on Ex. xviii. 27, ed. Weiss, p. 68 b).

[7889]1397 Comp. 1 Sam. xv. 22; Ps. xl. 6-8; li. 7, 17; Is. i. 11-13;

Jer. vii. 22, 23; Amos v. 21, 22; Ecclus. vii. 9; xxxiv. 18, 19; xxxv.

1, 7.

[7890]1398 Hebr. ix. 13, 9; x. 1; viii. 6, 13. On this subject we

refer to the classical work of Riehm (Lehrbegriff des Hebraerbriefes,

1867).

[7891]1399 Ancient commentators supposed that they came from hostile

motives; later writers that curiosity prompted them. Neither of these

views is admissible, nor does St. Luke vii. 30 imply, that all the

Pharisees who come to him rejected his baptism.

[7892]1400 Comp. St. Matt. xxiii. 5. The Tsitsith (plural,

Tsitsiyoth), or borders (corners, 'wings') of the garments, or rather

the fringes fastened to them. The observance was based on Numb. xv.

38-41, and the Jewish practice of it is indicated not only in the N.T.

(u. s., comp. also St. Matt. ix. 20; xiv. 36) but in the Targumim on

Numb. xv. 38, 39 (comp. also Targ. Pseudo-Jon. on Numb. xvi. 1, 2,

where the peculiar colour of the Tsitsith is represented as the cause

of the controversy between Moses and Korah. But see the version of

this story in Jer. Sanh. x. p. 27 d, end). The Tsitsith were

originally directed to be of white threads, with one thread of deep

blue in each fringe. According to tradition, each of these white

fringes is to consist of eight threads, one of them wound round the

others: first, seven times with a double knot; then eight times with a

double knot (7 + 8 numerically = {hebrew}); then eleven times with a

double knot (11 numerically = {hebrew};) and lastly, thirteen times

(13 numerically = {hebrew}; or, altogether {hebrew}, Jehovah One).

Again, it is pointed out that as Tsitsith is numerically equal to 600

({hebrew}), this, with the eight threads and five knots, gives the

number 613, which is that of the Commandments. At present the Tsitsith

are worn as a special undergarment (the {hebrew}) or on the Tallith or

prayer-mantle, but anciently they seem to have been worn on the outer

garment itself. In Bemidbar R. 17, end (ed. Warsh, vol. iv. p. 69 a),

the blue is represented as emblematic of the sky, and the latter as of

the throne of God (Ex. xxiv. 10). Hence to look upon the Tsitsith was

like looking at the throne of glory (Schürer is mistaken in supposing

that the tractate Tsitsith in the Septem Libri Talmud. par. pp. 22,

23, contains much information on the subject).

[7893]1401 Such certainly was John the Baptist's. Some locusts were

lawful to be eaten, Lev. xi. 22. Comp. Terum. 59 a; and, on the

various species, Chull. 65.

[7894]1402 Deeply as we appreciate the beauty of Keim's remarks about

the character and views of John, we feel only the more that such a man

could not have taken the public position nor made such public

proclamation of the Kingdom as at hand, without a direct and objective

call to it from God. The treatment of John's earlier history by Keim

is, of course, without historical basis.

[7895]1403 The year from Tishri (autumn) 779 to Tishri 780 was a

Sabbatic year. Comp. the evidence in Wieseler, Synopse d. Evang. pp.

204, 205.

[7896]1404 We read of three places where John baptized: 'the

wilderness of Judæa' - probably the traditional site near Jericho;

Ænon, near Salim, on the boundary between Samaria and Judæa (Conder's

Handbook of the Bible, p. 320); and Beth-Abara, the modern Abarah,

'one of the main Jordan fords, a little north of Beisân' (u. s.).

[7897]1405 It is one of the merits of Lieut. Conder to have identified

the site of Beth-Abara. The word probably means 'the house of passage'

(fords), but may also mean 'the house of shipping,' the word Abarah in

Hebrew meaning 'ferryboat,' 2 Sam. xix. 18. The reading Bethania

instead of Bethabara seems undoubtedly the original one, only the word

must not be derived (as by Mr. Conder, whose explanations and comments

are often untenable), from the province Batanea, but explained as

Beth-Oniyah, the 'house of shipping.' (See Lücke, Comment. u. d.

Evang. Joh. i. pp. 392. 393.).

[7898]1406 St. John i. 28.

[7899]1407 Considerable probability attaches to the tradition of the

Basilideans, that our Lord's Baptism took place on the 6th or 10th of

January. (See Bp. Ellicott's Histor. Lect. on the Life of our Lord

Jesus Christ, p. 105, note 2.

[7900]1408 St. John i. 33.

[7901]1409 The superficial objection on the supposed discrepancy

between St. Matthew iii. 14 and St. John i. 33 has been well put aside

by Bp. Ellicott (u. s. p. 107, note).

[7902]1410 Comp. Nicholson, Gospel according to the Hebrews, pp. 38,

92, 93.

[7903]1411 It would occupy too much space to give the names of the

authors of these theories. The views of Godet come nearest to what we

regard as the true explanation.

[7904]1412 I must here, once for all, express my astonishment that a

book so frivolous and fantastic in its treatment of the Life of Jesus,

and so superficial and often inaccurate, should have excited so much

public attention.

[7905]1413 But the latter must be firmly upheld.

[7906]1414 St. Luke iii. 21.

[7907]1415 The account by St. Luke seems to me to include both. The

common objection on the score of the supposed divergence between St.

John and the Synoptists is thus met.

[7908]1416 The expression diek_luen (St. Matt iii. 14: 'John forbade

Him') implies earnest resistance (comp. Meyer ad locum).

[7909]1417 St. Luke iii. 21.

[7910]1418 It seems to me that the prayer which the Lord taught His

disciples must have had its root in, and taken its start from, His own

inner Life. At the same time it is adapted to our wants. Much in that

prayer has, of course, no application to Him, but is His application

of the doctrine of the Kingdom to our state and wants.

[7911]1419 Whether or not we adopt the reading e_v a_t_n in St. Mark

i. 10, the remaining of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus is clearly

expressed in St. John i. 32.

[7912]1420 1 St. Pet. iii. 21.

[7913]1421 Here the Targum on Ps. ii. 7, which is evidently intended

to weaken the Messianic interpretation, gives us welcome help. It

paraphrases: 'Beloved as a son to his father art Thou to Me.' Keim

regards the words, 'Thou art my beloved Son,' &c., as a mixture of Is.

xlii. 1 and Ps. ii. 7. I cannot agree with this view, though this

history is the fulfilment of the prediction in Isaiah.

[7914]1422 St. John i. 34.

[7915]1423 Dr. Wünsche's Rabbinic notes on the Bath-Qol (Neue Beitr.

pp. 22, 23) are taken from Hamburger's Real-Encykl. (Abth. ii. pp. 92

&c.)

[7916]1424 Jer. Sot. ix. 14; Yoma 9 b; Sotah 33 a; 48 b; Sanh 11 a.

[7917]1425 Hamburger, indeed maintains, on the ground of Macc. 23 b,

that occasionally it was identified with the Holy Spirit. But

carefully read, neither this passage, nor the other, in which the same

mistranslation, and profane misinterpretation of the words 'She has

been more righteous' (Gen. xxxviii. 26) occur (Jer. Sot. ix. 7), at

all bears out this suggestion. It is quite untenable in view of the

distinct statements (Jer. Sot. ix. 14; Sot. 48 b; and Sanh. 11a), that

after the cessation of the Holy Spirit the Bath-Qol took His place.

[7918]1426 Comp. on the subject Pinner in his Introduction to the

tractate Berakhoth.

[7919]1427 In the Targum Onkelos it is not at all mentioned. In the

Targum PseudoJon. it occurs four times (Gen. xxxviii. 26; Numb. xxi.

6; Deut. xxviii. 15; xxxiv. 5), and four times in the Targum on the

Hagiographa (twice in Ecclesiastes, once in Lamentations, and once in

Esther). In Mechilta and Siphra it does not occur at all, and in

Siphré only once, in the absurd legend that the Bath-Qol was heard a

distance of twelve times twelve miles proclaiming the death of Moses

(ed. Friedmann, p. 149 b). In the Mishnah it is only twice mentioned

(Yeb. xvi. 6, where the sound of a Bath-Qol is supposed to be

sufficient attestation of a man's death to enable his wife to marry

again; and in Abhoth vi. 2, where it is impossible to understand the

language otherwise than figuratively). In the Jerusalem Talmud the

Bath-Qol is referred to twenty times, and in the Babylon Talmud

sixty-nine times. Sometimes the Bath-Qol gives sentence in favour of a

popular Rabbi, sometimes it attempts to decide controversies, or bears

witness; or else it is said every day to proclaim: Such an one's

daughter is destined for such an one (Moed Kat. 18 b; Sot. 2 a; Sanh.

22 a). Occasionally it utters curious or profane interpretations of

Scripture (as in Yoma 22 b; Sot. 10 b), or silly legends, as in regard

to the insect Yattush which was to torture Titus (Gitt. 56 b), or as

warning against a place where a hatchet had fallen into the water,

descending for seven years without reaching the bottom. Indeed, so

strong became the feeling against this superstition, that the more

rational Rabbis protested against any appeal to the Bath-Qol (Baba

Metsia 59 b).

[7920]1428 Nov. Test. i. p. 268.

[7921]1429 The force of Gfrörer's attacks upon the Gospels lies in his

cumulative attempts to prove that the individual miraculous facts

recorded in the Gospels are based upon Jewish notions. It is,

therefore, necessary to examine each of them separately, and such

examination, it careful and conscientious, shows that his quotations

are often untrustworthy, and his conclusions fallacies. None the less

taking are they to those who are imperfectly acquainted with Rabbinic

literature. Wünsche's Talmudic and Midrashic Notes on the N.T.

(Gottingen, 1878) are also too often misleading.

[7922]1430 Jahrh. des Heils, vol. ii. p. 433.

[7923]1431 Chag. 15 a.

[7924]1432 Farrar, Life of Christ, i. p. 117.

[7925]1433 The saying in Chag. 15 a is of Ben Soma, who is described

in Rabbinic literature as tainted with Christian views, and whose

belief in the possibility of the supernatural birth of the Messiah is

so coarsely satirised in the Talmud. Rabbi Löw (Lebensalter. p. 58)

suggests that in Ben Soma's figure of the dove there may have been a

Christian reminiscence.

[7926]1434 Ber. R. 2.

[7927]1435 Comp. the long illustrations in the Midr. on Song i. 15;

Sanh. 95 a; Ber. R. 39; Yalkut on Ps. 1v. 7. and other passages.

[7928]1436 St. Matt. xxi. 25.

[7929]1437 No other terms would correctly describe the book of Keim to

which I specially refer. How widely it differs, not only from the

superficial trivialities of a Renan, but from the stale arguments of

Strauss, or the picturesque inaccuracies of a Hausrath, no serious

student need be told. Perhaps on that ground it is only the more

dangerous.

[7930]1438 On the temptations of Abraham see Book of Jubilees, ch.

xvii.; Sanh. 89 b (and differently but not less blasphemously in Pirké

de R. Elies. 31); Pirké de R. Elies. 26, 31, 32 (where also about

Satan's temptation of Sarah, who dies in consequence of his tidings);

Ab. de R. N. 33; Ber. R. 32, 56; Yalkut, i. c. 98, p. 28 b; and

Tanchuma, where the story is related with most repulsive details. As

to Moses, see for example Shabb. 89 a; and especially the truly

horrible story of the death of Moses in Debar R. 11 (ed. Warsh. iii.

p. 22 a and b). But I am not aware of any temptation of Moses by

Satan.

[7931]1439 Bemidb. R. 15, ed. Warsh. vol. iv. p. 63 a, lines 5 and 4

from bottom.

[7932]1440 Thus Gfrörer can only hope that some Jewish parallelism may

yet be discovered (!); while Keim suggests, of course without a title

of evidence, additions by the early Jewish Christians. But whence and

why these imaginary additions?

[7933]1441 Yalkut on Is. ix. 1, vol. ii. p. 56.

[7934]1442 Keim (Jesu von Naz. i. b, p. 564) seems not to have perused

the whole passage, and, quoting it at second-hand, has misapplied it.

The passage (Yalkut on Is. lx. 1) has been given before.

[7935]1443 u. s. col. d.

[7936]1444 The number is thus reached: as there are seventy nations,

and ten of each are to take hold on each of the four corners of a

Jew's garment, we have 70 x 10 x 4 =2,800.

[7937]1445 u. s. 11 lines further down.

[7938]1446 The Rabbis have it, that a man must accommodate himself to

the ways of the place where he is. When Moses was on the Mount he

lived of 'the bread of the Torah' (Shem. R. 47).

[7939]1447 Ps. lxviii. 18.

[7940]1448 The quotation in Eph. iv. 8 resembles the rendering of the

Targum (see Delitzsch Comm. ü. d. Psalter, vol. i. p. 503).

[7941]1449 We refrain from naming the individual writers who have

broached these and other equally untenable hypotheses.

[7942]1450 The former notably in St. Matt. xii. 25-28; St. Luke xi. 17

&c. The import of this, as looking back upon the history of the

Temptation, has not always been sufficiently recognised. In regard to

Satan and his power many passages will occur to the reader, such as

St. Matt. vi. 13; xii. 22; xiii. 19, 25, 39; xxvi. 41; St. Luke x. 18;

xxii. 3, 28, 31; St. John viii. 44; xii. 31; xiii. 27; xiv. 30; xvi.

11.

[7943]1451 So Bishop Ellicott, Histor. Lectures, p. 111.

[7944]1452 Professor Godet's views on this subject are very far from

satisfactory, whether exegetically or dogmatically. Happily, they fall

far short of the notion of any internal solicitation to sin in the

case of Jesus, which Bishop Ellicott so justly denounces in strongest

language.

[7945]1453 U. s. p. 110, note 2.

[7946]1454 Deut. xxxiv. 1-3.

[7947]1455 According to Siphré (ed. Friedmann p. 149 a and b), God

showed to Moses Israel in its happiness, wars, and misfortunes; the

whole world from the Day of Creation to that of the Resurrection;

Paradise, and Gehenna.

[7948]1456 Heb. iv. 15.

[7949]1457 St. James i. 14.

[7950]1458 The heresy which represents the Body of Christ as only

apparent, not real.

[7951]1459 Hebr. iv. 15.

[7952]1460 St. James i. 14.

[7953]1461 Comp. Riehm, Lehrbegr. d. Hebr. Br. P. 364. But I cannot

agree with the views which this learned theologian expresses. Indeed,

it seems to me that he does not meet the real difficulties of the

question; on the contrary, rather aggravates them. They lie in this:

How could One Who (according to Riehm) stood on the same level with us

in regard to all temptations have been exempt from sin?

[7954]1462 The latter was already sin. Yet 'temptation' means more

than mere 'assault.' There may be conditional mental assensus without

moral consensus - and so temptation without sin. See p. 301, note.

[7955]1463 The heresy which unduly separated the two Natures.

[7956]1464 This is evident even from the terms used by St. Matthew

(_n_cqj) and St. Luke (_geto). I cannot agree with Godet, that Jesus

would have been inclined to return to Galilee and begin teaching.

Jesus had no inclination save this - to do the Will of His Father. And

yet the expression 'driven' used by St. Mark seems to imply some human

shrinking on His part - at least at the outset.

[7957]1465 Heb. iv. 15.

[7958]1466 The place of the Temptation could not, of course, have been

the traditional 'Quarantania,' but must have been near Bethabara. See

also Stanley's Sinai and Palestine, p. 308.

[7959]1467 It was this which would make the 'assault' a 'temptation'

by vividly setting before the mind the reality and rationality of

these considerations - a mental assensus - without implying any inward

consensus to the manner in which the Enemy proposed to have them set

aside.

[7960]1468 All the assaults of Satan were really directed against

Christ's absolute submission to the Will of God, which was His

Perfectness. Hence, by every one of these temptations, as Weiss says

in regard to the first, 'rüttelt er an Seiner Volkommenheit.'

[7961]1469 I regard the memory as affording the basis for the

Temptation. What was so vividly in Christ's memory at that moment,

that was flashed before Him as in a mirror under the dazzling light of

temptation.

[7962]1470 Satan's 'if' was rather a taunt than a doubt. Nor could it

have been intended to call in question His ability to do miracles.

Doubt on that point would already have been a fall.

[7963]1471 Deut. viii 3.

[7964]1472 The supply of the manna was only an exemplification and

application of the general principle, that man really lives by the

Word of God.

[7965]1473 It cannot be regarded as certain, that the pter_gion to_

_ero_ was, as commentators generally suppose, the Tower at the

southeastern angle of the Temple Cloisters, where the Royal (southern)

and Solomon's (the eastern) Porch met, and whence the view into the

Kedron Valley beneath was to the stupendous depth of 450 feet. Would

this angle be called 'a wing' (pter_gion)? Nor can I agree with

Delitzsch, that it was the 'roof' of the Sanctuary, where indeed there

would scarcely have been standing-room. It certainly formed the

watch-post of the Priest. Possibly it may have been the extreme corner

of the 'wing-like' porch, or ulam, which led into the Sanctuary.

Thence a Priest could easily have communicated with his brethren in

the court beneath. To this there is, however, the objection that in

that case it should have been to_ nao_. At p. 244, the ordinary view

of this locality has been taken.

[7966]1474 Comp. 'The Temple, its Ministry and Services,' p. 132.

[7967]1475 Bengel: 'Scriptura per Scripturam interpretanda et

concilianda.' This is also a Rabbinic canon. The Rabbis frequently

insist on the duty of not exposing oneself to danger, in presumptuous

expectation of miraculous deliverance. It is a curious saying: Do not

stand over against an ox when he comes from the fodder; Satan jumps

out from between his horns. (Pes. 112 b.) David had been presumptuous

in Ps. xxvi. 2 - and failed. (Sanh. 107 a.) But the most apt

illustration is this: On one occasion the child of a Rabbi was asked

by R. Jochanan to quote a verse. The child quoted Deut. xiv. 22, at

the same time propounding the question, why the second clause

virtually repeated the first. The Rabbi replied, 'To teach us that the

giving of tithes maketh rich.' 'How do you know it?' asked the child.

'By experience,' answered the Rabbi. 'But,' said the child, 'such

experiment is not lawful, since we are not to tempt the Lord our God.'

(See the very curious book of Rabbi So oweyczgk, Die Bibel, d. Talm.

u. d. Evang. p. 132.).

[7968]1476 Sin always intensifies in the coarseness of its assaults.

[7969]1477 For the Jewish views on Angelology and Demonology, see

Appendix XIII.: 'Jewish Angelology and Demonology.'

[7970]1478 St. John vii. 3-5.

[7971]1479 This quotation of the Doxology leaves, of course, the

critical question undetermined, whether the words were part of the

'Lord's Prayer' in its original form.

[7972]1480 This chapter contains, among other matter, a detailed and

critical examination of the great Jewish Sects, such as was necessary

in a work on 'The Times.' as well as 'The Life,' of Christ.

[7973]1481 i. 19-28.

[7974]1482 This point is fully discussed by Lücke, Evang. Joh., vol.

i. pp. 396-398.

[7975]1483 Comp. St. John v. 15, 16; ix. 18, 22; xviii. 12, 31.

[7976]1484 So Professor Westcott, in his Commentary on the passage

(Speaker's Comment., N.T., vol. ii. p. 18), where he notes that the

expression in St. John viii. 3 is unauthentic.

[7977]1485 Sanh. i. 5.

[7978]1486 Of this the Sanhedrin must have been perfectly aware. Comp.

St. Matt. iii. 7; St. Luke iii. 15 &c.

[7979]1487 For ex. Yoma 1. 5.

[7980]1488 Comp. 'The Temple, its Ministry and Services,' p. 75. Dr.

Geiger (Urschr. u. Uebersetz. d. Bibel, pp. 113, 114) ascribes to

them, however, a much wider jurisdiction. Some of his inferences (such

as at pp. 115, 116) seem to me historically unsupported.

[7981]1489 St. Matt. iii. 7 &c.

[7982]1490 Comp. Book I. ch. viii.

[7983]1491 I use the term metaphysical here in the sense of all that

is above the natural, not merely the speculative, but the

supersensuous generally.

[7984]1492 The word a_resiv has received its present meaning chiefly

from the adjective attaching to it in 2 Pet. ii. 1. In Acts xxiv. 5,

14, xxviii. 22, it is vituperatively applied to Christians; in 1 Cor.

xi. 19, Gal. v. 20, it seems to apply to diverging practices of a

sinful kind; in Titus iii. 10, the 'heretic' seems one who held or

taught diverging opinions or practices. Besides, it occurs in the N.T.

once to mark the Sadducees, and twice the Pharisees (Acts v. 17; xv.

5, and xxvi. 5).

[7985]1493 I mean on historical, not theological grounds.

[7986]1494 I here refer to the following passages: Jewish War ii. 8.

14; Ant. xiii. 5. 9; 10. 5, 6; xvii. 2. 4; xviii. 1, 2, 3, 4.

[7987]1495 For a full discussion of the character and writings of

Josephus, I would refer to the article in Dr. Smith's Dict. of Chr.

Biogr. vol. iii.

[7988]1496 Jos. Ant. xvii. 2. 4.

[7989]1497 Chag. ii. 5, 7; comp. Tohor. vii. 5.

[7990]1498 For ex. Kidd. 33 b.

[7991]1499 Bekh. 30.

[7992]1500 Abba Saul would also have freed all students from that

formality.

[7993]1501 Bekhor. 30.

[7994]1502 Comp. the suggestion as to the significant time when this

alteration was introduced, in 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp.

228, 229.

[7995]1503 Dem. ii. 2.

[7996]1504 Demai ii.3.

[7997]1505 In St. Luke xi.42; xviii. 12; St. Matt. xxiii. 23.

[7998]1506 In St. Luke xi. 39, 41; St. Matt. xxiii. 25, 26.

[7999]1507 Sot. 22 b; Jer. Ber. ix. 7.

[8000]1508 Sot. iii. 4.

[8001]1509 Pes. 70 b.

[8002]1510 Abhoth de R. Nathan 5.

[8003]1511 Jer. Chag. 79 d; Tos. Chag. iii.

[8004]1512 Erub. 54 a. I give the latter clause, not as in our edition

of the Talmud, but according to a more correct reading (Levy, Neuhebr.

Wörterb. vol. ii. p. 102).

[8005]1513 It could serve no good purpose to give instances. They are

readily accessible to those who have taste or curiosity in that

direction.

[8006]1514 So, erroneously, Wellhausen, in his treatise 'Pharisäer u.

Sadduc.'; and partially, as it seems to me, even Schürer (Neutest.

Zeitgesch.). In other respects also these two learned men seem too

much under the influence of Geiger and Kuenen.

[8007]1515 Megill. Taan. Per. iv. ed. Warsh. p. 8 a.

[8008]1516 Wellhausen has carried his criticisms and doubts of the

Hebrew Scholion on the Megill. Taan. (or 'Roll of Fasts') too far.

[8009]1517 Even such a book as the Meg. Taan. does not accuse them of

absolute ignorance, but only of being unable to prove their dicta from

Scripture (comp. Pereq x. p. 15 b, which may well mark the extreme of

Anti-Sadduceeism).

[8010]1518 Sanh. 33 t Horay 4 a.

[8011]1519 Some traditional explanation of the Law of Moses was

absolutely necessary, if it was to be applied to existing

circumstances. It would be a great historical inaccuracy to imagine

that the Sadducees rejected the whole par_dosiv t_n presbut_rwn (St.

Matt. xv. 2) from Ezra downwards.

[8012]1520 This is the meaning of Ant. xiii. 10. 6, and clearly

implied in xviii. 1,3,4, and War ii. 8. 14.

[8013]1521 Ab. iii. 11; v 8.

[8014]1522 Jos. War i. 5. 2.

[8015]1523 M. Derenbourg (Hist. de la Palest., p. 122, note) rightly

remarks, that the Rabbinic equivalent for Josephus' _kr_beia is

{hebrew}, heaviness, and that the Pharisees were the {hebrew} or

'makers heavy.' What a commentary this on the charge of Jesus about

'the heavy burdens' of the Pharisees! St. Paul uses the same term as

Josephus to describe the Pharisaic system, where our A.V. renders 'the

perfect manner' (Acts xxii. 3). Comp. also Acts xxvi. 5: kat_ t_n

_kribest_tjn a_resin.

[8016]1524 Ant. xviii. 1. 3.

[8017]1525 Ant. xviii. 1. 3.

[8018]1526 Sanh. xi. 3.

[8019]1527 The subject is discussed at length in Jer. Ber. i. 7 (p. 3

b), where the superiority of the Scribe over the Prophet is shown (1)

from Mic. ii. 6 (without the words in italics), the one class being

the Prophets ('prophesy not'), the other the Scribes ('prophesy'); (2)

from the fact that the Prophets needed the attestation of miracles.

(Duet. xiii. 2), but not the Scribes (Deut. xvii. 11).

[8020]1528 St. Matt xxii. 23, and parallel passages; Acts iv. 1, 2;

xxiii. 8.

[8021]1529 War ii. 8. 14.

[8022]1530 Ant. xviii 1. 4.

[8023]1531 Ab. d. R. Nath.5.

[8024]1532 Ber ix. 5.

[8025]1533 This is admitted even by Geiger (Urschr. u. Uebers. p. 130,

note), though in the passage above referred to he would emendate:

'Scribes of the Samaritans.' The passage, however, implies that these

were Sadducean Scribes, and that they were both willing and able to

enter into theological controversy with their opponents.

[8026]1534 Rabbi Gamaliel's proof was taken from Deut. i. 8: 'Which

Jehovah sware unto your fathers to give unto them.' It is not said

'unto you,' but unto 'them,' which implies the resurrection of the

dead. The argument is kindred in character, but far inferior in

solemnity and weight, to that employed by our Lord, St. Matt. xxii.

32, from which it is evidently taken. (See book v. ch. iv., the

remarks on that passage.)

[8027]1535 It is a curious circumstance in connection with the

question of the Sadducees, that it raised another point in controversy

between the Pharisees and the 'Samaritans,' or, as I would read it,

the Sadducees, since 'the Samaritans' (Sadducees?) only allowed

marriage with the betrothed, not the actually wedded wife of a

deceased childless brother (Jer Yebam. i. 6, p. 3 a). The Sadducees in

the Gospel argue on the Pharisaic theory, apparently for the twofold

object of casting ridicule on the doctrine of the Resurrection, and on

the Pharisaic practice of marriage with the espoused wife of a

deceased brother.

[8028]1536 Acts xxiii.

[8029]1537 The expression is used in the heathen (philosophical) sense

of fate by Philo, De Incorrupt. Mundi. section 10. ed. Mangey, vol.

ii. p. 496 (ed. Fref. p. 947).

[8030]1538 In Jewish War ii. 8. 14.

[8031]1539 Ant. xviii. 1. 3.

[8032]1540 Ant. xiii. 5. 9.

[8033]1541 Sanh. 29 a.

[8034]1542 Chull. 7 b.

[8035]1543 The following curious instance of this is given. On one

occasion King Solomon, when attended by his two Scribes, Elihoreph and

Ahiah (both supposed to have been Ethiopians), suddenly perceived the

Angel of Death. As he looked so sad, Solomon ascertained as its

reason, that the two Scribes had been demanded at his hands. On this

Solomon transported them by magic into the land of Luz, where,

according to legend, no man ever died. Next morning Solomon again

perceived the Angel of Death, but this time laughing, because, as he

said. Solomon had sent these men to the very place whence he had been

ordered to fetch them (Sukk, 53 a).

[8036]1544 Those who understand the character of Josephus' writings

will be at no loss for his reasons in this. It would suit his purpose

to speak often of the fatalism of the Pharisees, and to represent them

as a philosophical sect like the Stoics. The latter, indeed, he does

in so many words.

[8037]1545 For details comp. Hamburger, Real-Encykl. ii. pp. 103-106 -

though there is some tendency to 'colouring' in this as in other

articles of the work.

[8038]1546 Yoma 38 b.

[8039]1547 Baba B. 16 a.

[8040]1548 Siphré on Deut. xi. 26, § 53, ed. Friedmann, p. 86 a.

[8041]1549 Ab. iii. 15.

[8042]1550 Jer. Chag. iii. 8; Tos. Chag. iii., where the reader will

find sufficient proof that the Sadducees were not in the wrong.

[8043]1551 In Yad. iv. 6, 7.

[8044]1552 The Pharisees replied by asking on what ground the bones of

a High-Priest 'defiled,' but not those of a donkey. And when the

Sadducees ascribed it to the great value of the former, lest a man

should profane the bones of his parents by making spoons of them, the

Pharisees pointed out that the same argument applied to defilement by

the Holy Scriptures. In general, it seems that the Pharisees were

afraid of the satirical comments of the Sadducees on their doings

(comp. Parah iii. 3).

[8045]1553 Wellhausen rightly denounces the strained interpretation of

Geiger, who would find here - as in other points - hidden political

allusions.

[8046]1554 Comp. 'The Temple, its Ministry and Services,' pp. 309,

312. The rubrics are in the Mishnic tractate Parab, and in Tos. Par.

[8047]1555 Parah iii.; Tos. Par. 3.

[8048]1556 Parah iii. 7.

[8049]1557 The Mishnic passage is difficult, but I believe I have

given the sense correctly.

[8050]1558 Shabb. 108 a.

[8051]1559 Vv. 15, 16.

[8052]1560 Men. x. 3; 65 a; Chag. ii. 4.

[8053]1561 This difference, which is more intricate than appears at

first sight, requires a longer discussion than can be given in this

place.

[8054]1562 Rosh haSh. i. 7; ii. 1; Tos. Rosh haSh. ed. Z. i. 15.

[8055]1563 Sukk. 48 b; comp. Jos. Ant. xiii 13. 5.

[8056]1564 For details about the observances on this festival I must

refer to 'The Temple, its Ministry and Services.'

[8057]1565 Sukk. 43 b; and in the Jerus. Talm. and Tos. Sukk. iii. 1.

[8058]1566 Jer. Yoma i. 5; Yoma 19 b; 53 a.

[8059]1567 Specially Ant. xx. 9.

[8060]1568 Other differences, which rest merely on the authority of

the Hebrew Commentary on 'The Roll of Fasts,' I have discarded as

unsupported by historical evidence. I am sorry to have in this

respect, and on some other aspect of the question, to differ from the

learned Article on 'The Sadducees,' in Kitto's Bibl. Encycl.

[8061]1569 Decreed in Deut. xix. 21.

[8062]1570 Makk. i. 6.

[8063]1571 Baba B. 115 b; Tos. Yad. ii. 20.

[8064]1572 Yad. iv. 7 and Tos. Yad.

[8065]1573 Geiger, and even Derenbourg, see in these things deep

political allusions - which, as it seems to me, have no other

existence than in the ingenuity of these writers.

[8066]1574 Ant. xiii. 10. 6.

[8067]1575 Ant. xvii. 2. 4.

[8068]1576 Acts v. 17; Ant. xx. 9. 1.

[8069]1577 So Wellhausen, u. s.

[8070]1578 So Geiger, u. s.

[8071]1579 Sheqal. iv. 4; vi. 1; Eduy. viii. 2; Ab. ii. B &c.

[8072]1580 St. John i. 24.

[8073]1581 In the Ab. de R. Nath. c. 5.

[8074]1582 Tseduqim and Tsadduqim mark different transliterations of

the name Sadducees.

[8075]1583 This theory, defended with ingenuity by Geiger, had been of

late adopted by most writers, and even by Schürer. But not a few of

the statements hazarded by Dr. Geiger seem to me to have no historical

foundation, and the passages quoted in support either do not convey

such meaning, or else are of no authority.

[8076]1584 So Dr. Löw, as quoted in Dr. Ginsburg's article.

[8077]1585 Yad. iv. 6 &c.

[8078]1586 The argument as against the derivation of the term Sadducee

would, of course, hold equally good, even if each party had assumed,

not received from the other, its characteristic name.

[8079]1587 Ps. xxx. 4; xxxi. 23; xxxvii. 28.

[8080]1588 vi. 21; ix. 1; x. 11; Neh. ix. 2.

[8081]1589 Comp. generally, 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 230,

231.

[8082]1590 Ber. v. 1; comp. with Vayyikra R. 2, ed. Warsh. t. iii. p.

5 a.

[8083]1591 Here it deserves special notice that the Old Testament term

Chasid, which the Pharisees arrogated to themselves, is rendered in

the Peshito by Zaddîq. Thus, as it were, the opponents of Pharisaism

would play off the equivalent Tsaddiq against the Pharisaic arrogation

of Chasid.

[8084]1592 Such by-names, by a play on a word, are not unfrequent.

Thus, in Shem. R. 5 (ed. Warsh. p. 14 a, lines 7 and 8 from top),

Pharaoh's charge that the Israelites were {hebrew} 'idle,' is, by a

transposition of letters made to mean that they were p_rnoi.

[8085]1593 It seems strange, that so accurate a scholar as Schürer

should have regarded the 'national party' as merely an offshoot from

the Pharisees (Neutest. Zeitgesch. p. 431), and appealed in proof to a

passage in Josephus (Ant. xviii. 1.6), which expressly calls the

Nationalists a fourth party, by the side of the Pharisees, Sadducees,

and Essenes. That in practice they would carry out the strict Judaism

of the Pharisees, does not make them Pharisees.

[8086]1594 Philo, Quod omnis probus liber, 12, ed, Mang. ii. p. 457;

Jos. Ant. xviii. 1.5.

[8087]1595 They are also mentioned by Pliny (Hist. Natur. v. 16).

[8088]1596 This may be inferred from Josephus' Life, c. 2.

[8089]1597 This point is conclusively disposed of by Bishop Lightfoot

in the third Dissertation appended to his Commentary on the Colossians

(pp. 397-419). In general, the masterly discussion of the whole

subject by Bishop Lightfoot, alike in the body of the Commentary and

in the three Dissertations appended, may be said to form a new era in

the treatment of the whole question, the points on which we would

venture to express dissent being few and unimportant. The reader who

wishes to see a statement of the supposed analogy between Essenism and

the teaching of Christ will find it in Dr. Ginsburg's Article

'Essenes,' in Smith and Wace's Dictionary of Christian Biography. The

same line of argument has been followed by Frankel and Gärtz. The

reasons for the opposite view are set forth in the text.

[8090]1598 Jos. Ant. xiii. 5. 9.

[8091]1599 105-104 b.c.; Ant. xiii. 11. 2; War i. 3. 5.

[8092]1600 Compare Josephus, Ant. xiii. 5, 9; xv. 10. 4, 5; xviii. 1.

5; Jewish War, ii. 8, 2-13; Philo, Quod omnis probus liber, 12, 13

(ed. Mangey, ii. 457-459; ed. Par. and Frcf. pp. 876-879; ed. Richter,

vol. v. pp. 285-288); Pliny, N.H. v. 16, 17. For references in the

Fathers see Bp. Lightfoot on Colossians, pp. 83, 84 (note). Comp. the

literature there and in Schürer (Neutest. Zeitgesch. p. 599), to which

I would add Dr. Ginburg's Art. 'Essenes' in Smith's and Wace's Dict.

of Chr. Biogr., vol. ii.

[8093]1601 Philo, ii.p. 457.

[8094]1602 Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 16, 17.

[8095]1603 Philo, u.s. p. 632; Jos. Jewish War ii. 8. 4.

[8096]1604 Ant. xiii. 11.2; xv. 10. 5; xvii. 13.3.

[8097]1605 War v. 4. 2.

[8098]1606 Philo, u. s. p. 632.

[8099]1607 War ii. 8. 9.

[8100]1608 War ii. 8. 6.

[8101]1609 u. s. § 4.

[8102]1610 The distinction is Schürer's, although he is disposed to

minimise this point. More on this in the sequel.

[8103]1611 Jos. War ii. 8. 5; Ant. xviii. 1. 5.

[8104]1612 Schürer regards these children as forming the first of the

four 'classes' or 'grades' into which the Essenes were arranged. But

this is contrary to the express statement of Philo, that only adults

were admitted into the order, and hence only such could have formed a

'grade' or 'class' of the community. (Comp. ed. Mangey, ii. p. 632,

from Eusebius' Præpar. Evang. lib. viii. cap. 8.) I have adopted the

view of Bishop Lightfoot on the subject. Even the marrying order of

the Essenes, however, only admitted of wedlock under great

restrictions, and as a necessary evil (War, u. s. sections 13). Bishop

Lightfoot suggests, that these were not Essenes in the strict sense,

but only 'like the third order of a Benedictine or Franciscan

brotherhood.'

[8105]1613 War ii. 8.7.

[8106]1614 Can this possibly have any connection in the mind of

Josephus with the later Nationalist movement? This would agree with

his insistance on their respect for those in authority. Otherwise the

emphasis laid on abstinence from robbery seems strange in such a sect.

[8107]1615 I venture to think that even Bishop Lightfoot lays too much

stress on the affinity to Pharisaism. I can discover few, if any,

traces of Pharisaism in the distinctive sense of the term. Even their

frequent washings had a different object from those of the Pharisees.

[8108]1616 For a similar reason, and in order 'not to affront the

Divine rays of light' - the light as symbol, if not outcome, of the

Deity - they covered themselves, in such circumstances, with the

mantle which was their ordinary dress in winter.

[8109]1617 Ed. Mang ii. p. 458.

[8110]1618 Jos. War ii. 8. 12; comp. Ant. xiii. 11. 2; xv. 10. 5;

xvii. 13. 3.

[8111]1619 There can be no question that these Essene cures were

magical, and their knowledge of remedies esoteric.

[8112]1620 Bishop Lightfoot refers to a part of the Sibylline books

which seems of Christian authorship.

[8113]1621 ch. xxxi. - lxxi.

[8114]1622 Comp. Lucius, Essenismus, p. 109. This brochure, the latest

on the subject, (though interesting, adds little to our knowledge.)

[8115]1623 See Appendix XIII. on the Angelology, Satanology, and

Demonology of the Jews.

[8116]1624 Ch. x.

[8117]1625 Comp. also the Sepher Noach in Jellinek's Beth. haMidr.

part iii. pp. 155, 156.

[8118]1626 c. 48.

[8119]1627 Only after writing the above I have noticed, that Jellinek

arrives at the same conclusion as to the Essene character of the Book

of Jubilees (Beth ha-Midr. iii. p. xxxiv., xxxv.), and of the Book of

Enoch (u.s. ii. p. xxx.).

[8120]1628 So Zeller, Philosophie d. Griechen, ed. 1881, iii. pp.

277-337.

[8121]1629 So Bishop Lightfoot, in his masterly treatment of the whole

subject in his Commentary on the Ep. to the Colossians.

[8122]1630 By Bishop Lightfoot, u.s. pp. 382-396 In general, I prefer

on many points - such as the connection between Essenism and

Gnosticism &c., simply to refer readers to the classic work of Bishop

Lightfoot.

[8123]1631 Sepher Noach ap. Jellinek iii. p. 156.

[8124]1632 As regards any connection between the Essenes and the

Therapeutai, Lucius has denied the existence of such a sect and the

Philonic authorship of de V. cont. The latter we have sought to defend

in the Art. Philo (Smith and Wace's Dict. of Chr. Biogr. iv.), and to

show that the Therapeutes were not a 'sect' but an esoteric circle of

Alexandrian Jews.

[8125]1633 Deutsch, Remains, pp. 359, 360.

[8126]1634 As other instances may be quoted such as Istagioth

({hebrew}) = st_gj, roof; Istuli ({hebrew}) = st_lj, a pillar;

Dikhsumini ({hebrew}) = dexamenj, cistern.

[8127]1635 Megill. 24 b, lines 4 and 5 from bottom.

[8128]1636 The practice of beginning prayers before, and ending them

as the sun had just risen, seems to have passed from the Essenes to a

party in the Synagogue itself, and is pointedly alluded to as a

characteristic of the so-called Vethikin, Ber. 9 b; 25 b; 26 a. But

another peculiarity about them, noticed in Rosh haSh. 32 b (the

repetition of all the verses in the Pentateuch containing the record

of God in the so-called Malkhiyoth, Zikhronoth, and Shophroth), shows

that they were not Essenes, since such Rabbinic practices must have

been alien to their system.

[8129]1637 Sanh. x 1.

[8130]1638 In Sanh. 100 b they are explained as 'the writings of the

Sadducees,' and by another Rabbi as 'the Book of Sirach' (Ecclus. in

the Apocrypha). Hamburger, as sometimes, makes assertions on this

point which cannot be supported (Real-Wörterb. ii. p. 70). Jer. Sanh.

28 a explains, 'Such as the books of Ben Sirach and of Ben La'nah' -

the latter apparently also an Apocryphal book, for which the Midr.

Kohel. (ed. Warsh. iii. p. 106 b) has 'the book of Ben Tagla' 'La'nah'

and 'Tagla' could scarcely be symbolic names. On the other hand, I

cannot agree with Fürst (Kanon d. A.T. p. 99), who identifies them

with Apollonius of Tyana and Empedocles. Dr. Neubauer suggests that

Ben La'nah may be a corruption of Sibylline Oracles.

[8131]1639 In Sanh. x. 1.

[8132]1640 Meg. 24 b.

[8133]1641 The 'Epicureans,' or 'freethinkers,' are explained to be

such as speak contemptuously of the Scriptures, or of the Rabbis (Jer.

Sanh. 27 d). In Sanh. 38 b a distinction is made between 'stranger'

(heathen) Epicureans, and Israelitish Epicureans. With the latter it

is unwise to enter into argument.

[8134]1642 Both in the Jer. and Bab. Talm. it is conjoined with

'spitting,' which was a mode of healing, usual at the time. The Talmud

forbids the magical formula, only in connection with this 'spitting' -

and then for the curious reason that the Divine Name is not to be

recorded while 'spitting.' But, while in the Bab. Talm. the

prohibition bears against such 'spitting' before pronouncing the

formula, in the Jer. Talm. it is after uttering it.

[8135]1643 Sanh. 101 a; Jer. Sanh. p. 28 b.

[8136]1644 Bishop Lightfoot has shown that the Essene cures were

magical (u. s. pp. 91 &c. and p. 377).

[8137]1645 St. Matt. iii. 7.

[8138]1646 St. John i. 33.

[8139]1647 This is insisted upon by Keim, in his beautiful sketch of

the Baptist. Would that he had known the Master in the glory of His

Divinity, as he understood the Forerunner in the beauty of his

humanity! To show how the whole teaching of the Baptist was, so to

speak, saturated with Isaiah-language and thoughts, comp. not only Is.

xl. 3, as the burden of his mission, but as to his imagery (after

Keim): Generation of vipers, Is. lix. 5; planting of the Lord, Is. v.

7; trees, vi. 13; x. 15, 18, 33; xl. 24; fire, i. 31; ix. 18; x. 17;

v. 24; xlvii. 14; floor and fan, xxi. 10; xxvii. 27 &c.; xxx. 24; xl.

24; xli. 15 &c.; bread and coat to the poor, lviii. 7; the garner,

xxi. 10. Besides these, the Isaiah reference in his Baptism (Is. lii.

15; i. 16), and that to the Lamb of God - indeed many others of a more

indirect character, will readily occur to the reader. Similarly, when

our Lord would afterwards instruct him in his hour of darkness (St.

Matt. xi. 2), He points for the solution of his doubts to the

well-remembered prophecies of Isaiah (Is. xxxv. 5, 6; lxi. 1; viii.

14, 15).

[8140]1648 Is. ix. 6 &c.; xi.; xlii.; lii. 13 &c. [iii.]; lxi.

[8141]1649 Is. liii.

[8142]1650 Is. xxxiii. 17.

[8143]1651 I cannot agree with Mr. Cheyne (Prophecies of Is. vol. i.

p. 183), that there is no Messianic reference here. It may not be in

the most literal sense 'personally Messianic;' but surely this ideal

presentation of Israel in the perfectness of its kingdom, and the

glory of its happiness, is one of the fullest Messianic picture (comp.

vv. 17 to end).

[8144]1652 This is well pointed out by Keim.

[8145]1653 We have in a previous chapter suggested that the baptism of

Jesus had taken place at Bethabara, that is, the furthest northern

point of his activity, and probably at the close of his baptismal

ministry. It is not possible in this place to detail the reasons for

this view. But the learned reader will find remarks on it in Keim, i.

2, p. 524.

[8146]1654 This, of course, on the supposition that the Baptism of

Jesus took place at Bethabara, and hence that the 'wilderness' into

which He was driven, was close by. It is difficult to see why, on any

other supposition, Jesus returned to Bethabara, since evidently it was

not for the sake of any personal intercourse with John.

[8147]1655 This is most beautifully suggested by Canon Westcott in his

Commentary on the passage.

[8148]1656 'He confessed, and denied not' (St. John i. 20). Canon

Westcott points out, that 'the combination of a positive and negative'

is intended to 'express the fulness of truth,' and that 'the first

term marks the readiness of his testimony, the second its

completeness.'

[8149]1657 See Appendix VIII: 'Rabbinic Traditions about Elijah, the

Forerunner of the Messiah.'

[8150]1658 St. Luke i. 17.

[8151]1659 St. Mark ix. 13; St. Matt. xvii. 12.

[8152]1660 St. Matt. xi. 14.

[8153]1661 Jer. xxxi. 31 &c.

[8154]1662 Can the reference in St. Stephen's speech (Acts vii. 37)

apply to this expected alteration of the Law? At any rate St. Stephen

is on his defence for teaching the abolition by Jesus of the Old

Testament economy. It is remarkable that he does not deny the charge,

and that his contention is, that the Jews wickedly resisted the

authority of Jesus (vv. 51-53).

[8155]1663 Eduy. viii. 7.

[8156]1664 For the Jewish views on the Law in Messianic times, see

Appendix XIV.: 'The Law in Messianic Days.'

[8157]1665 St. John i. 22-28.

[8158]1666 The words within quotations are those of Archdeacon

Watkins, in his Commentary on St. John.

[8159]1667 Is. lii. 13.

[8160]1668 Is. viii. 20.

[8161]1669 Is. lii. 13 - liii.

[8162]1670 Comp. St. Matt. viii. 17; St. Luke xxii. 37; Acts viii. 32;

1 Pet. ii. 22.

[8163]1671 Manifestly, whatever interpretation is made of Is. lii. 13

- liii., it applies to Messianic times, even if the sufferer were, as

the Synagogue now contends, Israel. On the whole subject comp. the

most learned and exhaustive discussions by Dr. Pusey in his

introduction to the catena of Jewish Interpretations of Is. liii.

[8164]1672 To those persons who deny to the people of God under the

Old Testament the designation Church, we commend the use of that term

by St. Stephen in Acts vii. 38.

[8165]1673 Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 61 b; comp. more fully in Yalkut p.

248 d.

[8166]1674 In i. p. 249 a.

[8167]1675 This appears more clearly in the Hebrew, where both words

('lambs' and 'suppressors') are written exactly the same, {hebrew}. In

Hillel's derivation it is identified with the root {hebrew} =

{hebrew}.

[8168]1676 And this with special reference to Is. i. 18.

[8169]1677 This meets the objection of Keim (i. 2, p.552), which

proceeds on the assumption that the words of the Baptist imply that he

knew not merely that, but how, Jesus would take away the sin of the

world. But his words certainly do not oblige us to think, that he had

the Cross in view. But, surely, it is a most strange idea of Godet,

that at His Baptism Jesus, like all others, made confession of sins;

that, as He had none of His own, He set before the Baptist the picture

of the sin of Israel and of the world; and that this had led to the

designation: 'The Lamb of God. Which taketh away the sin of the

world.'

[8170]1678 For the reasons of this, comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social

Life,' p. 151.

[8171]1679 St. John 1. 43.

[8172]1680 This may be regarded as another of the undesigned evidences

of the Hebraic origin of the fourth Gospel. Indeed, it might also be

almost called an evidence of the truth of the whole narrative.

[8173]1681 St. John ii. 1.

[8174]1682 Yet Renan speaks of the first chapters of St. John's Gospel

as scattered notices, without chronological order!

[8175]1683 This reticence seems another undesigned evidence of

Johannine authorship.

[8176]1684 The Greek has it: 'John was standing, and from among his

disciples two.'

[8177]1685 The word implies earnest, penetrating gaze.

[8178]1686 The precise date of the origin of this designation is not

quite clear. We find it in threefold development: Rab, Rabbi, and

Rabban - 'amplitudo,' 'amplitudo mea,' 'amplitudo nostra,' which mark

successive stages. As the last of these titles was borne by the

grandson of Hillel (a.d. 30-50), it is only reasonable to suppose that

the two preceding ones were current a generation and more before that.

Again, we have to distinguish the original and earlier use of the

title when it only applied to teachers, and the later usage when, like

the word 'Doctor,' it was given indiscriminately to men of supposed

learning. When Jesus is so addressed it is in the sense of 'my

Teacher.' Nor can there be any reasonable doubt, that thus it was

generally current in and before the time noted in the Gospels. A still

higher title than any of these three seems to have been Beribbi, or

Berabbi, by which Rabban Gamaliel is designated in Shabb. 115 a. It

literally means 'belonging to the house of a Rabbi' - as we would say,

a Rabbi of Rabbis. On the other hand, the expression 'Come and see' is

among the most common Rabbinic formulas, although generally connected

with the acquisition of special and important information.

[8179]1687 Comp. Canon Westcott's note.

[8180]1688 The common supposition is, that the time must be computed

according to the Jewish method, in which case the tenth hour would

represent 4 p.m. But remembering that the Jewish day ended with

sunset, it could, in that case, have been scarcely marked, that 'they

abode with Him that day.' The correct interpretation would therefore

point in this, as in the other passages of St. John, to the Asiatic

numeration of hours, corresponding to our own. Comp. J. B. McLellan's

New Testament, pp. 740-742.

[8181]1689 v. 41.

[8182]1690 This appears from the word 'first,' used as an adjective

here, v. 41 (although the reading is doubtful), and from the implied

reference to some one else later on.

[8183]1691 On the reading of the Aramaic Meshicha by Messias, see

Delitzsch in the Luther. Zeitschr. for 1876, p. 603 Of course, both

Messias and Christ mean 'the Anointed.'

[8184]1692 The same word as that used in regard to the Baptist looking

upon Jesus.

[8185]1693 So according to the best text, and not Jona.

[8186]1694 'Hereafter thou shalt win the name.' - Westcott.

[8187]1695 So in the Greek, of which the English interpretation is 'a

stone' - Keyph, or Keypha, 'a rock.'

[8188]1696 The evidence for the great historic difference between this

call to personal attachment, and that to the Apostolate, is shown - I

should think beyond the power of cavil - by Godet, and especially by

Canon Westcott. To these and other commentators the reader must be

referred on this and many points, which it would be out of place to

discuss at length in this book.

[8189]1697 v. 47.

[8190]1698 v. 51.

[8191]1699 Tanchuma on the passage, ed. Warsh. p. 38 a, b.

[8192]1700 Corroborative and illustrative passages are here too

numerous, perhaps also not sufficiently important, to be quoted in

detail.

[8193]1701 Ewald imagines that this 'fig-tree' had been in the garden

of Nathanael's house at Cana, and Archdeacon Watkins seems to adopt

this view, but, as it seems to me, without historical ground.

[8194]1702 So in Tanchuma.

[8195]1703 Pesiqta.

[8196]1704 Ps. cxlvi 5; Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 62 a.

[8197]1705 Tanchuma, u. s.

[8198]1706 This, as it would seem, needless addition (if the narrative

were fictitious) is of the highest evidential value. In an Ephesian

Gospel of the end of the second century it would have been well-nigh

impossible.

[8199]1707 v. 50 comp. the words to Peter in St. John xiii. 36-38; and

to the disciples, St. John xvi. 31, 32.

[8200]1708 v. 51.

[8201]1709 So, at least, most probably. Comp. St. John xxi. 2, and the

various commentaries.

[8202]1710 St. John i 51.

[8203]1711 For a full discussion of that most important and

significant appellation 'Son of Man,' comp. Lücke, u. s. pp. 459-466;

Godet (German transl.) pp. 104-108; and especially Westcott, pp.

33-35. The main point is here first to ascertain the Old Testament

import of the title, and then to view it as present to later Jewish

thinking in the Pseudepigraphic writings (Book of Enoch). Finally, its

full realisation must be studied in the Gospel-history.

[8204]1712 Hebr. ii. 10.

[8205]1713 We may, however, here again notice that, if this narrative

had been fictitious, it would seem most clumsily put together. To

introduce the Forerunner with fasting, and as an ascetic, and Him to

Whom he pointed with a marriage-feast, is an incongruity which no

writer of a legend would have perpetrated. But the writer of the

fourth Gospel does not seem conscious of any incongruity, and this

because he has no ideal story nor characters to introduce. In this

sense it may be said, that the introduction of the story of the

marriage-feast of Cana is in itself the best proof of its

truthfulness, and of the miracle which it records.

[8206]1714 Yalkut on 1 Sam. xiii. 1 vol ii. p. 16 d.

[8207]1715 The Biblical proofs adduced for attaching this benefit to a

sage, a bridegroom, and a prince on entering on their new state, are

certainly peculiar. In the case of a bridegroom it is based on the

name of Esau's bride, Machalath (Gen. xxviii. 9), a name which is

derived from the Rabbinic 'Machal,' to forgive. In Jer. Biccur. iii.

p. 65 d, where this is also related, it is pointed out that the

original name of Esau's wife had been Basemath (Gen. xxxvi. 3), the

name Machalath, therefore, having been given when Esau married.

[8208]1716 In Yalcut on Is. lxi. 10 (vol. ii. p. 57 d Israel is said

to have been ten times called in Scripture 'bride' (six times in

Canticles, three times in Isaiah, and once in Jeremiah). Attention is

also called to the 'ten garments' with which successively the Holy One

arrayed Himself; to the symbolic priestly dignity of the bridegroom,

&c.

[8209]1717 Everything, even a funeral, had to give way to a

marriage-procession.

[8210]1718 Ber. R. 8.

[8211]1719 Ab. de R. Nath. iv.

[8212]1720 Sot. 14 a.

[8213]1721 2 Kings. ix. 35.

[8214]1722 Yalkut on 2 Kings ix 35, vol. ii. p. 36 a and b.

[8215]1723 St. Luke vii. 12.

[8216]1724 For details I must refer to the Encyclopædias, to the

article in Cassell's 'Bible Educator,' and to the corresponding

chapters in 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life.'

[8217]1725 Pesiq. R. 15 applies the first clause of Prov. xiii. 12 to

a long engagement, the second to a short one.

[8218]1726 The reader who is curious to see these and other legal

documents in extenso, is referred to Dr. Sammter's ed. of the tractate

Baba Metsia (notes at the end, fol. pp. 144-148).

[8219]1727 Jer. Yeb. Md.

[8220]1728 Some of these joyous demonstrations, such as the wearing of

crowns, and even the bridal music, were for a time prohibited after

the destruction of Jerusalem, in token of national mourning (Sot. ix.

14). On these crowns comp. Wagenseil, Sota, pp. 965-967.

[8221]1729 Comp. Tob. vii. 14.

[8222]1730 I quote the very words of the formula, which, it will be

noticed, closely agree with those in our own Marriage Service.

[8223]1731 If the Zuz be reckoned at 7d., about 5l. 16s. 8d.

[8224]1732 This, of course, represents only the minimum. In the case

of a priest's daughter the ordinary legal minimum was doubled.

[8225]1733 The Talmud (Tos. Kethub.) here puts the not inapt question,

'How if the bridegroom has no goods and chattels?' but ultimately

comforts itself with the thought that every man has some property, if

it were only the six feet of ground in which he is to be buried.

[8226]1734 Not a few such instances of riotous merriment, and even

dubious jokes, on the part of the greatest Rabbis are mentioned, to

check which some were wont to adopt the curious device of breaking

valuable vases, &c.

[8227]1735 Comp. Ber. 6 b.

[8228]1736 Comp. Kethub. 12 a; Jer. Kethub, i. p. 25 a.

[8229]1737 This, and the other great differences in favour of morality

and decency which distinguished the customs of Galilee from those of

the rest of Palestine, are enumerated in Jer. Kethub. i. 1, p. 25 a,

about the middle.

[8230]1738 Comp. St. Matt. ix. 15.

[8231]1739 Two such sites have been proposed, that by Dr. Robinson

being very unlikely to represent the ancient 'Cana of Galilee.'

[8232]1740 Comp. the memoir on the subject by Zeller in the Quarterly

Report of the Palestine Explor. Fund (for 1869, No. iii., and for

April 1878, by Mr. Hepworth Dixon); and Lieut. Conder, Tent-Work in

Palestine, vol. i. pp. 150-155. Zeller makes it five miles from

Nazareth, Conder only three and three-quarters.

[8233]1741 St. John ii. 13-17, and vv. 18-23.

[8234]1742 Comp. St. Mark vii. 1-4.

[8235]1743 The whole Mishnah is divided into six Sedarim (Orders), of

which the last is the Seder Tohoroth, treating of 'purifications.' It

consists of twelve tractates (Massikhtoth), 126 chapters (Peraqim),

and contains no fewer than 1001 separate Mishnayoth (the next largest

Seder - Neziqin - contains 689 Mishnayoth). The first tractate in this

'Order of Purifications' treats of the purification of vessels

(Kelim), and contains no fewer than thirty chapters; 'Yadayim'

('hands') is the eleventh tractate, and contains four chapters.

[8236]1744 Comp. St. Mark vii. 2-5; St. Matt. xxiii. 25, 26; St. Luke

xi. 38, 39.

[8237]1745 Sanh. 17 a.

[8238]1746 These 'stone-vessels' (Keley Abhanim) are often spoken of

(for example, Chel. x. 1). In Yaday. i. 2 they are expressly mentioned

for the purification of the hands.

[8239]1747 Jos. Ant. viii. 2. 9.

[8240]1748 For further details we refer to the excursus on Palestinian

money, weights, and measures, in Herzfeld's Handelsgesch. d. Juden,

pp. 171-185.

[8241]1749 Shabb. 77 b. So Lightfoot in loc.

[8242]1750 The Teraqlin, from which the other side-rooms opened (Jer.

Rosh haSh. 59 b; Yoma 15 b). From Baba B. vi. 4 we learn, that such an

apartment was at least 15 feet square and 15 feet high. Height of

ceiling was characteristic of Palestinian houses. It was always half

the breadth and length put together. Thus, in a small house consisting

of one room: length, 12 feet, breadth, 9 feet, the height would be 10

½ feet. In a large house: length, 15 feet, breadth, 12 feet, the

height would be 13 ½ feet. From Jer. Kethub. p. 28 d we learn, that

the bride was considered as actually married the moment she had

entered the Teraqlin, before she had actually gone to the Chuppah.

[8243]1751 Pas. 18 b.

[8244]1752 Thus it was customary, and deemed meritorious, to sing and

perform a kind of play with myrtle branches (Jer. Peah 15 d); although

one Rabbi was visited with sudden death for excess in this respect.

[8245]1753 St. John ii. 3, A.V.: 'when they wanted wine.'

[8246]1754 Baba B ix.

[8247]1755 This is the view of many commentators, ancient and modern.

[8248]1756 Tholuck and Lücke, however, hold the opposite view.

[8249]1757 Luthardt rightly calls it the commencement of a very

painful education, of which the next stage is marked in St. Luke viii.

19, and the last in St. John xix. 26.

[8250]1758 This meets the objection of Strauss and others, that Mary

could not have expected a miracle. It is scarcely conceivable, how

Calvin could have imagined that Mary had intended Jesus to deliver an

address with the view of turning away thought from the want of wine;

or Bengel, that she intended to give a hint that the company should

break up.

[8251]1759 Godet aptly says. 'His motto henceforth is: My Father and

I.'

[8252]1760 Comp. the passages from the classics quoted by Wetstein in

his Commentary.

[8253]1761 St. John xix. 26.

[8254]1762 St. Matt xii. 46-50.

[8255]1763 Ecclus. xxxii. 1 2.

[8256]1764 On the omission of certain parts of St. John's narrative by

the Synoptists, and vice versâ, and on the supposed differences, I can

do no better than refer the reader to the admirable remarks of Canon

Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, pp. 280 &c.

[8257]1765 According to the best reading, and literally, 'This did -

beginning of signs - Jesus in Cana.' Upon a careful review the

Rabbinic expression Simana (taken from the Greek word here used) would

seem to me more fully to render the idea than the Hebrew Oth. But the

significant use of the word sign should be well marked. See Canon

Westcott on the passage.

[8258]1766 In this, the first of his miracles, it was all the more

necessary that He should manifest his glory.

[8259]1767 Thus Schenkel regards Christ's answer to Mary as a proof

that He was not on good terms with His family; Paulus suggests, that

Jesus had brought the wine, and that it was afterwards mixed with the

water in the stone-vessels; Gfrörer, that Mary had brought it as a

present, and at the feast given Jesus the appropriate hint when to

have it set on. The gloss of Renan seems to me even more untenable and

repulsive.

[8260]1768 Against this view of Strauss, see Lücke, u. s. p. 477.

[8261]1769 So Lange, in his 'Life of Christ,' imagining that converse

with Jesus had put all in that higher ecstasy in which He gave them to

drink from the fulness of Himself. Similar spiritualisation - though

by each in his own manner - has been attempted by Baur, Keim, Ewald,

Hilgenfeld, and others. But it seems more rational, with Schweizer and

Weisse, to deny the historical accuracy of the whole, than to resort

to such expedients.

[8262]1770 Hilgenfeld, however, sees in this miracle an evidence that

the Christ of the fourth Gospel proclaimed another and a higher than

the God of the Old Testament - in short, evidence of the Gnostic taint

of the fourth Gospel.

[8263]1771 Meyer well reminds us that 'physical incomprehensibility is

not identical with absolute impossibility.'

[8264]1772 Godet has scarcely rightly marked the difference.

[8265]1773 If I rightly understand the meaning of Dr. Abbott's remarks

on the miracles in the fourth Gospel (Encycl. Britan. vol. x. p. 825

b), they imply that the change of the water into wine was an

emblematic reference to the Eucharistic wine, this view being

supported by a reference to 1 John v. 8. But could this be considered

sufficient ground for the inference, that no historic reality attaches

to the whole history? In that case it would have to be seriously

maintained, that an Ephesian writer at the end of the second century

had invented the fiction of the miraculous change of water into wine,

for the purpose of certain Eucharistic teaching!

[8266]1774 St. Matt. iv. 13; ix. 1; St. Mark ii. 1.

[8267]1775 St. Mark vi. 3.

[8268]1776 In support of the natural interpretation of these terms

(which I frankly own to be my view) not only St. Matt. i. 25 and St.

Luke ii. 7 may be urged, but these two questions may be put, suggested

by Archdeacon Norris (who himself holds them to have been the children

of Joseph by a former marriage): How could our Lord have been, through

Joseph, the heir of David's throne (according to the genealogies), if

Joseph had elder sons? And again, What became of the six young

motherless children when Joseph and the Virgin went first to

Bethlehem, and then into Egypt, and why are the elder sons not

mentioned on the occasion of the visit to the Temple? (Commentary on

the New Testament, vol. i. p. 117.)

[8269]1777 Robinson, Sepp, and, if I understand him aright, Lieut.

Conder, regard Khan Minyeh (Tent-Work in Palest. vol. ii. pp. 182 &c.)

as the site of Capernaum; but most modern writers are agreed in fixing

it at Tell Hûm.

[8270]1778 Jewish War iii. 10. 8; Life 72.

[8271]1779 The stories are too foolish, and the insinuations too vile,

to be here repeated. The second of the two notices evidently refers to

the first. The 'heretic' Jacob spoken of, is the bete noire of the

Rabbis. The implied charges against the Christians remind one of the

description, Rev. ii. 20-24.

[8272]1780 Midr. on Eccl. i. 8. and vii 26. ed. Warsh. vol. iii. p. 80

a and 97 a.

[8273]1781 St. Matt. viii. 5, &c.

[8274]1782 The comparison is Canon Tristram's (Land of Israel, p.

427.)

[8275]1783 This is another Rabbinic interpretation of the term

Gennesaret.

[8276]1784 St. Mark ii. 15; comp. iii. 20, 31.

[8277]1785 St. Matt. viii. 14.

[8278]1786 St. John vi. 49, 59.

[8279]1787 Comp. especially Warren's Recovery of Jerusalem, pp.

337-351.

[8280]1788 a.d. 27.

[8281]1789 Wieseler and most modern writers place the Baptism of Jesus

in the summer of 27 a.d., and, accordingly, the first Passover in

spring, 28 a.d. But it seems to me highly improbable, that so long an

interval as nine or ten months should have elapsed between John's

first preaching and the Baptism of Jesus. Besides, in that case, how

are we to account for the eight or nine months between the Baptism and

the Passover? So far as I know, the only reason for this strange

hypothesis is St. John ii. 20, which will be explained in its proper

place.

[8282]1790 780 a.u.c. or 27 a.d.

[8283]1791 St. John xi. 55.

[8284]1792 Simon Maccabee had copper money coined; the so-called

copper shekel, a little more than a penny, and also half and quarter

shekels (about a half-penny, and a farthing). His successors coined

even smaller copper money. During the whole period from the death of

Simon to the last Jewish war no Jewish silver coins issued from the

Palestinian mint, but only copper coins. Herzfeld (Handelsgesch. pp.

178, 179) suggests that there was sufficient foreign silver coinage

circulating in the country, while naturally only a very small amount

of foreign copper coin would be brought to Palestine.

[8285]1793 It is extremely difficult to fix the exact equivalent.

Cassel computes it at one-fifth, Herzfeld at one-sixth, Zunz at

one-third, and Winer at one-fourth of a denar.

[8286]1794 Comp. Winer's Real-Wörterb. I have taken a low estimate, so

as to be well within bounds. All the regulations about the Tribute and

Qolbon are enumerated in Sheqal. i. I have not given references for

each of the statements advanced, not because they are not to hand in

regard to almost every detail, but to avoid needless quotations.

[8287]1795 54-53 b.c.

[8288]1796 Comp. 'The Temple and its Services, &c.,' pp. 118, 119.

[8289]1797 Jer. Taan iv. 8.

[8290]1798 M. Derenbourg (Histoire de Palest., p. 467) holds that

these shops were kept by priests, or at any rate that the profits went

to them. But I cannot agree with him that these were the Chanuyoth, or

shops, of the family of Annas, to which the Sanhedrin migrated forty

years before the destruction of Jerusalem. See farther on.

[8291]1799 Sanh. 5 b.

[8292]1800 Bekhor. iv. 5.

[8293]1801 It is certain that this Temple-market could not have been

'on both sides of the Eastern Gate - the gate Shushan - as far as

Solomon's Porch' (Dr. Farrar). If it had been on both sides of this

gate, it must have been in Solomon's Porch. But this supposition is

out of the question. There would have been no room there for a market,

and it formed the principal access into the Sanctuary. The

Temple-market was undoubtedly somewhere in the 'Court of the

Gentiles.'

[8294]1802 Ker. i. 7.

[8295]1803 Jerus. Chag. 78 a.

[8296]1804 It is, however, quite certain that Baba ben Buta had not

'been the first to introduce' (Dr. Farrar) this traffic. A perusal of

Jer. Chag. 78 a shows this sufficiently.

[8297]1805 Jer. Sheq. i. 7, last 4 lines, p. 46 b.

[8298]1806 Rosh haSh. 31 a, b.

[8299]1807 Siphré on Deut. § 105, end. ed. Friedmann, p. 95 b; Jer.

Peah i. 6.

[8300]1808 St. Matt. xxi. 12.

[8301]1809 Ant. xx. 9. 2-4.

[8302]1810 Pes. 57 a.

[8303]1811 Pes. u. s.

[8304]1812 St. Matt. xxi. 12, &c.; St. Mark xi 11, &c.; St. Luke xix.

45 &c.

[8305]1813 It must, however, be admitted, that even Luther had grave

doubts whether the narrative of the Synoptists and that of the fourth

Gospel did not refer to one and the same event. Comp. Meyer, Komment.

(on St. John), p. 142, notes.

[8306]1814 And so He ever does, beginning His Ministry by purifying,

whether as regards the individual or the Church.

[8307]1815 Canon Westcott calls attention to the use of two different

terms for money-changers in vv. 14, 15. In the latter only it is

kollubist_v, of which the Aramaic form is qolbon. It is this

qolbon-taking against which the Hand of Christ is specially directed.

[8308]1816 Yet Renan ventures to characterise this as a sudden,

ill-advised outburst of ill-humour.

[8309]1817 Acts xxi. 31, 32.

[8310]1818 St. Matt. xiii. 11-15; St. Mark iv. 11, 12.

[8311]1819 St. Matt. xii. 38-40.

[8312]1820 I cannot see in the words of Jesus any direct reference to

the abrogation of the material Temple and its services, and the

substitution of the Church for it. Of course, such was the case, and

implied in His Crucifixion and Resurrection, though not alluded to

here.

[8313]1821 From the expression (St. John ii. 20) 'Forty and six years

was this Temple in building,' it has been inferred by most writers

that this Passover was of the year 791 a.u.c., or 28 a.d., and not, as

we have argued, of the year 780 a.u.c., or 27 a.d. But their

calculation rests on an oversight. Admittedly the rebuilding of the

Temple began in the autumn of the eighteenth year of Herod's reign

(Jos. Ant. xv. 11. 1-6). As Herod's reign dates from 717 a.u.c., the

Temple-building must have commenced in the autumn of the year 734-35.

But it has already been explained that, in Jewish reckoning, the

beginning of a new year was reckoned as a year. Thus if, according to

universal opinion (comp. Wieseler, Chronolog. Synopse, pp. 165, 166),

the Temple-building began in Kislev 734, forty-nine years after it

would bring us to the autumn 779, and the Passover of 780, or 27 a.d.,

would be regarded and spoken of as 'forty and six years.' If a Jew had

calculated the time at the Passover 781, he would not have said

'forty-six' but 'forty-seven years' 'was this Temple in building.' The

mistake of writers lies in forgetting that a fresh year had begun

after the autumn - or at any rate at the Passover. It may here be

added, that the Temple was not finally completed till 63 a.d.

[8314]1822 Acts xiii. 41.

[8315]1823 Ps. lxix. 9.

[8316]1824 Although our A.V. translates in ver. 18 'sign' and in ver.

23 'miracles,' the Greek word is the same in both cases, and means a

'sign.'

[8317]1825 We reserve a detailed account of the Paschal celebration

for our account of the last Passover of Jesus.

[8318]1826 St. John ii.

[8319]1827 Sanh. 65 b.

[8320]1828 Baba Mez. 59 b.

[8321]1829 A Nicodemus is spoken of in the Talmud as one of the

richest and most distinguished citisens of Jerusalem (Taan. 20 a:

Kethub. 66 b: Gitt. 56 a; Ab. de R. Nath. 6 comp. Ber. R. 42. Midr. on

Eccles. vii. 12, and on Lament. i. 5). But this name was only given

him on account of a miracle which happened at his request, his real

name being Bunai, the son of Gorion. A Bunai is mentioned in the

Talmud among the disciples of Jesus, and a story is related how his

daughter, after immense wealth, came to most abject poverty. But there

can scarcely be a doubt that this somewhat legendary Naqdimon was not

the Nicodemus of the Gospel.

[8322]1830 'We know that Thou art a Teacher come from God.'

[8323]1831 St. John xix. 39.

[8324]1832 This, of course, is not the view of the Tubingen School,

which regards the whole of this narrative as representing a later

development. Dr. Abbott (Encycl. Brit., Art. 'Gospels,' p. 821)

regards the expression, 'born of water and of the Spirit,' as a

reference to Christian Baptism, and this again as evidence for the

late authorship of the fourth Gospel. His reasoning is, that the

earliest reference to regeneration is contained in St. Matt. xviii. 3.

Then he supposes a reference in Justin's Apologia (i. 61) to be a

further development of this doctrine, and he denies what is generally

regarded as Justin's quotation from St. John iii. 5 to be such,

because it omits the word 'water.' A third stage he supposes to be

implied in 1 Pet. i. 3, 23; with which he connects 1 Pet. iii. 21. The

fourth stage of development he regards as embodied in the words of St.

John iii. 5. All these hypotheses - for they are no more than such -

are built on Justin's omission of the word 'water,' which, as Dr.

Abbott argues, proves that Justin must have been unacquainted with the

fourth Gospel, since otherwise it were impossible that, when expressly

treating of Baptism, he should have omitted it. To us, on the other

hand, the opposite seems the legitimate inference. Treating

confessedly of Baptism, it was only necessary for his argument, which

identified regeneration with Baptism, to introduce the reference to

the Spirit. Otherwise the quotation is so exactly that from the fourth

Gospel, including even the objection of Nicodemus, that it is almost

impossible to imagine that so literal a transcription could have

originated otherwise than from the fourth Gospel itself, and that it

is the result of a supposed series of developments in which Justin

would represent the second, and the fourth Gospel the fourth stage.

But besides, the attentive reader of the chapter in Justin's Apology

cannot fail to remark that Justin represents a later, and not an

earlier, stage than the fourth Gospel. For, with Justin, Baptism and

regeneration are manifestly identified, not with renovation of our

nature, but with the forgiveness of sins.

[8325]1833 For detailed examination and proof I must here refer the

reader to Canon Westcott's Commentary.

[8326]1834 St. John iii. 8.

[8327]1835 I cannot agree with Archdeacon Watkins, who would render

it, 'The Spirit breathes' - an opinion, so far as I know, unsupported,

and which seems to me ill-accordant with the whole context.

[8328]1836 The expression, 'Kingdom of God,' occurs only in iii. 3 and

iii. 5 of the fourth Gospel. Otherwise the expression 'My Kingdom' is

used in xviii. 36. This exceptional use of the Synoptic term, 'Kingdom

of God,' is noteworthy in this connection, and not without its

important bearing on the question of the authorship of the fourth

Gospel.

[8329]1837 Notwithstanding the high authority of Professor Westcott, I

must still hold that this, and now 'anew,' is the right rendering. The

word _nwqen has always the meaning 'above' in the fourth Gospel (ch.

iii. 3, 7, 31; xix. 11, 23); and otherwise also St. John always speaks

of 'a birth' from God (St. John i. 13; 1 John ii. 29; iii. 9; iv. 7;

v. 1, 4, 18).

[8330]1838 This is at least implied by Wünsche, and taken for granted

by others. But ancient Jewish tradition and the Talmud do not speak of

it. Comp. Yebam. 22 a, 62 a; 97 a and b; Bekhor 47 a. Proselytes are

always spoken of as 'new creatures,' Ber. R. 39, ed. Warsh. p. 72 a;

Bemidb. R. 11. In Vayyikra R. 30, Ps. cii. 18, 'the people that shall

be created' is explained: 'For the Holy One, blessed be His Name, will

create them a new creature.' In Yalkut on Judg. vi. 1 (vol. ii. p. 10

c, about the middle) this new creation is connected with the

forgiveness of sins, it being maintained that whoever has a miracle

done, and praises God for it, his sins are forgiven, and he is made a

new creature. This is illustrated by the history of Israel at the Red

Sea, by that of Deborah and Barak, and by that of David. In Shem. R. 3

(ed. Warsh. ii. p. 11 a) the words Ex. iv. 12, 'teach thee what thou

shalt say,' are explained as equivalent to 'I will create thee a new

creation.'

[8331]1839 Yebam. 62 a.

[8332]1840 Yalkut on 1 Sam. xiii.

[8333]1841 As in Yalkut.

[8334]1842 ver. 4.

[8335]1843 The clause 'Who is in heaven' is regarded, on critical

grounds, as a gloss. But, even so, it seems almost a necessary gloss,

in view of the Jewish notions about the ascent of Moses into heaven.

Strange to say, the passage referred to forced Socinus to the curious

dogma that before the commencement of His ministry Jesus had been rapt

in spirit to heaven. (Comp. 'The History and Development of

Socinianism,' in the North. Brit. Rev. May 1859.)

[8336]1844 This in many places. Comp., for ex., Jer. Targ. on Deut.

xxx. 12, and the shocking notice in Bemid. R. 19. Another view,

however, Sukk. 5 a.

[8337]1845 So already in Wisdom of Solomon xvi. 7; still more clearly

in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Numb. xxi. 8, 9: 'He who lifted up

his heart to the name of the Memra of Jehovah, lived;' and in the

Jerusalem Targum on the passage: 'And Moses made a serpent of brass,

and set it on a place aloft [of uplifting] (talé - the same term,

curiously, which is applied by the Jews to Christ as the 'Uplifted' or

'Crucified' One). And it was that every one that was bitten with the

serpent, and lifted his face in prayer (the word implies humbled

prayer) unto His Father Who is in heaven, and looked unto the brazen

serpent, he was healed.' Similarly Rosh haSh iii. 8. Buxtorf's learned

tractate on the Brazen Serpent (Exercitationes, pp. 458-492) adds

little to our knowledge.

[8338]1846 Yalkut, vol. i. p. 240.

[8339]1847 This seems the correct reading. Comp. Canon Westcott's note

on the passage, and in general his most full and thorough criticism of

the various readings in this chapter.

[8340]1848 St. John iii. 16-21.

[8341]1849 ver. 16.

[8342]1850 St. John iii. 22.

[8343]1851 St. John vi. 2.

[8344]1852 The Baptism of preparation for the Kingdom could not have

been administered by Him Who opened the Kingdom of Heaven.

[8345]1853 The Evangelist reports the message which was brought to the

Pharisees in the very words in which it was delivered.

[8346]1854 St. John iv. 1.

[8347]1855 Rom. iv. 3.

[8348]1856 This, and not 'the Jews,' is the better reading.

[8349]1857 St. John iii. 25.

[8350]1858 Probably the discussion originated with John's disciples -

the objector being a Jew or a professing disciple of Christ, who

deprecated their views. In the one case they would in his opinion be

too low; in the other too high. In either case the subject in dispute

would not be baptisms, but the general subject of purifications - a

subject of such wide range in Jewish theology, that one of the six

sections into which the Mishnah or traditional Law is divided, is

specially devoted to it.

[8351]1859 The next event was John's imprisonment by Herod.

[8352]1860 This strange suggestion is made by Godet.

[8353]1861 No fewer than four localities have been identified with

Ænon and Salim. Ewald, Hengstenberg, Wieseler, and Godet, seek it on

the southern border of Judæa (En-rimmon, Neh. xi. 29, comp. Josh. xv.

1, 32). This seems so improbable as scarcely to require discussion.

Dr. Barclay (City of the Great King, pp. 558-571) finds it a few miles

from Jerusalem in the Wady Fâr'ah, but admits (p. 565) that there are

doubts about the Arab pronunciation of this Salim. Lieut. Conder

(Tent-Work in Palest., vol. i. pp. 91-93) finds it in the Wady Fâr'ah,

which leads from Samaria to the Jordan. Here he describes most

pictorially 'the springs' 'in the open valley surrounded by desolate

and shapeless hills,' with the village of Salim three miles south of

the valley, and the village of 'Ainân four miles north of the stream.

Against this there are, however, two objections. First, both Ænon and

Salim would have been in Samaria. Secondly, so far from being close to

each other, Ænon would have been seven miles from Salim.

[8354]1862 St. John iv. 1.

[8355]1863 St. Luke xiii. 31, 32.

[8356]1864 Ant. xviii 5. 2.

[8357]1865 Ant. xviii. 5. 2: 'But to some of the Jews it appeared,

that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and, indeed, as a

righteous punishment on account of what had been done to John, who was

surnamed the Baptist. For Herod ordered him to be killed, a good man,

and who commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to

righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to

come to baptism. For that the baptizing would be acceptable to Him, if

they made use of it, not for the putting away (remission) of some

sins, but for the purification of the body, after that the soul had

been previously cleansed by righteousness. And when others had come in

crowds, for they were exceedingly moved by hearing these words, Herod,

fearing lest such influence of his over the people might lead to some

rebellion, for they seemed ready to do anything by his counsel, deemed

it best, before anything new should happen through him, to put him to

death, rather than that, when a change should arise in affairs, he

might have to repent.', Comp. also Krebs. Observationes in Nov. Test.

e Fl. Jos. pp. 35, 36.

[8358]1866 St. Mark i. 14; St. Mark iv. 12.

[8359]1867 See specially St. Matt. iv. 13 to end.

[8360]1868 I am so strongly impressed with this, that I do not feel

sure about Godet's theory, that the calling of the four Apostles

recorded by the Synoptists (St. Matt. iv. 18-22; St. Mark i. 16-20;

St. Luke v. 1-11), had really taken place during our Lord's first stay

in Capernaum (St. John ii. 12). On the whole, however, the

circumstances recorded by the Synoptists seem to indicate a period in

the Lord's Ministry beyond that early stay in Capernaum.

[8361]1869 St. John xx. 30, 31; xxi. 25.

[8362]1870 Jos. Life, 52.

[8363]1871 Ant. xx. 6. 1.

[8364]1872 St. Matt. x. 5.

[8365]1873 St. John iv. 4.

[8366]1874 I cannot agree with Archdeacon Watkins, that the 'needs go'

was in order 'to teach in Samaria, as in Judæa, the principles of true

religion and worship.'

[8367]1875 So Bengel and Luthardt.

[8368]1876 Much as has been written about Samaria, the subject has not

been quite satisfactorily treated. Some of the passages referred to by

Deutsch (Smith's Dict. of the Bible, vol. iii., Art. Samaritan Pentat.

p. 1118) cannot be verified, probably owing to printer's mistakes.

[8369]1877 Comp. 1 Kings xiii. 32; xvi. 24 &c.; Tiglath-Pileser, 2

Kings xv. 29; Shalmaneser, xvii. 3-5; xviii. 9-11; Sargon. xvii. 6,

&c.

[8370]1878 Comp. Smith's Bible Dict., Art. Sargon; and Schrader,

Keil-Inschr. u. d. Alte Test. p. 158 &c.

[8371]1879 2 Chron. xxx. 1-26; xxxiv. 6.

[8372]1880 2 Kings xvii. 6.

[8373]1881 Of course, not all the ten tribes. Comp. previous remarks

on their migrations.

[8374]1882 2 Kings xvii. 24-26; comp. Ezr. iv. 2, 10.

[8375]1883 St. John viii. 48.

[8376]1884 St. Luke xvii. 16.

[8377]1885 The expression cannot, however, be pressed as implying that

the Samaritans were of entirely Gentile blood.

[8378]1886 Comp. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6, 9 Jer. xii. 5; Amos v. 3.

[8379]1887 Jos. Ant. xi. 8, 2, 6, 7.

[8380]1888 Comp. Herzfeld, Gesch. d. Volkes Isr. ii. p. 120.

[8381]1889 2 Kings xvii. 30, 31.

[8382]1890 vv. 28-41.

[8383]1891 Jost thinks it existed even before the time of Alexander.

Comp. Nutt, Samar. Hist. p. 16, note 2.

[8384]1892 The difficult question, whether this is the Sanballat of

the Book of Nehemiah, is fully discussed by Petermann (Herzog's

Real-Enc. vol. xiii. p. 366).

[8385]1893 For a very full criticism of that Pentateuch, see Mr.

Deutsch's Art. in Smith's Bible-Dict.

[8386]1894 Comp. the sketch of it in Nutt's Samar. Hist., and

Petermann's Art.

[8387]1895 As instances we may mention the names of the Angels and

devils. One of the latter is called Yatsara ({hebrew}), which

Petermann derives from Deut. xxxi. 21, and Nutt from Ex. xxiii. 28. I

have little doubt, it is only a corruption of Yetser haRa. Indeed, the

latter and Satan are expressly identified in Baba B. 16 a. Many of the

Samaritan views seem only corruptions and adaptations of those current

in Palestine, which, indeed, in the circumstances, might have been

expected.

[8388]1896 The Jews termed it {hebrew} (Ber. R. 81). Frankel ridicules

the derivation of Reland (de Monte Garis iii., apud Ugolini, Thes.

vol. vii. pp. 717, 718), who explains the name as peleqo_ na_v,

stercoreum delubrum, corresponding to the Samaritan designation of the

Temple at Jerusalem as {hebrew} oedes stercorea. Frankel himself

(Palast. Ex. p. 248) derives the expression from pl_tanov with

reference to Gen. xxxv. 4. But this seems quite untenable. May not the

term be a compound of {hebrew}, to spit out, and na_v?

[8389]1897 Comp. Herzfeld, u. s. ii. p. 120.

[8390]1898 In 314.

[8391]1899 In 311.

[8392]1900 187-175.

[8393]1901 175-164.

[8394]1902 According to Jos. Ant. xii. 5. 5, _ll_niov; according to 2

Macc. vi. 2, x_niov.

[8395]1903 It is very probable that the date 25 Marcheshvan (Nov.) in

the Megill. Taan. refers to the capture of Samaria. Both the Talmud

(Jer. Sot. ix. 14; Sot. 33 a) and Josephus (Ant. xiii. 10. 7) refers

to a Bath Qol announcing this victory to Hyrcanus while he ministered

in the Sanctuary at Jerusalem.

[8396]1904 Between 113 and 105.

[8397]1905 Not a few of the events of Herod's life were connected with

Samaria. There he married the beautiful and ill-fated Mariamme (Ant.

xiv. 12. 1); and there, thirty years later, her two sons were

strangled by order of the jealous tyrant (Ant. xvi. 11. 2-7).

[8398]1906 Ant xiv. 5. 3.

[8399]1907 Ant. xx. 8. 5; Jewish War i. 21. 2.

[8400]1908 Ant. xviii. 4. 2.

[8401]1909 Comp. Nutt, Samar. Hist. p. 26, note, and the authorities

there quoted.

[8402]1910 See specially War iii. 3. 4, 5.

[8403]1911 For ex. Baba B. iii. 2.

[8404]1912 For ex. Jer. Chag. iii. 4.

[8405]1913 Gitt. vii. 7.

[8406]1914 War iii. 3. 4, 5.

[8407]1915 Ant. xii. 4.1.

[8408]1916 Rosh haSh. ii. 2.

[8409]1917 Ant. xviii. 2. 2.

[8410]1918 Ant. xx. 6. 1.

[8411]1919 The more exact translation would, of course, be Kuthim, but

I have written Cuthim on account of the reference to 2 Kings xxvii.

24. Indeed, for various reasons, it is impossible always to adopt a

uniform or exact system of transliteration.

[8412]1920 Thus in Ber. 57 b Cuthæan is evidently used for 'idolator.'

An instance of the Jewish use of the term Cuthæan for Christian occurs

in Ber. R. 64, where the Imperial permission to rebuild the Temple of

Jerusalem is said to have been frustrated by Cuthæan intrigue, the

text here evidently referring by that expression not to samaritans,

but to Christians, however silly the charge against them. See Joël,

Blicke in d. Relig. Gesch. P. 17. Comp. also Frankel u. s. p. 244;

Jost, Gesch. d. Judenth. i. p. 49, note 2.

[8413]1921 In Sanh. 90 b.

[8414]1922 Frankel quotes as a notable instance of it, Ber. viii. 8,

and refers in proof to the Jerus. Talmud on this Mishnah. But, for

reasons soon to be explained, I am not prepared in this instance to

adopt his view.

[8415]1923 Ecclus. 1. 25, 26.

[8416]1924 Test. Levi. vii.

[8417]1925 Ber. viii. 8.

[8418]1926 Sheq. i. 5.

[8419]1927 As in the case of heathens, neither Temple-tribute, nor any

other than free-will and votive offerings were received from them.

[8420]1928 Jer. Abhod. Z. v. 4, p. 44 d.

[8421]1929 Sanh. 85 b; Chull. 3 b; Kidd, 75 b.

[8422]1930 Jer. Sheq. 46 b.

[8423]1931 Jer. Demai iii. 4.

[8424]1932 Comp. also Jer. Dem. vi. 11; Jer. Ber. vii. 1; and Jer.

Keth. 27 a.

[8425]1933 Ber. 47 b.

[8426]1934 Comp. Chull. 4 a.

[8427]1935 Chull. 6 a.

[8428]1936 Chull. 104 c.

[8429]1937 St. John iv. 9.

[8430]1938 Megill. 2.

[8431]1939 Jer. Abhod. Zar. v. 4.

[8432]1940 Chull. 6 a.

[8433]1941 Shebhyith viii. 10.

[8434]1942 The expression literally applies to idolaters.

[8435]1943 Yalkut ii. p. 36 d.

[8436]1944 In Jer. Kil. ix. 4, 9. 32 c (middle) the question of the

Resurrection is discussed, when it is said that the Samaritan

inhabitants of Palestine, far from enjoying the blessings of that

period, would be made into sections (or, made like cloth [?]), and

then burnt up.

[8437]1945 Massecheth Kuthim, in Kirchheim, Septem Libri parvi

Talmudici, pp. 31-36.

[8438]1946 Chull. 3 b.

[8439]1947 In Jer. Orlah ii. 7 the question is discussed, how long

after the Passover it is not lawful to use bread baked by Samaritans,

showing that ordinarily it was lawful.

[8440]1948 Jer. Abhod. Zar. v. 4.

[8441]1949 The doctrinal views, the festive observances, and the

literature of the Samaritans of a later period, cannot be discussed in

this place. For further information we refer to the following:, The

Articles in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, in Winer's Bibl.

Real-Wörterb., and especially in Herzog's Real-Encykl. (by Petermann);

to Juynboll, Comment. in Hist. Gentis Samarit.; Jost, Gesch. des

Judenth.; Herzfeld, Gesh. des judisch. Volkes, passim; Frankel,

Einfluss der Paläst. Exeg. pp. 237-254; Nutt, Sketch of Samaritan

History, &c.

[8442]1950 Gitt. 10 b; Nidd. 33 b.

[8443]1951 Siphré on Numb. xv. 31; Sanh. 90 b.

[8444]1952 Epiphanius, Hæres. iv., xiv.; Leontius, De Sectis viii.;

Gregory the Great, Moral. i. xv. Grimm (Die Samariter &c., pp. 91

&c.), not only strongly defends the position of the Fathers, but holds

that the Samaritans did not even believe in the immortality of the

soul, and maintained that the world was eternal. The 'Samaritan

Chronicle' dates from the thirteenth century, but Grimm maintains that

it embodies the earlier views of that people (u. s. p. 107).

[8445]1953 This seems inconsistent with their disbelief of the

Resurrection, and also casts doubt on the patristic testimony about

them, since Leontius falsely accuses them of rejecting the doctrine of

Angels. Epiphanius, on the other hand, attributes to them belief in

Angels. Reland maintains, that they regarded the Angels as merely

'powers' - a sort of impersonal abstractions; Grimm thinks there were

two sects of Samaritans - one believing, the other disbelieving, in

Angels.

[8446]1954 For their horrible distortion of later Jewish Biblical

history, see Grimm (u. s.), p. 107.

[8447]1955 Deut. xviii. 15, 18.

[8448]1956 They expected that this Messiah would finally convert all

nations to Samaritanism (Grimm, p. 99). But there is no historic

ground for the view of Mr. Nutt (Sketch of Samar. Hist. pp. 40, 69)

that the idea of a Messiah the Son of Joseph, which holds so large a

place in later Rabbinic theology, was of Samaritan origin.

[8449]1957 The reference here is to Gen. xlviii. 22. Wünsche, indeed,

objects that this application of the passage is inaccurate, and

contrary to universal Rabbinic tradition. But in this, as in other

instances, it is not the Gospel, but rather Dr. Wünsche, who is

inaccurate. If the reader will refer to Geiger's Urschr. p. 80, he

will find proof that the Evangelist's rendering of Gen. xlviii. 22 was

in accordance with ancient Rabbinic tradition, which was only

afterwards altered for anti-Samaritan purposes. On the other hand,

this may be regarded as another undesigned proof of the Johannine

authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

[8450]1958 The present depth of the well is about seventy-five feet.

Most travellers have given more or less pictorial accounts of Jacob's

Well. We refer here especially to Mr. King's Report (Quarterly Stat.

of the Pal. Explor. Fund, Ap. 1879), although it contains the strange

mistake that Jesus had that day come from Jerusalem, and reached

Jacob's Well by midday.

[8451]1959 Gen. xxxiii. 18, 19.

[8452]1960 For 'the location of Sychar,' and the vindication of the

view that the event took place at the beginning of the wheat harvest,

or about the middle of May, see Appendix XV. The question is of

considerable importance.

[8453]1961 From the silence of the Synoptists, and the general

designation of the disciples without naming them, Caspari concludes

that only John, and perhaps Nathanael, but none of the other apostles,

had accompanied Jesus on this journey (Chronol. Geogr. Einl. p. 104).

[8454]1962 Caspari (u. s. p. 103) thinks that John only related that

of which he himself was an eyewitness, except, perhaps, in ch. xviii.

33, &c.

[8455]1963 It is very characteristic when Schenkel, in ignorance of

the fact that Sychar is mentioned by the Rabbis, argues that the use

of the name Sychar for Shechem affords evidence that the Fourth Gospel

is of Gentile-Christian origin.

[8456]1964 See Appendix XV.

[8457]1965 St. John iv. 33.

[8458]1966 ii. 13-iv. 54.

[8459]1967 ii. 13-iv. 54.

[8460]1968 v.-vi. 3.

[8461]1969 We have already expressed our belief, that in the Fourth

Gospel time is reckoned not according to the Jewish mode, but

according to the Roman civil day, from midnight to midnight. For a

full discussion and proof of this, with notice of objections, see

McLellan's New Test. vol. i. pp. 737-743. It must surely be a lapsus

when at p. 288 (note o), the same author seems to assume the contrary.

Meyer objects, that, if it had been 6 p.m., there would not have been

time for the after-events recorded. But they could easily find a place

in the delicious cool of a summer's evening, and both the coming up of

the Samaritans (most unlikely at noon-time), and their invitation to

Jesus 'to tarry' with them (v. 40), are in favour of our view. Indeed,

St. John xix. 14 renders it impossible to adopt the Jewish mode of

reckoning.

[8462]1970 See a previous note on p. 404.

[8463]1971 Godet rightly asks what, in view of this, becomes of the

supposed Docetism which, according to the Tubingen school, is one of

the characteristics of the Fourth Gospel?

[8464]1972 By which we are to understand a woman from the country, not

the town of Samaria, a Samaritaness. The suggestion, that she resorted

to Jacob's Well on account of its sanctity, scarcely requires

refutation.

[8465]1973 ver. 8.

[8466]1974 According to the testimony of travellers the Samaritans,

with the exception of the High-Priestly family, have not the common,

well-known type of Jewish face and feature.

[8467]1975 The 'fringes' on the Tallith of the Samaritans are blue,

while those worn by the Jews, whether on the Arba Kanphoth or the

Tallith, are white. The Samaritans do not seem to have worn

phylacteries (Menach. 42 b). But neither did many of the Jews of old -

nor, I feel persuaded, our Lord (comp. Jost, Gesch. d. Judenth. vol.

i. p. 60).

[8468]1976 There were, undoubtedly, marked differences of

pronunciation between the Jews and the Samaritans. Without entering

into details, it may be said, that they chiefly concern the

vowel-sounds; and among consonants the gutturals (which are generally

not pronounced), the aspirates, and the letter {hebrew} which is not,

as in Hebrew, either {hebrew} (pronounced s), or {hebrew} (pronounced

sh), but is always pronounced as 'sh.' In connection with this we may

notice one of those instances, how a strange mistake comes 'by

tradition' to be commonly received. It has been asserted that, if

Jesus had said to the woman: Teni li lishtoth ('Give me to drink'), a

Samaritan would have pronounced it listoth, since the Samaritans

pronounced the sh as s. But the reverse of this is the fact. The

Samaritans pronounced the s ('sin') as sh ('shin') - and not the sh as

s. The mistake arose from confounding the old Ephraimite (Judg. xii.

5, 6) with the Samaritan mode of pronouncing. The suggestion seems

first to have been made - through very doubtfully - by Stier (Reden

Jesu, iv. p. 134). Stier, however, at least rendered the words of

Jesus: Teni li lishtoth. Godet (ad loc.) accepts Stier's suggestions,

but renders the words: Teni li lishchoth. Later writers have r epeated

this, only altering lishchoth into lishkoth.

[8469]1977 The article is wanting in the original.

[8470]1978 Gen. xxvi. 19; Lev. xiv. 5.

[8471]1979 Jer. ii. 13.

[8472]1980 Those who wish to see the well-worn Rabbinic references

will find them in Lightfoot and Schöttgen ad loc.

[8473]1981 Ab. ii. 9.

[8474]1982 There is much spurious religious sentiment which, in

contravention to our Lord's saving, delights in such expressions as

that of St. Bernard of Clairvaux (followed by so many modern

hymnologists):

'Qui Te gustant esuriunt,

Qui bibunt adhuc sitiunt.'

(Ap. Daniel, Thes. i p. 223.)

The theology of this is not only sickly, but untrue and misleading.

[8475]1983 in Bar. iii. 12.

[8476]1984 See 'The Temple and its Ministry,' pp. 241-243.

[8477]1985 I cannot bring myself to see, as some commentators, any

extraordinary mark of rising reverence in the use by her of the word

'Sir' in vv. 11 and 15. It seems only natural in the circumstances.

[8478]1986 ver. 15.

[8479]1987 ver. 19.

[8480]1988 ver. 29.

[8481]1989 St. John i. 48, 49.

[8482]1990 Comp St. John vi. 6.

[8483]1991 Comp. Lücke, Evang. Joh. vol. i. p. 588.

[8484]1992 2 Kings xvii. 24 &c.

[8485]1993 The references here are to Strauss, vol. i. pp. 510-519,

and to Keim i. 1, p. 116.

[8486]1994 Meyer, Komment. vol. ii. p. 208, rightly remarks on the

theory of Baur, Hilgenfeld, &c. According to them, the whole of this

history is only a type of heathenism as receptive to faith, in

contrast to Nicodemus, the type of Judaism shutting itself up against

faith. But in that case why make the principal person a Samaritan, and

not a heathen, and why attribute to her belief in a Messiah, which was

entirely foreign to heathenism?

[8487]1995 Curiously enough, several instances are related in Rabbinic

writings in which Samaritans enter into dispute with Rabbis who pass

by Mount Gerizim on their way to Jerusalem, to convince them that

Gerizim was the proper place of worship. One instance may here be

mentioned,. when a Samaritan maintained that Gerizim was the mount of

blessing, because it was not covered by the Flood, quoting in proof

Ezek. xxii. 24. The Rabbi replied, that if such had been the case, God

would have told Noah to flee there, instead of making an ark. The

Samaritan retorted, that this was done to try him. The Rabbi was

silenced, but his muleteer appealed to Gen. vii. 19, according to

whcih all the high hills under the heavens were covered, and so

silenced the Samaritan. (Deb. R. 3; comp. Ber. R. 32.) On the other

hand, it ought to be added, that in Ber. R. 33 the Mount of Olives is

said not to have been covered by the Flood, and that Ezek. xxii. 24 is

applied to this.

[8488]1996 He had formerly taught her the 'where,' and now teaches her

the 'what,' of true worship.

[8489]1997 Rom. i. 3.

[8490]1998 Rom. ix. 5.

[8491]1999 It is remarkable, that most of the alterations in the

Samaritan Pentateuch are with the view of removing anthropomorphisms.

[8492]2000 The words 'which is called Christ' should be within

brackets, and are the explanation of the writer.

[8493]2001 In the original, ver. 31 has it: 'Rabbi (not Master), eat.'

Surely such an address to Christ is sufficiently anti-Ephesian.

Readers know how thoroughly opposed to Jewish notions was any needless

converse with a woman (comp. Ab. i. 5; Ber. 43 b; Kidd. 70 a; also

Erub. 53 b). To instruct a woman in the Law was forbidden; comp. the

story in Bemid. R. 9.

[8494]2002 vv. 39, 40.

[8495]2003 ver. 30.

[8496]2004 Following the suggestion of Professor Westcott, I would

thus give the real meaning of the original. It may save needless notes

if I add, that where the rendering differs from the A.V. the change

has been intentional, to bring out the meaning of the Greek; and that

where words in the A.V. are omitted, it is because they are either

spurious, or doubtful.

[8497]2005 St. Matt. xvi. 6, 7.

[8498]2006 This is a Hebraism.

[8499]2007 See them in Appendix XV.

[8500]2008 Comp. Appendix XV.

[8501]2009 We follow Canon Westcott, who, for reasons explained by

him, joins the word 'already' to ver. 36, omitting the particle 'and.'

[8502]2010 It will be noticed that, in ver. 36 _na has been translated

'so that,' the ka_ omitted, and _mo_ rendered 'equally as.'

Linguistically, no apology is required for these renderings. I,

however, hesitate between this and the rendering: 'in order that the

sower may rejoice along with the reaper.' But the translation in the

text seems to agree better with what follows. The whole passage is

perhaps one of the most difficult, from the curtness and rapid

transition of the sentences. The only apology which I can offer for

proposing a new rendering and a new interpretation is, that those with

which I am acquainted have not conveyed any distinct or connected

meaning to my own mind.

[8503]2011 lal_a speech, talking.

[8504]2012 We have omitted the words 'the Christ', in ver. 42, as

apparently spurious. In general, the text has been rendered as

faithfully as possible, so as to bring out the real meaning.

[8505]2013 St. John iv. 45.

[8506]2014 The history of the Baptist's imprisonment will be given in

the sequel.

[8507]2015 St. Matt. iv. 12.

[8508]2016 St. Mark i. 14.

[8509]2017 St. Luke iv. 11.

[8510]2018 St. Matt. iv. 17.

[8511]2019 St. Mark i. 15.

[8512]2020 The origin, authorship, and occasion of the Synoptic

Gospels and of that by St. John, as well as their interrelation, is

discussed in Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 24, the discussion being the

more important that Eusebius throughout appeals for his statements to

'the testimony of the ancients.'

[8513]2021 St. John iv. 43-54.

[8514]2022 St. John iv. 45-54.

[8515]2023 St. Luke iv. 16-30.

[8516]2024 St. Matt. iv. 13-17; St. Mark i. 14, 15; St. Luke iv. 31,

32.

[8517]2025 St. John v. 1.

[8518]2026 St. Matt. iv.18-22 &c.

[8519]2027 St. Luke iv. 16.

[8520]2028 St. Luke iv. 15.

[8521]2029 St. Luke iv. 31; comp. St. Matt. iv. 13-16.

[8522]2030 St. John iv. 44.

[8523]2031 I cannot believe that the expression 'His own country,'

refers to Judæa. Such an explanation is not only unnatural, but

contrary to the usage of the expression _diov ('his own'). Comp. St.

Matt. ix. 1; also St. John vii. 40-42. Strauss's arguments (Leben

Jesu, i. p. 659) seem here conclusive.

[8524]2032 St. John ii. 1-11.

[8525]2033 St. Luke iv. 23.

[8526]2034 basilik_v, used by Josephus in the general sense of

officers in the service of Herod Antipas. Comp. Krebs, Obs. in N.

Test. e Fl. Josepho, pp. 144, 145, who notes that the expression

occurs 600 times in the writings of Josephus.

[8527]2035 Ber. 34 b; Jer. Ber. 9 d.

[8528]2036 The emphasis must lie on the word 'see,' yet not

exclusively. Lücke's objections to this (Ev. Joh. i. p. 622) are not

well founded.

[8529]2037 ver. 49.

[8530]2038 ver. 50.

[8531]2039 ver. 53.

[8532]2040 St. John i. vi. 50, 51.

[8533]2041 St. Matt. viii. 5 &c.; St. Luke vii. 1 &c.

[8534]2042 These will readily occur on comparison of the two

narratives. Archdeacon Watkins (ad loc.) has grouped these under eight

distinct particulars. Comp. Lücke (Ev. Joh.) i. p. 626.

[8535]2043 So partially and hesitatingly Origen, Chrysostom, and more

decidedly Theophilus, Euthymius, Irenoeus, and Eusebius. All modern

negative critics hold this view; but Gfrörer regards the narrative of

St. John, Strauss and Weiss that of St. Matthew, as the original

account. And yet Keim ventures to assert: 'Ohne allen Zweifel (!) ist

das die selbe Geschichte.'

[8536]2044 Alike Strauss and Keim discuss this at some length from the

point of view of seeming contradiction between the reception of the

heathen Centurion and the first refusal of the Syro-Phoenician woman.

Keim's treatment of the whole subject seems to me inconsistent with

itself.

[8537]2045 Keim, Jesu v. Nazara, II. i. pp. 179-185. I regret to say,

that the language of Keim at p. 181 is among the most painful in his

book.

[8538]2046 So Strauss, Leben Jesu, vol. ii. pp. 121, 122 (1st ed.).

[8539]2047 At least I so understand Keim, unless he means that the

faith of the child alone brought about the cure, in which case there

was no need for the father's journey. Keim naively asks, what

objections there can be to this view, unless for the 'wording of St.

John'? But the whole narrative is derived from that 'wording.'

[8540]2048 ver. 52.

[8541]2049 So literally; the A.V. has: 'began to amend.'

[8542]2050 ver. 53.

[8543]2051 The Jewish servants may have expressed the time according

to Jewish notation, though in such a house in Galilee such might not

have been the usual practice. However this be, we contend that St.

John's notation of time was according to the Roman civil day, or

rather according to that of Asia Minor.

[8544]2052 ver. 52.

[8545]2053 St. Luke viii. 3.

[8546]2054 ver. 50.

[8547]2055 ver. 53.

[8548]2056 Shabb. 35 b.

[8549]2057 Jer. Shabb. xvii. p. 16 a.

[8550]2058 The remark in the 'Speaker's Commentary' (St. Luke iv. 16),

that Jesus had been in the habit of expounding the Scriptures in

Nazareth, is not only groundless, but inconsistent with the narrative.

See ver. 22. Still more strange is the supposition, that 'Jesus

offered to read and to expound, and signified this intention by

standing up. This might be done by any member of the congregation.'

Most assuredly such would not be the case.

[8551]2059 This seems at first sight inconsistent with Ps. lxxiv.8.

But the term rendered 'Synagogues' in the A. V. has never been used in

that sense. The solution of the difficulty here comes to us through

the LXX. Their rendering, katapa_swmen (let us make to cease), shows

that in their Hebrew MSS. they read {hebrew}. If so, then the {hebrew}

probably belonged to the next word, and the text would read: {hebrew}.

'Let us suppress altogether - the Sabbath and all the festive seasons

in the land.' Comp. Ehrt, Abfass. Zeit. u. Abschl. d. Psalt. pp.

17-19.

[8552]2060 The introduction of morning, midday, and afternoon prayers

is respectively ascribed to Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. The Targum of

Onkelos and the Targum Ps., Jon. on Gen. xxv. 27 imply their existence

in the time of Jacob. In B. Kama 82 a, and Jer. Megill. 75 a, its

services are traced to the time of Moses. According to Sanh. 94 b,

Synagogues existed in the time of Hezekiah. It is needless to follow

the subject further. We take the present opportunity of adding, that,

as the Rabbinic quotations in this chapter would be so numerous, only

those will be given which refer to points hitherto unnoticed, or of

special importance.

[8553]2061 The expressions 'Targum' and 'targuming' have been

previously explained. The first indication of such paraphrasing in the

vernacular is found in Neh. viii. 7, 8.

[8554]2062 Baba K. 82 a.

[8555]2063 See Book I. pp. 19, 77.

[8556]2064 These numbers, however, seem to have been symbolical. The

number 480 is, by Gimatreya, deduced from the word 'She that was full

of' (meleathi) in Is. i. 21. Comp. Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 40 d, towards

the end, or else 480 = 4 x 10 x 12.

[8557]2065 Comp. Megill. 26.

[8558]2066 St. Luke vii. 5.

[8559]2067 Maimonides, Hilc. Tephill, xi 1.

[8560]2068 Comp. Philem. 2.

[8561]2069 See the notes in Maimonides, Hilc. Tephill. xi. 2; p. 75 b.

[8562]2070 Shabb. 11 a.

[8563]2071 Tos. Meg. ed. Z iv. 23.

[8564]2072 Maimonides, Hilc. Tephill. xi. 2.

[8565]2073 Comp. Lieut. Kitchener's article on the Synagogues of

Galilee (P.E.F. Report, July 1878, pp. 126 &c.). The inference, that

they date from the beginning of the third century, when the Jews were

in high favour with the Emperor Alexander Severus, is all the more

ungrounded, that at that time, if ever, the Jewish authorities would

strictly adhere to Talmudic directions as to the structure of

Synagogues.

[8566]2074 From 'battel,' which here seems to have the same meaning as

the Latin vacare rei, to have leisure for a thing.

[8567]2075 This is expressly stated in Jer. Megill. i. 6, p. 70 b,

towards the end.

[8568]2076 Comp. Megill. iv. 3; Sanh. i. 6. That ten constituted a

congregation was derived from Numb. xiv. 27. Similarly, it was thought

to be implied in the fact, that if ten righteous men had been in

Sodom, the city would not have been destroyed. But in case of

necessity the number ten might be made up by a male child under age

(Ber. R. 91, pp. 160 a and b).

[8569]2077 Comp. Jer. Ber. iv. 5; Baba B. 25 a.

[8570]2078 Tos. Megill. iii. 3.

[8571]2079 Baba B. 25 a and b; Jer. Ber. iv. 5.

[8572]2080 On the next page we give a plan of the Synagogue excavated

at Tell Hum (Capernaum). It is adapted from Capt. Wilson's plan in the

P. E. F. Quarterly Statement, No. 2.

[8573]2081 Tos. Meg. iii. 3.

[8574]2082 De Vit. Contempl. 3 and 9, ed. Mang. ii. pp. 476, 482.

[8575]2083 Comp. Palestine Exploration Fund Report, Quarterly

Statement, ii. p. 42 &c.

[8576]2084 Comp. Warren's 'Recovery of Jerusalem,' p. 343 &c.

[8577]2085 There is a curious passage in Ber. 8 a, which states that

although there were thirteen Synagogues in Tiberias, it was the

practice of the Rabbis only to pray 'between the columns where they

studied.' This seems to imply that the Academy consisted also of

colonnades. For it would be difficult to believe that all the supposed

Synagogues excavated in Galilee were Academies.

[8578]2086 Shabb. 32 a.

[8579]2087 It was also called Argas and Qomtar (Megill. 26 b), but

more generally Chest.

[8580]2088 Megill. 26 b; Taan. 15 a.

[8581]2089 Exod. xxvii. 20.

[8582]2090 St. Matt. xxiii. 6; Tos. Megill. ed. Z. iv. 21.

[8583]2091 Hence the expression 'yored liphney hattebhah,' and 'obhed

liphney hattebhah.

[8584]2092 Seems also to have been called 'Kathedrah,' just as by our

Lord (St. Matt. xxiii. 2). Comp. Buxtorf's Lexicon, p. 2164.

[8585]2093 Megill. 32 a.

[8586]2094 Megill. 26 b.

[8587]2095 Comp. Ber. 6 a and b; 8 a.

[8588]2096 Ber. 63 a.

[8589]2097 Tos. Megill. ed. Z. iii. 7.

[8590]2098 Pes. 101 a.

[8591]2099 Megill. 26 a.

[8592]2100 This, not for symbolical reasons, but probably on account

of the strength of the wine. It is needless here to give the rules how

the cup is to be held, or even the liturgical formula of the Qiddush.

Comp. Jer. Ber. p. 3 c, d; vii. 6, p. 11 c, d.

[8593]2101 As to all this, and the great liberty in prayer, comp.

Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. d. Jud. pp. 368, 369, and notes a, b, and d; and

Ritus des Synag. Gottesd. pp. 2 and 3.

[8594]2102 St. Luke iv. 20.

[8595]2103 Comp. Schürer, Gemeind. Verfass. in Rom, pp. 27 &c.

[8596]2104 In St. Mark v. 22, several Archisynagogoi seem to be spoken

of. But the expression may only mean, as Weiss suggests, one of the

order of the Archisynagogoi. The passage in Acts xiii. 15 is more

difficult. Possibly it may depend upon local circumstances - the term

Archisynagogoi including others beside the Archisynagogoi in the

strictest sense, such as the Gerousiarchs of the Roman inscriptions.

[8597]2105 Schürer, u.s., pp. 18-20.

[8598]2106 Sanh. 92 a; Cag. 5 b.

[8599]2107 Gitt. 60 a.

[8600]2108 St. Luke xiii. 14.

[8601]2109 Megill. v. 5.

[8602]2110 Part of the Shema, and the whole of the Eulogies.

[8603]2111 Deut. vi. 4-9; xi. 13-21; Numb. xv. 37-41.

[8604]2112 Ber. ii. 2.

[8605]2113 According to Ber. 34 a.

[8606]2114 Ber. 33 a.

[8607]2115 There is even doubt, whether the exact words of at least

some of the Benedictions were fixed at an early period. See Zunz, u.

[8608]2116 Originally the eulogies were eighteen in number. The

addition of that against the heretics would have made them nineteen.

Accordingly, Eulogy xv., which prayed for the coming of the Branch of

David, was joined to the previous one in order to preserve the number

eighteen. Comp. Jer. Ber. iv. 3. It is sadly characteristic that,

together with a curse upon Christian converts, the Messianic hope of

Israel should thus have been pushed into the background.

[8609]2117 Jer. Ber. iv. 3 to end.

[8610]2118 Ber. 33 a &c.

[8611]2119 For the sake of brevity, I can only here refer the reader

to the passages.

[8612]2120 Sot. vii. 6.

[8613]2121 Comp. 1 Tim. ii. 8.

[8614]2122 Sot. 37 b 38 a.

[8615]2123 Siphré on Numb. par. 39, p. 12 a.

[8616]2124 Minor differences need not here be detailed, especially as

they are by no means certain.

[8617]2125 Numb. vi. 23-26.

[8618]2126 Chag. 16 a.

[8619]2127 It seems also to have been the rule, that they must wash

their hands before pronouncing the benediction (Sot. 39 a).

[8620]2128 Megill. 24.

[8621]2129 Jer. Gitt. v. 9. p 47 b; comp Duschak. Jüd. Kultus, p. 270.

[8622]2130 The question is discussed: first, who blessed the priests?

and, secondly, what part God had in that benediction? The answer will

readily be guessed (Chull. 49 a). In Siphré on Numbers, par. 43, the

words are quoted (Numb. vi. 27) to show that the blessing came from

God, and not from, although, through, the priests. In Bemidb. R. 11

ed. Warsh. iv. p. 40 a there is a beautiful prayer, in which Israel

declares that it only needs the blessing of God, according to Deut.

xxvi. 15, on which the answer comes, that although the priests bring

the benediction, it is God Who stands and blesses His people.

Accordingly, the benediction of the priests is only the symbol of

God's blessing.

[8623]2131 For these different numbers very curious symbolical reasons

are assigned (Megill. 23 a.)

[8624]2132 This division seems to have originated in Babylon. Comp.

Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. pp. 3, 4.

[8625]2133 Meg. 29 b.

[8626]2134 Jer. Shabb. xvi. 1; Sopher. xvi. 10.

[8627]2135 Comp. Megill. 31 b.

[8628]2136 Comp. Duschak, Gesch. des jüd. Cultus, pp. 251-258.

[8629]2137 Gitt. 59 b.

[8630]2138 Some of the leading Rabbis resisted this practice, and

declared that a Rabbi who yielded to it deserved death (Megill. 28 a;

comp. Megill. 22 a. See generally Duschak, u. s. p. 255.).

[8631]2139 Every descendant of Aaron in the Synagogue is bound to join

in the act of benediction, on pain of forfeiture of the blessing on

himself, according to Gen. xii. 3. Otherwise he transgresses three

commands, contained in Numb. vi. 27 (Sot. 38 b). The present mode of

dividing the fingers when pronouncing the blessing is justified by an

appeal to Cant. ii. 9 (Bemidb. R. 11), although no doubt the origin of

the practice is mystical.

[8632]2140 The reasons commonly assigned for it are unhistorical.

Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Life,' p. 278. The term Haphtarah, or rather

Aphtarah and Aphtarta is derived from patar, to dismiss - either, like

the Latin Missa, because it ended the general service, or else because

the valedictory discourse, called Aphtarah, was connected with it.

[8633]2141 In a few places in Babylon (Shabb. 116 b), lessons from the

Hagiographa were read at afternoon services. Besides, on Purim the

whole Book of Esther was read.

[8634]2142 Megill iv. 4.

[8635]2143 Comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 27, 28.

[8636]2144 Megill. 24 a.

[8637]2145 At a later period, however, ordination seems to have been

required for preaching. By a curious Rabbinic exegesis, the first

clause of Prov. vii. 26 was applied to those who preached without

ordination, and the second clause to those who were ordained and did

not preach (Sot. 22 a).

[8638]2146 Thus, we have a saying of the first century 'You preach

beautifully, but you do not practice beautifully' (Chag. 14 b; Yebam.

63 b.)

[8639]2147 Moed K 21 a.

[8640]2148 Eccl. ix. 15.

[8641]2149 Ab. de R. Nath. 4.

[8642]2150 Meg. 4 a.

[8643]2151 Targum on Judg. v. 2, 9.

[8644]2152 Darshanin, Pes. 70 b.

[8645]2153 Ag. Ap. ii. 18.

[8646]2154 In Flacc., ed. Frcf., p. 972; de Vita Mos. p. 688; Leg. ad

Caj. pp. 1014, 1035.

[8647]2155 For ex. Pes. 53 b.

[8648]2156 In Sot. 40 a we have an account of how a popular preacher

comforted his deserted brother theologian by the following parable:

'Two men met in a city, the one to sell jewels and precious things,

the other toys, tinsel, and trifles. Then all the people ran to the

latter shop, because they did not understand the wares of the former.'

A curious instance of popular wit is the following: It was expected

that a person lately ordained should deliver a discourse before the

people. The time came, but the Methurgeman in vain bent his ear closer

and closer. It was evident that the new preacher had nothing to say.

On which the Methurgeman quoted Habak. ii. 19: 'Woe unto him that

saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach !'

(Sanh. 7 b). It was probably on account of such scenes, that the Nasi

was not allowed afterwards to ordain without the consent of the

Sanhedrin.

[8649]2157 Succ. 51 b.

[8650]2158 Ber. 6 b.

[8651]2159 Ber. 6 b.

[8652]2160 Kidd. 81 a.

[8653]2161 Taan. 16 a. See Duschak, u. s. p. 285.

[8654]2162 Yalkut ii. p. 43 a, beginning.

[8655]2163 In connection with this the proverb quoted in the New

Testament is thus used by Rabbi Tarphon: 'I wonder whether anyone at

present would accept reproof. If you said, Remove the mote from thine

eye, he would immediately reply, First remove the beam out of thine

own eye' (Arach. 16 b). May this not indicate how very widely the

sayings of Christ had spread among the people?

[8656]2164 Even the celebrated R. Eliezer had the misfortune that, at

a festival, his hearers one by one stole out during the sermon (Bez.

15 b). On the other hand, it is said of R. Akiba, although his success

as a preacher was very varied, that his application to Israel of the

sufferings of Job and of his final deliverance moved his hearers to

tears (Ber. R. 33).

[8657]2165 Comp. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. pp. 101-106, 351.

[8658]2166 See Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. p. 352, Note b.

[8659]2167 As in Ber. R. 14.

[8660]2168 Shem. R. 15.

[8661]2169 Thus, in Tanch. on Ex. xxii. 24 (ed. Warsh. p. 105 a and b,

sect. 15, towards the end), the expression in Deut. xv. 7,

'Meachikha,' from thy brother, is rendered 'm_ achikha,' not thy

brother. Similarly, in the Pesiqta, the statement in Gen. xxii. 7, 8,

'God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt-offering,' is

paraphrased. 'And if not a Seh (lamb) for a burnt-offering, my son, se

(thee) for a burnt offering.' It is added, 'se leolah is Greek,

meaning, thou art the burnt-offering.' But the Greek in the former

passage is also explained by rendering the 'achikha' as an Aramaic

form of _oika, in which case it would targumically mean 'Withhold not

thy hand from the poor, who is like to thee.' Comp. the interesting

tractate of Brüll (Fremdspr. Redens. p. 21). A play upon Greek words

is also supposed to occur in the Midrash on Cant. ii. 9, where the

word 'dodi,' by omitting the second d, and transposing the yod and the

vav, is made into the Greek diov, divine. But I confess I do not feel

quite sure about this, although it has the countenance of Levy. In the

Midrash on Cant. ii. 15, a whole Greek sentence is inserted, only

Aramaically written. See also Sachs, Beitr. pp. 19 &c.

[8662]2170 Thus, when on one occasion the hearers of Akiba were going

to sleep during his sermon, he called out: 'Why was Esther Queen in

Persia over 127 provinces? Answer: She was a descendant of Sarah, who

lived 127 years' (Ber. R. 58). On a similar occasion R. Jehudah

startled the sleepers by the question: 'One woman in Egypt bore

600,000 men in one birth.' One of his hearers immediately replied to

the question, who she was: 'It was Jochebed, who bore Moses, who is

reckoned equal to all the 600,000 of Israel' (Midr. Shir haSh. R., ed.

Warsh., p. 11 b, towards the end, on Cant. i. 15).

[8663]2171 Midr. on Eccl. vii. 5; ix. 17 b.

[8664]2172 In both these passages 'the fools' are explained to refer

to the Methurgeman.

[8665]2173 Chag. 14 a.

[8666]2174 St. Matt. xxvi. 60, 61.

[8667]2175 St. Matt. xxvi. 40-42.

[8668]2176 And yet most commentators - following, I suppose, the lead

of Meyer - hold that Christ had 'stood up' in the sense of offering or

claiming to read.

[8669]2177 Although we cannot feel quite sure of this.

[8670]2178 Is. lxi. 1, 2.

[8671]2179 St. Luke iv. 18, 19.

[8672]2180 Baba B. 13 b.

[8673]2181 I infer this from the fact, that the Book of the Prophet

Isaiah was given to Him by the Minister of the Synagogue. Since the

time of Bengel it has been a kind of traditional idea that, if this

was the Haphtarah for the day, the sermon of Christ in Nazareth must

have taken place on the Day of Atonement, for which in the modern

Jewish lectionary Is. lviii. 6 forms part of the Haphtarah. There are,

however, two objections to this view: 1. Our modern lectionary of

Haphtarahs is certainly not the same as that in the time of Christ. 2.

Even in our modern lectionary, Is. lxi. 1, 2 forms no part of the

Haphtarah, either for the Day of Atonement, nor for any other Sabbath

or festive day. In the modern lectionary Is. lvii. 14 to Is. lviii. 14

is the Haphtarah for the Day of Atonement.

[8674]2182 Massech. Soph. xii. 7.

[8675]2183 This symbolically: 7 x 3, since each of the seven readers

in the Law had to read at least three verses.

[8676]2184 'To set at liberty those that are bruised.' The words are

taken, with but a slight necessary alteration in the verb, from the

LXX. rendering of Is. lviii. 6. The clause from Is. lxi. 2 is: 'To

preach the acceptable year of the Lord.'

[8677]2185 Preaching instead of proclaiming, in Is. lxi. 2, and in the

form of the verb in the clause from Is. lviii. 6. Besides, the

insertion of the clause: 'to heal the broken-hearted,' is spurious.

[8678]2186 All the best MSS. omit the words, 'To heal the

broken-hearted.'

[8679]2187 See above, Note 2.

[8680]2188 See the remarks on this point in the previous chapter. If I

rightly understand the somewhat obscure language of Surenhusius

(Biblos Katallages, pp. 339-345), such is also the view of that

learned writer. This peculiarly Jewish method of Scriptural quotation

by 'stringing together' is employed by St. Paul in Rom. iii. 10-18.

[8681]2189 The other two being Is. xxxii. 14, 15, and Lament. iii. 50.

[8682]2190 See the Appendix on the Messianic passages.

[8683]2191 See the previous chapter. It was the universal rule to

listen to the sermon in perfect silence (Pes. 110 a; Moed K. a). The

questions and objections commenced afterwards.

[8684]2192 The proverb really is: 'Physician, heal thine own lameness'

(Ber. R. 23, ed. Warsh. p. 45 b).

[8685]2193 St. John iv. 44.

[8686]2194 The statement that the famine in the time of Elijah lasted

three and a half years is in accordance with universal Jewish

tradition. Comp. Yalkut on 1 Kings xvi., vol. ii. p. 32 b.

[8687]2195 See Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 363. But surely it

could not have been the south-western corner (Conder, Tent-Work, i. p.

140, and all later writers).

[8688]2196 The provision, which awarded instant death without formal

trial in case of open blasphemy or profanation (Sanh. 81 b), would not

apply in this instance. Probably the purpose was, that the crowd

around should, as it were accidentally, push Him over the cliff.

[8689]2197 The spot is just above the Maronite Church.

[8690]2198 See the plan of Nazareth in Bädeker's (Socin's) Palæstina,

p. 255. The road to the left goes westward, that through the northern

part of the town, towards Capernaum. Our localisation gains in

probability, if the ancient Synagogue stood where tradition places it.

At present it is in the hands of the Maronites.

[8691]2199 The circumstance that the Nazarenes did not avow the

purpose of casting Him over the cliff, but intended accidentally to

crowd Him over, explains how, when He turned sharply round to the

right, and passed through the crowd, they did not follow Him.

[8692]2200 Many, even orthodox commentators, hold that this history is

the same as that related in St. Matt. xiii. 54-58, and St. Mark vi.

1-6. But, for the reasons about to be stated, I have come, although

somewhat hesitatingly, to the conclusion, that the narrative of St.

Luke and those of St. Matthew and St. Mark refer to different events.

1. The narrative in St. Luke (which we shall call A) refers to the

commencement of Christ's Ministry, while those of St. Matthew and St.

Mark (which we shall call B) are placed at a later period. Nor does it

seem likely, that our Lord would have entirely abandoned Nazareth

after one rejection. 2. In narrative A, Christ is without disciples;

in narrative B He is accompanied by them. 3. In narrative A no

miracles are recorded - in fact, His words about Elijah and Elisha

preclude any idea of them; while in narrative B there are a few,

though not many. 4. In narrative A He is thrust out of the city

immediately after His sermon, while narrative B implies, that He

continued for some time in Nazareth, only wondering at their unbelief.

If it be objected, that Jesus could scarcely have returned to Nazareth

after the attempt on His life, we must bear in mind that this purpose

had not been avowed, and that His growing frame during the intervening

period may have rendered such a return not only possible, but even

advisable.

The coincidences as regards our Lord's statement about the Prophet,

and their objection as to His being the carpenter's son, are only

natural in the circumstances.

[8693]2201 Probably resting in the immediate neighbourhood of

Nazareth, and pursuing His journey next day, when the Sabbath was

past.

[8694]2202 St. Matt. ix. 1.

[8695]2203 St. Luke vii. 5.

[8696]2204 St. Mark v. 22.

[8697]2205 St. Matt. iv. 18, 22, and parallels.

[8698]2206 St. Matt. iv. 13-17.

[8699]2207 Is. ix. 2.

[8700]2208 Tanch. on Gen. vi. 9; ed. Warsh. p. 11 b.

[8701]2209 See Mikraoth Gedoloth on the passage.

[8702]2210 The words, 'That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by

Esaias,' do not bear the meaning, that this was their primary and

literal purpose. They represent a frequent mode of citation among

Jewish writers, indicating a real fulfillment of the spirit, though

not always of the letter, of a prophecy. On this subject see also

Surenhusius, u. s., p. 218, and his admirable exposition of the Jewish

formula {hebrew} ('that it might be fulfilled which was spoken'), u.

s., pp. 2-4.

[8703]2211 St. Matt. ix. 16.

[8704]2212 Both Godet and Prof. Westcott (the latter more fully) have

pointed out the distinction between met_ ta_ta (literally: 'after

those things - as in St. John v. 1'), and met_ to_to. The former does

not indicate immediate succession of time.

[8705]2213 For a full discussion of the question see vol. ii. App. XV.

pp. 765, 766; for the 'Feast of Wood-offering,' 'The Temple and its

Services, & c.,' pp.295, 296.

[8706]2214 Wetstein.

[8707]2215 The reader will have no difficulty in finding not a few

points in St. John v. utterly irreconcilable with the theory of a

second century Ephesian Gospel. It would take too much space to

particularise them.

[8708]2216 So Gess, Godet, and others.

[8709]2217 Even Strauss admits, that the discourse contains nothing

which might not have been spoken by Christ. His objection to its

authenticity, on the ground of the analogies to it in certain portions

of the Fourth Gospel and of the Epistles of St. John, is a curious

instance of critical argumentation (Leben Jesu, i. p. 646).

[8710]2218 Neh. iii. 1, 32; xii. 39.

[8711]2219 Comp. specially Riehm's Handwörterb. ad voc.

[8712]2220 Said when people sneezed, like 'Prosit!'

[8713]2221 Indeed, belief in 'holy wells' seems to have been very

common in ancient times. From the cuneiform inscriptions it appears to

have been even entertained by the ancient Babylonians.

[8714]2222 St. John v. 7.

[8715]2223 I must here refer to the critical discussion in Canon

Westcott's Commentary on St. John. I only wish I could without

unfairness transport to these pages the results of his masterly

criticism of this chapter.

[8716]2224 See the Appendix on 'Angels.'

[8717]2225 Another term for 'sick' in the N. T. is ___wstov (St. Matt.

xiv. 14; St. Mark vi. 5, 13; xvi. 18; (comp. Ecclus. vii. 35). This

corresponds to the Hebrew {hebrew}, Mal. i. 8. In 1 Cor. xi. 30 the

two words are used together, ___wstov and _sqen_v.

[8718]2226 St. John v. 17-47.

[8719]2227 Such a logical inversion seems necessary in passing from

the objective to the subjective.

[8720]2228 ver. 44.

[8721]2229 vv. 45-47.

[8722]2230 ver. 39.

[8723]2231 vv. 40-43.

[8724]2232 ver. 37.

[8725]2233 vv. 30-38.

[8726]2234 vv. 19-32.

[8727]2235 St. John xx. 30.

[8728]2236 St. John xx. 31.

[8729]2237 ver. 7.

[8730]2238 ver. 14.

[8731]2239 Comp. St. John ix. 3.

[8732]2240 This characteristic is specially marked by Canon Westcott.

[8733]2241 ver. 13.

[8734]2242 The meaning of the expression is 'retired' or 'withdrawn'

Himself.

[8735]2243 In connection with this see ver. 24, where the expression

is 'believeth Him,' not 'on Him' as in the A.V., which occasionally

obliterates the difference between the two, which is so important, the

one implying credit, the other its outcoming trust (comp. St. John vi.

29, 30; viii. 30, 31; 1 John v. 10).

[8736]2244 The whole subject of the Sabbath-Law will be specially

discussed in a later chapter. See also Appendix XVII. on 'The Law of

the Sabbath' according to the Mishnah and Talmud.

[8737]2245 See Westcott ad loc.

[8738]2246 ver. 17.

[8739]2247 The accounts in the three Synoptic Gospels must be

carefully pieced together. It will be seen that only thus can they be

understood. The narratives of St. Matthew and St. Mark are almost

literally the same, only adding in St. Mark i. 20 a notice about 'the

hired servants,' which is evidential of the Petrine origin of the

information. St. Luke seems to have made special inquiry, and, while

adopting the narrative of the others, supplements it with what without

them would be almost unintelligible.

[8740]2248 St. Luke v. 5.

[8741]2249 St. Matt. iv. 18 &c.; St. Mark i. 16 &c. as compared with

St. Luke v. 2.

[8742]2250 In order not to impede navigation, it was forbidden to fix

nets. For these two ordinances, see Baba K. 80 b, last line &c. The

reference to the fishing in the lake is in 81 b. But see Tos. Baba K.

viii. 17, 18.

[8743]2251 St. Matt. vii. 10; xiii. 47; xv. 36.

[8744]2252 Ab. Z. 39 a.

[8745]2253 Bab. Mez ii. 1.

[8746]2254 Moed K. 11 a, last line.

[8747]2255 Three lines before that we read this saying of a fisherman:

'Roast fish with his brother (salt), lay it beside his father (water),

eat it with his son (fish-juice), and drink upon it his father'

(water).

[8748]2256 Jer. Sheq. vi. 2, p. 50 a.

[8749]2257 Shem. R. 9.

[8750]2258 Specially from Egypt and Spain, Machsh. vi. 3.

[8751]2259 Neh. iii. 3.

[8752]2260 Ber. 44 a.

[8753]2261 Jer. Ab. Z. ii. 10, p. 42 a.

[8754]2262 So in Erub. 30 a.

[8755]2263 Ab. i. 1; Sanh. 91 b.

[8756]2264 St. John i. 37 &c.

[8757]2265 St. Matt. iv. 20, 22.

[8758]2266 The name Peter occurs also among the Jews, but not that of

Paul. Thus, in Pesiqta (ed. Buber, p. 158 a, line 8 from bottom, see

also the Note there) we read of a R. José the son of Peytros, and

similarly in the fragments from Tanchuma in Jellinek's Beth ha-Midr.

vol. vi. p. 95, where, however, he is called Ben Petio. In Menor.

Hamm. the name is changed into Phinehas. Comp. Jellinek, Beth ha-Midr.

vol. vi. Pref. xi.

[8759]2267 We would call special attention to the arrangement of this

narrative. The explanation given in the text will, it is hoped, be

sufficient answer to the difficulties raised by some commentators.

Strauss' attempt to indicate the mythic origin of this narrative forms

one of the weakest parts of his book. Keim holds the genuineness of

the account of the two first Evangelists, but rejects that of the

third, on grounds which neither admit nor require detailed

examination. The latest and most curious idea of the Tubingen school

has been, to see in the account of St. Luke a reflection on Peter as

Judaistically cramped, and to understand the beckoning to his partners

as implying the calling in of Pauline teachers.

[8760]2268 St. Luke v. 21; vi.2; vi. 7.

[8761]2269 The accounts of this given by St. Mark and St. Luke

chronologically precede what is related in St. Matt. viii. 14-17. The

reader is requested in each case to peruse the Biblical narratives

before, or along with their commentation in the chapters of the

present work.

[8762]2270 The following are the passages in which the same term is

used: St. Matt. vii. 28; xiii. 54; xix. 25; xxii. 33; St. Mark i. 22;

vi. 2; vii. 37; x. 26; xi. 18; St. Luke ii. 48; iv. 32; ix. 43; Acts

xiii. 12.

[8763]2271 St. Matt. vii. 28.

[8764]2272 Comp. Delitzsch in Riehm's Hand-worter-buch.

[8765]2273 The word 'spirit' or 'spirits' occurs twice in St. Matthew,

thrice in St. Mark and twice in St. Luke; with the addition 'evil,'

twice in St. Luke; with that of 'unclean,' once in St. Matthew, eleven

times in St. Mark, and four times in St. Luke. The word da_mwn in

singular or plural occurs once in each of the Synoptists; while

daim_nion, in singular or plural, occurs nine times in St. Matthew,

three times in St. Mark, fourteen times in St. Luke, and six times in

St. John. The expression 'the spirit of an unclean demon' occurs once

in the St. Luke, while the verb 'to be demonished' occurs, in one form

or another, seven times in St. Matthew, four times in St. Mark, once

in St. Luke, and once in St. John. Comp. also the careful brochure of

Pastor Nanz, Die Besessenen im N.T., although we differ from his

conclusions.

[8766]2274 Comp. also Weiss, Leben Jesu i. p. 457.

[8767]2275 St. Matt. x. 8.

[8768]2276 St. Luke x. 17, 18.

[8769]2277 St. Matt. xvii. 21; comp. also xii. 43 &c., also spoken to

the disciples.

[8770]2278 This is also the conclusion arrived at by Weiss, u. s.

[8771]2279 The nearest approach to it, so far as I am aware, occurs in

Pirqé de R. El. c. 13 (ed. Lemberg, p. 16 b, 17 a), where the

influence of Satan over the serpent (in the history of the Fall) is

likened to that of an evil spirit over a man, all whose deeds and

words are done under the influence of the demon, so that he only acts

at his bidding.

[8772]2280 Surely Strauss (Leben Jesu, ii. 10) could not have

remembered the expressions in 1 Sam. xvi. 14, 15, &c., when he sees a

parallel to demoniacal possessions in the case of Saul.

[8773]2281 Tob. viii. 2, 3, is not a case in point.

[8774]2282 Gfrörer (Jahrh. d. Heils, i. p. 410, 412) quotes Erub. iv.

1 and Gitt. vii. 1; but neither of these passages implies anything

like demoniac possession.

[8775]2283 See, for example, Ant vi. 8. 2; 11. 3; viii. 2. 5; War vii.

6. 3.

[8776]2284 The reader will find full references in the Encyclopædias,

in Wetstein (Nov. Test. i. pp. 279-284), and in Nanz's brochure.

[8777]2285 See Appendix XVI.: 'Jewish Views about Demons and the

demonised.'

[8778]2286 In St. Mark i. 23.

[8779]2287 I have omitted, on critical grounds, the clause, 'Let us

alone.' The expression, 'What between us and Thee, Jesu Nazarene,'

contains a well-known Hebraism.

[8780]2288 This seems the more correct rendering.

[8781]2289 This is the real meaning of the expression rendered, 'Hold

thy peace.' It stills the raging of the powers of evil just as,

characteristically, it is again employed in the stilling of the storm,

St. Mark iv. 39.

[8782]2290 The Greek term implies this. Besides its use in this

narrative (St. Mark i. 27; St. Luke iv. 36, in the latter in the

substantive form), it occurs in St. Mark x. 24, 32; Acts ix. 6; and as

a substantive in Acts iii. 10.

[8783]2291 This seems the better rendering.

[8784]2292 Such is the meaning of the Greek word. I cannot understand,

why the corresponding term in St. Luke should have been interpreted in

'The Speaker's Commentary' as 'typhoid fever.'

[8785]2293 Shabb. 37 a.

[8786]2294 The word is the same in both cases.

[8787]2295 The term is the same. See the remarks of Volkmar (Marcus,

pp. 99, 100).

[8788]2296 Gen. xxii. 17, 18.

[8789]2297 Is. liii.

[8790]2298 I can scarcely find words strong enough to express my

dissent from those who would limit Is. liii. 4, either on the one hand

to spiritual, or on the other to physical 'sicknesses.' The promise is

one of future deliverance from both, of a Restorer from all the woe

which sin had brought. In the same way the expression 'taking upon

Himself,' and 'bearing' refers to the Christ as our Deliverer, because

our Substitute. Because He took upon Himself our infirmities,

therefore He bore our sicknesses. That the view here given is that of

the N.T., appears from a comparison of the application of the passage

in St. Matt. viii. 17 with that in St. John i. 29 and 1 Pet. ii. 24.

The words, as given by St. Matthew, are most truly a N.T. 'Targum' of

the original. The LXX. renders, 'This man carries our sins and is

pained for us;' Symmachus, 'Surely He took up our sins, and endured

our labors;' the Targum Jon., 'Thus for our sins He will pray, and our

iniquities will for His sake be forgiven.' (Comp. Driver and Neubauer,

The Jewish Interpreters on Isaiah liii., vol. ii.) Lastly, it is with

reference to this passage that the Messiah bears in the Talmud the

designation, 'The Leprous One,' and 'the Sick One' (Sanh. 98 b).

[8791]2299 So both in St. Mark (i. 35-39) and in St. Luke (iv. 42-44),

and in substantial accord even in St. Matthew (iv. 23).

[8792]2300 St. Mark vii. 34.

[8793]2301 St. Luke x. 17-20.

[8794]2302 So also St. Paul, 1 Cor. xii. 31:xiii. 1.

[8795]2303 St. Mark i. 35.

[8796]2304 prw_.

[8797]2305 The circumstances will be referred to in the sequel.

[8798]2306 The expression in St. Luke iv. 43 shows, that the 'coming

forth' (St. Mark i. 38) cannot be limited to His leaving Capernaum.

[8799]2307 The following are, briefly, some of the considerations

which determine the chronological order here adopted: (1.) This event

could not have taken place after the Sermon on the Mount, since then

the twelve Apostles were already called, nor yet after the call of St.

Matthew. (2) From the similes employed (about the lilies of the field,

&c.), the Sermon on the Mount seems to have taken place in spring;

this event in early autumn. On the other hand, the order in St. Mark

exactly fits in, and also in the main agrees, with that in St. Luke,

while, lastly, it exhibits the growing persecutions from Jerusalem, of

which we have here the first traces.

[8800]2308 This is ingeniously indicated in Professor Delitzsch's

Entsteh. d. Kanon. Evang., although, in my view, the theory cannot be

carried out in the full details attempted by the Professor. But such a

general conception of the Gospel by St. Matthew is not only reasonable

in itself, but explains his peculiar arrangement of events.

[8801]2309 On the date of this feast comp. Appendix XV.

[8802]2310 From this women were excepted, Sot. iii. 8.

[8803]2311 Lev. xiii. 45.

[8804]2312 They were not allowed to hold intercourse with persons

under other defilement than leprosy, Pes. 67 a.

[8805]2313 These were considered as walled since the time of Joshua,

Kel. i. 7, and their sanctity equal to that of the camp of Israel, and

greater than that of unwalled towns.

[8806]2314 Neg. iii. 1; vii. 1; xi. 1; xii 1.

[8807]2315 Neg. iii. 2.

[8808]2316 The following parts are declared in the Mishnah as

untainted by leprosy: within the eye, ear, nose, and mouth; the folds

of the skin, especially those of the neck; under the female breast;

the armpit; the sole of the foot, the nails, the head, and the beard

(Neg. vi. 8).

[8809]2317 Das Mos. Recht, vol. iv. p. 195.

[8810]2318 Michaelis views the whole question chiefly from the

standpoint of sanitary police.

[8811]2319 It is, though I think hesitatingly, propounded by Strauss

(vol. ii. pp. 56, 57). He has been satisfactorily answered by Volkmar

(Marcus, p. 110).

[8812]2320 u. s. pp. 53, 54.

[8813]2321 Jesu von Naz. ii. p. 174. This is among the weakest

portions of the book. Keim must have strongly felt 'the telling marks

of the authenticity of this narrative,' when he was driven to an

explanation which makes Jesus 'present Himself as a Scribe.'

[8814]2322 Ant. iii. 11. 3.

[8815]2323 Sanh. 98 b.

[8816]2324 See the passage in full in the Appendix on Messianic

Prophecies.

[8817]2325 These are detailed in Neg. i. 1-4; ii. 1; iii. 3-6; vii. 1;

ix. 2, 3.

[8818]2326 Neg. iii. 1.

[8819]2327 Kel. i. 7.

[8820]2328 Pes. 67.

[8821]2329 Neg. xiii 12.

[8822]2330 Undoubtedly the deepest and most philosophical treatment of

this subject is that in the now somewhat rare, and unfortunately

uncompleted, work of Molitor, Philosophie d. Gesch. (see vol. iii. pp.

126 &c., and 253 &c). The author is, however, perhaps too much imbued

with the views of the Kabbalah.

[8823]2331 According to Tos. Neg. vi. no case of leprosy of houses had

ever occurred, but was only mentioned in Scripture, in order to give

occasion to legal studies, so as to procure a Divine reward.

[8824]2332 I have here followed, or rather summarised, Maimonides. It

was, of course, impossible to give even the briefest details.

[8825]2333 Kel. i. 1-4.

[8826]2334 Neg. xiii. 11.

[8827]2335 Shabb. 55 a.

[8828]2336 Nedar. 41 a.

[8829]2337 Ber. 33 a.

[8830]2338 The story, of which this saying is the moral, is that of

the crushing of a serpent by the great miracle-monger Chanina ben

Dosa, without his being hurt. But I cannot help feeling that a double

entendre is here intended - on the one hand, that even a serpent could

not hurt one like Chanina, and, on the other, the wider bearing on the

real cause of death: not our original state, but our actual sin.

[8831]2339 Ber. 5 b.

[8832]2340 The Midrash enumerates four as in that category: the poor,

the blind, the childless, and the leprous.

[8833]2341 Ber. 5 a.

[8834]2342 Ber. 5 b.

[8835]2343 Bemidb. R. 13.

[8836]2344 From Zech. xiv. 12 it was inferred, that this leprosy would

smite the Gentiles even in the Messianic age (Tanchuma, Tazria, end).

[8837]2345 Tanch. on Hammetsora 4; ed. Lemberg ii. p. 24 a.

[8838]2346 u. s., 2, p.23 a; Arach. 15 b; and in many passages.

[8839]2347 Moed K.

[8840]2348 u.s. 15 a.

[8841]2349 Vayyik. R. 16. [Leprosy is there brought into connection

with calumny].

[8842]2350 And yet Jewish symbolism saw in the sufferings of Israel

and the destruction of the Temple the real fulfilment of the

punishment of leprosy with its attendant ordinances, while it also

traced in the healing of that disease and the provisions for declaring

the leper clean, a close analogy to what would happen in Israel's

restoration (Vayyikra R. 15, 17; Yalkut i. par. 551, 563).

[8843]2351 Moed. K 15 a.

[8844]2352 On this term see the first note in this chapter.

[8845]2353 This, however, as Godet has shown (Comm. on St. Luke,

German transl., p. 137), does not imply that the event took place

either in a house or in a town, as most commentators suppose. It is

strange that the 'Speaker's Commentary,' following Weiss, should have

located the incident in a Synagogue. It could not possibly have

occurred there, unless all Jewish ordinances and customs had been

reversed.

[8846]2354 The Rabbinic ordinances as to the ritual in such cases are

in Neg. xiv. See 'The Temple and its Services' pp. 315-317. Special

attention was to be given, that the water with which the purified

leper was sprinkled was from a pure, flowing spring (six different

collections of water, suited to different kinds of impurity, being

described in Miqv. i. 1-8). From Parah viii. 10 we gather, that among

other rivers even the Jordan was not deemed sufficiently pure, because

in its course other streams, which were not lawful for such

purification, had mingled with it.

[8847]2355 St. Luke v. 21.

[8848]2356 St. Luke vi. 7.

[8849]2357 St. Luke v. 30.

[8850]2358 St. Luke v. 33.

[8851]2359 The same order is followed by St. Luke. From the connection

between St. Mark and St. Peter, we should naturally look for the

fullest account of that early Capernaum-Ministry in the Second Gospel.

[8852]2360 St. John v.

[8853]2361 St. Mark ii. 6, 7.

[8854]2362 St. John v. 27.

[8855]2363 The A. V. mars the meaning by rendering it: 'power.'

[8856]2364 St. Mark ii. 9.

[8857]2365 So according to the best readings.

[8858]2366 In St. John v. 8.

[8859]2367 St. John v. 36; comp. St. Mark ii. 10.

[8860]2368 It is, of course, not pretended by negative critics that

the Fourth Gospel borrowed from St. Mark. On the contrary, the

supposed differences in form and spirit between the Synoptists and the

Fourth Gospel form one of the main arguments against the authenticity

of the latter. In regard to the 5th chap. of St. John, Dr. Abbott

writes (Art. 'Gospels,' Encycl. Brit. p. 833 b): 'That part of the

discourse in which Christ describes Himself in the presence of the

multitude as having received all power to judge and to quicken the

dead, does not resemble anything in the Synoptic narrative' - except

St. Matt. xi. 27; St. Luke x. 22, and 'that was uttered privately to

the disciples.' To complete the irony of criticism, Dr. Abbott

contrasts the 'faith of the Synoptists,' such as 'that half-physical

thrill of trust in the presence of Jesus. Which enables the limbs of a

paralysed man to make the due physical response to the emotional shock

consequent on the word "Arise," so that in the strength of that shock

the paralytic is enabled to shake off the disease of many years,' with

faith such as the Fourth Gospel presents it.

[8861]2369 {hebrew}. See Wetstein in loc.

[8862]2370 'Sketches of Jewish life,' pp. 93-96.

[8863]2371 Shabb. i. 4; Jer. Sanh. 21 b; Jer. Pes. 30 b, and often.

[8864]2372 Such a crowd could scarcely have assembled there - and

where were those about and beyond the door?

[8865]2373 This is the suggestion of Dr. Thomson ('The Land and the

Book,' pp. 358, 359). But even he sees difficulties in it. Besides,

was Christ inside the small room of such a house, and if so, how did

the multitude see and hear Him? Nor can I see any reason for

representing Peter as so poor. Professor Delitzsch's conception of the

scene (in his 'Elin Tag in Capern,') seems to me, so far as I follow

it, though exceedingly beautiful, too imaginative.

[8866]2374 Baba B. vi. 4.

[8867]2375 In Jer. Keth. iv. 14, p. 29 b.

[8868]2376 Tos. B. Mets. c. iv. 2.

[8869]2377 u. s., c. viii. 31, ed, Z.

[8870]2378 Baba Mets. v. 2.

[8871]2379 Jos, Ant. xiii. 5. 3; Bab. Mez. 88 a.

[8872]2380 St. Matt. ix. 2.

[8873]2381 In our A. V. it is erroneously Deut. xxix. 1.

[8874]2382 Lev. ii. 13.

[8875]2383 Deut. xxviii. 69 b.

[8876]2384 Ber. 5 a.

[8877]2385 Ber. 5 b.

[8878]2386 Nedar. 41 a.

[8879]2387 So according to the greater number of MSS., which have the

verb in the perfect tense.

[8880]2388 The expression, 'reasoning in their hearts,' corresponds

exactly to the Rabbinic {hebrew}, Ber. 22 a. The word {hebrew} is

frequently used in contradistinction to speaking.

[8881]2389 In Sanh. 93 b this reading of the thoughts is regarded as

the fulfilment of Is. xi. 3, and as one of the marks of the Messiah,

which Bar Kokhabh not possessing was killed.

[8882]2390 That the expression 'Son of Man' ({hebrew}) was well

understood as referring to the Messiah, appears from the following

remarkable anti-Christian passage (Jer. Taan 65 b, at the bottom): 'If

a man shall say to thee, I am God, he lies; if he says, I am the Son

of Man, his end will be to repent it; if he says, I go up into heaven

(to this applies Numb. xxiii. 19), hath he said and shall he not do

it?' [or, hath he spoken, and shall he make it good?] Indeed, the

whole passage, as will be seen, is an attempt to adapt. Numb. xxiii.

19 to the Christian controversy.

[8883]2391 The words 'to repentance' are certainly spurious in St.

Matt. and St. Mark. I regard theirs as the original and authentic

report of the words of Christ. In St. Luke v. 32, the words 'unto

repentance' do certainly occur. But, with Godet, I regard them as

referring to 'the righteous,' and as used, in a sense ironically.

[8884]2392 So in all the three Gospels.

[8885]2393 Yoma 29 a.

[8886]2394 Sot. 3 a.

[8887]2395 Rosh haSh. 17 a.

[8888]2396 Comp. Sepher Iqqarim iv. 28.

[8889]2397 Ber. 34 h.

[8890]2398 Vayyik. R. 7.

[8891]2399 It would be quite one-sided to represent this as the only

meaning, as, it seems to me, Weber has done in his 'System d.

altsynagog, palaest. Theol.' This, and a certain defectiveness in the

treatment, are among the blemishes in this otherwise interesting and

very able posthumous work.

[8892]2400 Pes. 54 a; Ber. R. 1.

[8893]2401 So in too many passages for enumeration.

[8894]2402 Yoma 69 b; Ber. R. 9, and in many places.

[8895]2403 Some of these points have already been stated. But it was

necessary to repeat them so as to give a connected view.

[8896]2404 Sanh. 99 a; Maimon. Hil. Tesh. Per. 7.

[8897]2405 Sanh. 99 a; Ber. 34 b.

[8898]2406 Yalkut on Ps. xxxii. p. 101 b.

[8899]2407 Sanh. 98 a.

[8900]2408 Sanh. 98 a; Jer. Taan. 64 a.

[8901]2409 Sanh. 98 a.

[8902]2410 St. Luke xvii. 10.

[8903]2411 So, according to Rabbinism, both in the Sepher Iqqar. and

in Menor. Hammaor.

[8904]2412 Yoma 86.

[8905]2413 Ber. 5 a, b; Kidd. 81 b.

[8906]2414 Yoma u. s.

[8907]2415 Yoma u. s., and many passages.

[8908]2416 In almost innumerable passages.

[8909]2417 Ab. Zar. 5 a.

[8910]2418 Mechilta, 76 a.

[8911]2419 In Menorath Hammaor (Ner v. 1. 1, 2) seven kinds of

repentance in regard to seven different conditions are mentioned. They

are repentance immediately after the commission of sin; after a course

of sin, but while there is still the power of sinning; where there is

no longer the occasion for sinning; where it is caused by admonition,

or fear of danger; where it is caused by actual affliction; where a

man is old, and unable to sin; and, lastly, repentance in prospect of

death.

[8912]2420 See also Yoma 86 and following.

[8913]2421 Ber. 12 b; Chag. 5 a.

[8914]2422 Pesiqta ed. Bub. p. 163 b.

[8915]2423 Ab. Zar. 17 a.

[8916]2424 This is illustrated, among other things, by the history of

a Rabbi who, at the close of a dissolute life, became a convert by

repentance. The story of the occasion of his repentance is not at all

nice in its realistic details, and the tears with which a

self-righteous colleague saw the beatification of the penitent are

painfully illustrative of the elder brother in the Parable of the

Prodigal Son (Ab. Z. 17 a).

[8917]2425 Vayyik. R. 7.

[8918]2426 Sanh. vi. 2.

[8919]2427 Shabb. 32 a.

[8920]2428 Sanh. u. s.

[8921]2429 Ps. xcii.

[8922]2430 So it would need to be rendered in this context.

[8923]2431 Ber. R. 22.

[8924]2432 Another beautiful allegory is that, in the fear of Adam, as

the night closed in upon his guilt, God gave him two stones to rub

against each other, which produced the spark of light - the rubbing of

these two stones being emblematic of repentance (Pes. 54 a; Ber. R.

11, 12).

[8925]2433 2 Chron. xxxiii. 12, 13.

[8926]2434 Debar. R. 2; ed. Warsh. p. 7 a; comp. Sanh. 102 b, last

lines, and 103 a.

[8927]2435 Ex. xv. 11.

[8928]2436 Taan. 16 a.

[8929]2437 Rosh haSh. 17 b.

[8930]2438 Baba. Mez. 85 a.

[8931]2439 Ber. 17 a.

[8932]2440 u. s.

[8933]2441 Baba Mez. 85 a.

[8934]2442 Baba Mez. 84 b (quoted by Weber) is scarcely an instance.

The whole of that part of the Talmud is specially repugnant, from its

unsavory character and grossly absurd stories. In one of the stories

in Baba Mez. 85, a Rabbi tries by sitting over the fire in an oven,

whether he has become impervious to the fire of Gehinnom. For thirty

days he was successful, but after that it was noticed his thighs were

singed, whence he was called 'the little one with the singed thighs.'

[8935]2443 Tanch. Noach 4.

[8936]2444 But such restitution was sometimes not insisted on, for the

sake of encouraging penitents.

[8937]2445 See the discussion in B. Mez. 37 a.

[8938]2446 Rabbinism has an apt illustration of this in the saying,

that all the baths of lustration would not cleanse a man, so long as

he continued holding in his hand that which had polluted him (Taan. 16

a).

[8939]2447 These statements are all so thoroughly Rabbinic that it is

needless to make special references.

[8940]2448 Vayyik. R. 3, towards the end.

[8941]2449 In B. Bab. 10 a.

[8942]2450 Vayyik. R. 25, beg. ed. Warsh. p. 38 a.

[8943]2451 Tanch. on Gen. xlviii.

[8944]2452 Ab. Zar. 17 a.

[8945]2453 St. Mark ii. 13.

[8946]2454 Gitt. 34 b.

[8947]2455 Sheq. v. 1.

[8948]2456 Eduy. ii. 5; Yoma 84 a.

[8949]2457 Sanh. 43 a, in the older editions; comp, Chesron. haShas,

p. 22 b.

[8950]2458 A ridiculous story is told that Matthew endeavored to avert

sentence of death by a play on his name, quoting Ps. xlii. 2: 'Mathai

(in our version, 'When') I shall come and appear before God;' to which

the judges replied by similarly adapting Ps. xli. 5: 'Mathai (in our

version, 'When') he shall die, and his name perish.'

[8951]2459 The other three disciples are named: Neqai, Netser, and

Boni, or Buni. In Taan. 20 a a miracle is related which gave to Boni

the name of Nicodemus (Naqdimon). But I regard this as some confusion,

of which there is much in connection with the name of Nicodemus in the

Talmud. According to the Talmud, like Matthew, the other three tried

to save their lives by punning appeals to Scripture, similar to that

of St. Matthew. Thus, Neqai quotes Exod. xxiii. 7, 'Naqi ('the

innocent' in our version) and the righteous shalt thou not slay,' to

which the judges replied by Ps. x. 8, 'in the secret places he shall

slay Naqi ('the innocent' in our version)'. Again, Netser pleads Is.

xi. 1: 'Netser (a branch) shall grow out of his roots,' to which the

judges reply, Is. xiv. 19: 'Thou art cast out of thy grave like an

abominable Netser' (branch), while Boni tries to save his life by a

pun on Exod. iv. 22: 'My first-born Beni (in our version, 'my son') is

Israel,' to which the judges reply by quoting the next verse, 'I will

slay Binkha (in our version, 'thy son'), thy first-born!' If the

Hebrew Beni was sometimes pronounced Boni, this may account for the

Grecianised form Boanerges ('sons of thunder') for Beney-Regosh, or

Regasha. In Hebrew the root scarcely means even 'noise' (see Gesenius

sub {hebrew}), but it has that meaning in the Aramæan. Kautzsch (Gram.

d. Bibl.-Aram.) suggests the word regaz 'anger,' 'angry impetuosity.'

But the suggestion does not commend itself.

[8952]2460 _p_ t_ tel_nion.

[8953]2461 Sanh. 25 b.

[8954]2462 Baba K. 94 b.

[8955]2463 With them herdsmen were conjoined, on account of their

frequent temptations to dishonesty, and their wild lives far from

ordinances.

[8956]2464 Wünsche is mistaken in making the Gabbai the superior, and

the Mokhes the subordinate, tax-collector. See Levy, Neuhebr. Wörterb,

iii. p. 116 a.

[8957]2465 Jer. Dem. 23 a; comp. Bekhor. 31 a.

[8958]2466 In B. Kamma x. 2.

[8959]2467 Nedar. iii. 4.

[8960]2468 Jer. Kidd. 66 b.

[8961]2469 Shabb. 78 b.

[8962]2470 Jos. Ant. xiv. 10. 5.

[8963]2471 Comp. Wieseler's Beitr. pp. 75-78. Hence the 'publicans'

were not subordinates, but direct officials of the Government.

[8964]2472 B. Kamma x. 1.

[8965]2473 Baba K. 113 a.

[8966]2474 Bekhor. 31 a.

[8967]2475 Ab. Zar. 13 a.

[8968]2476 Tos. B. Mets. viii. 25, ed. Zuck.

[8969]2477 Jer. Chag. 77 d; comp Jer. Sanh. 23 c, and Sanh. 44 b.

[8970]2478 Ab. Zar. 10 b.

[8971]2479 This is perhaps the better reading of St. Mark ii. 16.

[8972]2480 St. Matt. ix. 14-17.

[8973]2481 The latter in St. Luke v. 31.

[8974]2482 {hebrew}, a very common formula, where further thought and

instruction are required. So common, indeed, is it, that it is applied

in the sense of 'let,' such or such thing 'come and teach' ({hebrew}).

Sometimes the formula is varied, as {hebrew}, 'come and see' (Baba

Bath. 10 a), or {hebrew}, 'go and see' (u. s., b).

[8975]2483 Even in that beautiful page in the Talmud (Succ. 49 b)

righteousness and sacrifices are compared, the former being declared

the greater; and then righteousness is compared with works of kindness

with alms, &c.

[8976]2484 Hos. vi. 6.

[8977]2485 St. Matt. xii. 7.

[8978]2486 Mark the absence of the Article.

[8979]2487 See the note on p. 507.

[8980]2488 St. Matt. x. 2-4; St. Mark iii. 13-19; St. Luke vi. 12-19.

[8981]2489 Vayyik. R. 6; Pesiq, R. 22, ed. Friedm. p. 113 a.

[8982]2490 St. John xix. 25.

[8983]2491 Thus he would be the same as 'James the Less,' or rather

'the Little,' a son of Mary, the sister-in-law of the Virgin-Mother.

[8984]2492 As is done in the Rabbinic story where Thaddæus appeals to

Ps. c. 1 (superscription) to save his life, while the Rabbis reply by

appealing to Ps. l. 23: 'Whoso offereth praise (thodah) glorifieth Me'

(Sanh. 43 a, Chesr. haSh.).

[8985]2493 St. Luke vi. 15; comp. St. John xiv. 22.

[8986]2494 War. iv. 3, 9.

[8987]2495 Euseb. H. E. iii. 11; iv. 22.

[8988]2496 As to the identity of the names Alphaeus and Clopas, comp.

Wetzel in the Theol. Stud. u. Krit. for 1883, Heft iii. See also

further remarks on the sons of Clopas, in the comment on St. John xix.

25 in Book V. ch. xv.

[8989]2497 Josh. xv. 25.

[8990]2498 As to the designation Boanerges (sons of thunder), see note

2, p. 514.

[8991]2499 As it was impossible to quote separately the different

verses in the Sermon on the Mount, the reader is requested to have the

Bible before him, so as to compare the verses referred to with their

commentation in this chapter.

[8992]2500 St. Luke vi. 13.

[8993]2501 It is so that we group together St. Luke vi. 12, 13, 17-19,

compared with St. Mark iii. 13-15 and St. Matthew v. 1, 2.

[8994]2502 According to traditional view this mountain was the

so-called 'Karn Hattin' (Horns of Hattin) on the road from Tiberias to

Nazareth, about 1½ hours to the north-west of Tiberias. But the

tradition dates only from late Crusading times, and the locality is,

for many reasons, unsuitable.

[8995]2503 St. Luke vi.

[8996]2504 The reader will find these parallelisms in Dean Plumptre's

Notes on St. Matthew v. 1 (in Bishop Ellicott's Commentary for English

Readers, vol. i. of the N.T. p. 20).

[8997]2505 Comp. Euseb. H. Eccl. iii. 39.

[8998]2506 Thus St. Matthew passes over those earlier events in the

Gospel-history of which Judæa was the scene, and even over the visits

of Jesus to Jerusalem previous to the last Passover, while he devotes

not less than fourteen chapters and a half to the half-year's activity

in Galilee. If St. John's is the Judæan, St. Matthew's is the Galilean

Gospel.

[8999]2507 On this point there seems to me some confusion of language

on the part of controversialists. Those who maintain that the Sermon

on the Mount contains no doctrinal elements at all must mean

systematic teaching - what are commonly called dogmas - since, besides

St. Matt. vii. 22, 23, as Professor Wace has so well urged, love to

God and to our neighbour mark both the starting-point and the final

outcome of all theology.

[9000]2508 To adopt the language of St. Thomas Aquinas - it is neither

meritum ex congruo, nor yet is it ex condigno. The Reformers fully

showed not only the error of Romanism in this respect, but the

untenableness of the theological distinction.

[9001]2509 chs. v.-vii.

[9002]2510 St. Matt. v.

[9003]2511 St. Matt. v. 3-12.

[9004]2512 Ex. xix. 3-6.

[9005]2513 St. Matt. v. 13-16.

[9006]2514 vv. 21 to end of ch. v.

[9007]2515 Alms, vi. 1-4; Prayer, vv. 5-15; Fasting, 16-18.

[9008]2516 vv. 22, 23.

[9009]2517 vv. 22-24.

[9010]2518 vv. 25 to end of ch. vi.

[9011]2519 vii. 1-5.

[9012]2520 ver. 6.

[9013]2521 vv. 7-12.

[9014]2522 vv. 13, 14.

[9015]2523 vv. 15, 16.

[9016]2524 vv. 17-20.

[9017]2525 vv. 24-27.

[9018]2526 So in the quotations of many writers on the subject,

notably those of Wünsche.

[9019]2527 Ab. iv. 4.

[9020]2528 Sanh. 43 b.

[9021]2529 Vayyik. R. 1, ed. Warsh. p. 2 b.

[9022]2530 Abhodah Zarah.

[9023]2531 Erub. 41 b.

[9024]2532 Baba B. 10 a.

[9025]2533 Baba B. 10 b; comp. Pes. 8 a; Rosh haSh. 4 a.

[9026]2534 B. Bath. u. s.

[9027]2535 B. Bath. 9 b.

[9028]2536 Chag. 27 a.

[9029]2537 In Jer. B. Kamma 6 c, we have this saying in the name of R.

Gamaliel, and therefore near Christian times: 'Whensoever thou hast

mercy, God will have mercy upon thee; if thou hast not mercy, neither

will God have mercy upon thee;' to which, however, this saying of Rab

must be put as a pendent, that if a man has in vain sought forgiveness

from his neighbour, he is to get a whole row of men to try to assuage

his wrath, to which Job xxxiii. 28 applies; the exception, however,

being, according to R. Jose, that if one had brought an evil name upon

his neighbour, he would never obtain forgiveness. See also Shabb. 151

[9030]2538 B. Mez. 43 b and 44 a; comp also Kidd. 42 b.

[9031]2539 Ab. iii 14.

[9032]2540 St. Matt. vii. 12.

[9033]2541 Shabb. 31 a.

[9034]2542 As already stated, it occurs in this negative and

unspiritual form in Tob. iv. 15, and is also so quoted in the lately

published Didac_ t_n d_deka _post_lwn (ed. Bryennios) ch. i. It occurs

in the same form in Clem. Strom. ii. c. 23.

[9035]2543 St. Matt. vi. 9-13.

[9036]2544 Berakhoth.

[9037]2545 Ber. 34 a b; 32 a; 58 b.

[9038]2546 Jer. Ber. 8 b.

[9039]2547 Is. xxxviii. 2. Beautiful prayers in Ber. 16 b, 17 a; but

most painful instances very frequently occur in the Midrashim, such as

in Shem. R. 43.

[9040]2548 Jer. Ber. 8 c.

[9041]2549 Ber. 29 b.

[9042]2550 For some interesting Rabbinic parallels to the Lord's

Prayer, see Dr. Taylor's learned edition of the 'Sayings of the Jewish

Fathers,' Excursus V. (pp. 138-145). The reader will also find much to

interest him in Excursus IV.

[9043]2551 Abhod. Zar. 17 a and 27 b.

[9044]2552 Comp. the more full account of this Jacob's proposal to

heal Eleazar ben Dama when bitten of a serpent in Jer. Shabb. xiv.

end. Kefr Sekanya seems to have been the same as Kefr Simai, between

Sepphoris and Acco (comp. Neubauer, Geogr. p. 234.)

[9045]2553 In St. Matt. v. 18.

[9046]2554 Shabb. 116 b.

[9047]2555 Delitzsch accepts a different reading, which furnishes this

meaning, 'but I am come to add.' The passage occurs in a very curious

connection, and for the purpose of showing the utter dishonesty of

Christians - a Christian philosopher first arguing from interested

motives, that since the dispersion of the Jews the Law of Moses was

abrogated, and a new Law given; and the next day, having received a

larger bribe, reversing his decision, and appealing to this rendering

of St. Matt. v. 17.

[9048]2556 Jer. Sanh. p. 20 c.

[9049]2557 Shir. haSh. R. on ch. v. 11, ed. Warsh. p. 27 a.

[9050]2558 Shem. R. 6.

[9051]2559 Sanh. 107 a, and other passages.

[9052]2560 In Vayyik. R. 19.

[9053]2561 The following are mentioned as instances: the change of

{hebrew} into {hebrew} in Deut. vi. 4; of {hebrew} into {hebrew} in

Exod. xxxiv. 14; of {hebrew} into {hebrew} Lev. xxii. 32; of {hebrew}

into {hebrew} first verse of Ps. cl.; of {hebrew} into {hebrew} in

Jer. v. 12; {hebrew} into {hebrew} 1 Sam. ii. 2. It ought to be

marked, that Wünsche's quotations of these passages (Bibl. Rabb. on

Shir haSh. R. v. 11) are not always correct.

[9054]2562 St. Matt. v. 21.

[9055]2563 B. Kamma 50 b.

[9056]2564 Sanh. 100 a.

[9057]2565 Sotah iii. 4; Shabb. 13 b.

[9058]2566 Bab. Mez. 58 b, at bottom.

[9059]2567 Pesiqt. ed. Bub. 164 a.

[9060]2568 In the Midrash on Ruth iii. 18.

[9061]2569 See 'The Temple. its Ministry and Services,' &c., pp. 26,

27.

[9062]2570 ver. 13.

[9063]2571 In Sot. 48 b.

[9064]2572 Sanh. 100 b.

[9065]2573 Sot. i. 7.

[9066]2574 Arach. 16 b.

[9067]2575 B. Bath. 15 b; Bekhor. 38 b; Yalk. on Ruth.

[9068]2576 Pes. 49 a.

[9069]2577 In Ber. R 33.

[9070]2578 Jer. Ber. 13 d, towards the end.

[9071]2579 In Sukk. 45 b he proposes to conjoin with himself his son,

instead of Abraham.

[9072]2580 In Ab. iii. 17.

[9073]2581 Ab. de R. Nath. 24.

[9074]2582 I had collected a large number of supposed or real Rabbinic

parallels to the 'Sermon on the Mount.' But as they would have

occupied by far too large a space, I have been obliged to omit all but

such as would illustrate the fundamental position taken in this

chapter, and, indeed, in this book: the contrariety of spirit, by the

side of similarity of form and expressions, between the teaching of

Jesus and that of Rabbinism.

[9075]2583 For a discussion of the precise date of the building of

Tiberias, see Schürer, Neutest. Zeitgesch. p. 234, note 2. For

details, comp. Jos. Ant. xviii. 2. 3; 6. 2; xix. 8. 1; War ii. 9. 1;

21. 3, 6, 9; Life 9, 12, 17, 66, and many other places.

[9076]2584 St. Luke x. 15.

[9077]2585 St. John iv.

[9078]2586 St. Mark iii. 19-21.

[9079]2587 I take this as the general meaning, although the

interpretation which paraphrases the _legon g_r ('they said,' ver. 21)

as referring to the report which reached the o_ pa_ a_to_ seems to me

strained. Those who are curious will find all kinds of proposed

interpretations collected in Meyer, ad loc.

[9080]2588 The idea that they were in Nazareth seems wholly unfounded.

[9081]2589 St. Mark iii. 31.

[9082]2590 Urged even by Meyer.

[9083]2591 The difficulties which Keim raises seem to me little

deserving of serious treatment. Sometimes they rest on assumptions

which, to say the least, are not grounded on evidence.

[9084]2592 Godet has some excellent remarks on this point.

[9085]2593 So notably Keim.

[9086]2594 The differences have been well marked by Keim.

[9087]2595 Ber. 34 b.

[9088]2596 Jos. Ant. xix. 9. 1, 2.

[9089]2597 Ohal xxviii. 7.

[9090]2598 Comp. Warren, Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 385 &c.

[9091]2599 St. Luke vii. 8, last clause.

[9092]2600 St. John iv. 46-53.

[9093]2601 Ohal xviii. 7.

[9094]2602 St. Luke vii. 6.

[9095]2603 St. Matt. viii. 5.

[9096]2604 Without the article; perhaps only some of them went on this

errand of mercy.

[9097]2605 St. Matt. viii. 6, literally, 'my servant has been thrown

down (by disease) in the house, paralytic.' The b_bljtai corresponds

to the Hebrew {hebrew}. The same word is used in ver. 14, when Peter's

mother-in-law is described as 'thrown down and fever-burning.'

[9098]2606 One might say that all the species of animals are put in

requisition of this great feast: Leviathan (B. Bath. 75 a); Behemoth

(Pirké d. R. Eliez. 11); the gigantic bird Bar Jochani (B. Bath. 73 b;

Bekhor. 57 b, and other passages). Similar, fabulous fatted geese are

mentioned - probably for that feast (B. Bath. 73 b). The wine there

dispensed had been kept in the grapes from the creation of the world

(Sanh. 99 a; Targum, on Cant. viii. 2); while there is difficulty as

to who is worthy to return thanks, when at last the duty is undertaken

by David, according to Ps. cxvi. 13 (Pes. 119 b).

[9099]2607 Bemid. R. 21, ed. Warsh. iv. p. 85 a 57 a.

[9100]2608 Erub. 19 a..

[9101]2609 Tamid 32 b.

[9102]2610 Targ. on 1 Sam. ii. 9, Ps lxxxviii. 12.

[9103]2611 Amos. v. 20.

[9104]2612 Yaklkut ii. p. 42 c.

[9105]2613 u. s. nine lines higher up.

[9106]2614 St. Matt. viii. 12.

[9107]2615 All commentators regard this as a contrast to the light in

the palace, but so far as I know the Messianic feast is not described

as taking place in a palace.

[9108]2616 The use of the article makes it emphatic - as Bengel has

it: In hac vita dolor nondum est dolor.

[9109]2617 In Succ. 52 a it is said that in the age to come (Athid

labho) God would bring out the Yetser haRa (evil impulse), and

slaughter it before the just before the wicked. To the one he would

appear like a great mountain, to the other like a small thread. Both

would weep - the righteous for joy, that they had been able to subdue

so great so great a mountain; the wicked for sorrow, that they had not

been able even to break so small a thread.

[9110]2618 This is also the meaning of the expression in Ps. cxii. 10.

The verb is used with this idea in Acts vii. 54, and in the LXX, Job.

xvi. 9; Ps. xxxv. 16; xxxvii. 12; and in Rabbinical writings, for

example, Jer. Keth. 35 b; Shem. R. 5, &c.

[9111]2619 St. Matt. viii. 12.

[9112]2620 Shabb. xiv. 4.

[9113]2621 {hebrew} Ab. iii. 14 comp. Jer. Kidd. 61 c middle.

[9114]2622 Sanh. 97 b; Succ. 45 b.

[9115]2623 Jer. Ber. 13 d, end.

[9116]2624 Pesiqta 16 b; Shem. R. 23.

[9117]2625 Cant. ii. 11-13.

[9118]2626 This depends on whether we adopt the reading _n t_ or _n t_

_x_v.

[9119]2627 I cannot understand what Dean Stanley means, when he says

(Sinai and Palest. p. 352): 'One entrance alone it could have had.' I

have counted not fewer than six roads leading to Nain.

[9120]2628 So Dean Stanley, and even Captain Conder. Canon Farrar

regards this as one of 'the certain sites.' But, even according to his

own description of the route taken from Capernaum, it is difficult to

understand how Jesus could have issued upon the rock-hewn tombs.

[9121]2629 'Land of Israel,' pp. 129, 130.

[9122]2630 Captain Conder (Tent-Work in Pal. i. pp. 121, 122) has

failed to discover traces of a wall. But see the description of Canon

Tristram (Land of Isr. p. 129) which I have followed in my account.

[9123]2631 I cannot accept the rendering of Nain by 'pascuum.'

[9124]2632 Ber. R. 98, ed. Warsh. p. 175 b: {hebrew}.

[9125]2633 Ber. 18 a.

[9126]2634 For the sake of brevity I must here refer to 'Sketches of

Jewish Social Life,' ch. x., and to the article in 'The Bible

Educator,' vol. iv. pp. 330-333.

[9127]2635 Haneberg (Relig. Alterth. pp. 502, 503) gives the apt

reasons for this.

[9128]2636 The Tractate Ebhel Rabbathi ('Great Mourning')

euphemistically called Massekheth Semachoth, 'Tractate of Joys,' It is

already quoted in the Talmud: comp Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. p. 90, note

d. It is inserted in vol. ix. of the Bab. Talmud, pp. 28 a to 31 b.

[9129]2637 Ber. 28 b.

[9130]2638 Nedar. 40 a, lines 6 and 7 from bottom.

[9131]2639 Ber. v. 5.

[9132]2640 Moed K. 27 b.

[9133]2641 Jer. Moed. K. 83 d.

[9134]2642 Moed K. 8 b.

[9135]2643 Rosh haSh 17 a and other wise.

[9136]2644 Shabb. 151 b; Semach. I.

[9137]2645 The mourning up to the time of burial or during the first

day was termed Aninah (widowed-mourning, moaning) Jer. Horay. 48 a.

The following three, seven, or thirty days (as the case might be) were

those of Ebhel, 'mourning.' Other forms of the same word need not be

mentioned.

[9138]2646 Jer. Ber. 5 d.

[9139]2647 Kethub. iv. 4.

[9140]2648 Mass. Semach. i. 9.

[9141]2649 Of these a number of instances are given in the Talmud -

though probably only of the prologue, or epilogue, or of the most

striking thoughts.

[9142]2650 Shabb. 153 a.

[9143]2651 Moed K. 25 a.

[9144]2652 Sanh. 46 b.

[9145]2653 Shabb. 153 a.

[9146]2654 Shabb. 153 a.

[9147]2655 Ber. R. 17 end.

[9148]2656 Ber. 19 a.

[9149]2657 Jer. Kil 32 b; Ber. R. 100.

[9150]2658 Par. xii. 9.

[9151]2659 Moed K. 27 a and b.

[9152]2660 Semach. c. 8.

[9153]2661 Bez. 6 a Nidd. 37 a.

[9154]2662 Moed K. 27 b; Ber. 53 a.

[9155]2663 Jer. Sheq. ii. 7.

[9156]2664 It is evident the young man could not have been 'coffined,'

or it would have been impossible for him to sit up at Christ's

bidding. I must differ from the learned Delitzsch, who uses the word

{hebrew} in translating sor_v. Very remarkable also it seems to me,

that those who advocate wicker-basket interments are without knowing

it, resorting to the old Jewish practice.

[9157]2665 Ber. iii. 1.

[9158]2666 Ber. 18 a.

[9159]2667 Jer. Sot. 17 b, end.

[9160]2668 Sometimes the lament was chaunted simply in chorus, at

others one woman began and then the rest joined in chorus. The latter

was distinctively termed the Qinah, see Moed K. iii. 9.

[9161]2669 Keth. 17 a; Moed K. 27 b.

[9162]2670 Apparently sometimes torches were used at funerals (Ber. 53

a).

[9163]2671 The term k_riov for 'the Lord' is peculiar to St. Luke and

St. John - a significant conjunction. It occurs only once in St. Mark

(xvi. 19).

[9164]2672 Moed K. 8 a, lines 7 and 8 from bottom.

[9165]2673 So literally. We here recall the unfeeling threats by R.

Huna of further bereavements to a mother who wept very much, and their

fulfilment (Moed. K. 27 b).

[9166]2674 Kei. i.

[9167]2675 So literally - and very significantly.

[9168]2676 Minor difficulties may be readily dismissed. Such is the

question, why this miracle has not been recorded by St. Matthew.

Possibly St. Matthew may have remained a day behind in Capernaum. In

any case, the omission cannot be of real importance as regards the

question of the credibility of such a miracle, since similar miracles

are related in all the four Gospels.

[9169]2677 So Keim, who finally arrives at the conclusion that the

event is fictitious His account seems to me painfully unfair, as well

as unsatisfactory in the extreme.

[9170]2678 This is the admission of Keim.

[9171]2679 Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iv. 3.

[9172]2680 Acts xvii. 32; xxvi. 8; 1 Cor. xv. 12-19.

[9173]2681 2 Pet. i. 16.

[9174]2682 The term x sugkur_a x rendered in the A.V. 'chance' (St.

Luke x. 31), means literally, the coming together, the meeting, A.V.

'chance' (St. Luke x. 31), means literally, the coming together, the

meeting, or concurrence of events.

[9175]2683 Lit. 'fear took all.'

[9176]2684 _ti.

[9177]2685 Significantly, the same expression as in St. Luke i. 68.

[9178]2686 The embassy of the Baptist will be described in connection

with the account of his martyrdom.

[9179]2687 This is specially characteristic of the Gospel by St. Luke.

[9180]2688 See note in previous chapter.

[9181]2689 St. Matt. xi. 20-30.

[9182]2690 St. Luke x. 13-22.

[9183]2691 St. Matt. xi. 16-19

[9184]2692 St. Matt. xi. 28-30.

[9185]2693 Made 'the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven' ({hebrew}) equal

to 'the yoke of the Law' ({hebrew}) or to that 'of the commandments'

({hebrew}).

[9186]2694 St. Luke vii. 36.

[9187]2695 The untenableness of this strange hypothesis has been shown

in almost all commentaries. There is not a tittle of evidence for it.

[9188]2696 St. Matt. xxvi. 6&c. and parallels.

[9189]2697 The objections of Keim, though bulking largely when heaped

together by him, seem not only unfair, but, when examined one by one,

are seen to be groundless.

[9190]2698 St. Luke vii. 40

[9191]2699 Ber. vi. 6 makes the following curious distinction: if they

sit at the table, each says 'the grace' for himself; if they 'lie

down' to table, one says it in the name of all. If wine is handed them

during dinner, each says 'the grace' over it for himself; if after

dinner, one says it for all.

[9192]2700 Ab. iv.16.

[9193]2701 The Teraqlin was sometimes entered by an antechamber

(Prosedor), Ab. iv. 16, and opened into one (Jer. Rosh haSh. 59 b), or

more (Yom. 15 b), side-or bed-rooms. The common measurement for such a

hall was fifteen feet (ten cubits) breadth, length, and height (Baba

B. vi. 4).

[9194]2702 The strangeness of the circumstance suggests this, which

is, alas! by no means inconsistent with what we know of the morality

of some of these Rabbis, although this page must not be stained by

detailed references.

[9195]2703 The other and harsher reading, 'a woman which was in the

city a sinner,' need scarcely be discussed.

[9196]2704 I have so translated the word m_ron, which the A.V. renders

'ointment.' The word is evidently the Hebrew and Rabbinic {hebrew}

which, however, is not always the equivalent for myrrh, but seems also

to mean musk and mastic. In short, I regard it as designating any

fluid unguent or - generally speaking, 'perfume.' So common was the

use of perfumes, that Ber. vi. 6 mentions a mugmar, or a kind of

incense, which was commonly burnt after a feast. As regards the word

'alabastron,' the name was given to perfume-phials in general, even if

not made of alabaster, because the latter was so frequently used for

such flasks.

[9197]2705 Shebh. vii. 6.

[9198]2706 Jer. Demai 22 b.

[9199]2707 Ab. S. 35 b.

[9200]2708 Shabb. vi. 3.

[9201]2709 The derivation of the Rabbinic term in Buxtorf's Lexicon

(p. 1724) is certainly incorrect. I have no doubt the {hebrew} was the

foliatum of Pliny (Hist. Nat. xiii. 1, 2). In Jew. War iv. 9, 10,

Josephus seems to imply that women occasionally poured over themselves

unguents. According to Kethub. vi. 4, a woman might apparently spend a

tenth of her dowry on such things as unguents and perfumes. For, in

Kethub. 66 b we have an exaggerated account of a woman spending

upwards of 300l. on perfumes! This will at any rate prove their common

and abundant use.

[9202]2710 This is the real meaning of the verb.

[9203]2711 This is implied in the tense.

[9204]2712 It is certainly not implied, that she had her hair

dishevelled as in mourning, or as by women before drinking the waters

of jealousy.

[9205]2713 The tense implies this.

[9206]2714 ver. 39.

[9207]2715 ver. 43.

[9208]2716 In the A. V.

[9209]2717 The Talmud, with its usual exaggeration, has this story

when commenting on the reverence due by children to their parents,

that R. Ishmael's mother had complained her son would not allow her,

when he came from the Academy, to wash his feet and then drink the

water - on which the sages made the Rabbi yield! (Jer. Peah 15 c).

Again, some one came to kiss R. Jonathan's feet, because he had

induced filial reverence in his son (u. s., col. d).

[9210]2718 The one sum="upwards" of 15l.; the other=upwards of 1l.

10s.

[9211]2719 Money-lender - though perhaps not in the evil sense which

we attach to the term. At the same time, the frequent allusion to such

and to their harsh ways offers painful illustration of the social

state at the time.

[9212]2720 So rather than 'frankly' in the A. V.

[9213]2721 The points of resemblance and of difference with St. Matt.

xviii. 23 will readily appear on comparison.

[9214]2722 Comp. for ex. St. John xiii. 4.

[9215]2723 Washing: Gen. xviii. 4; xix. 2; xxiv. 32; Judg. xix. 21; 1

Sam. xxv. 41; kissing: Ex. xviii. 7; 2 Sam. xv. 5; xix. 39; anointing:

Eccl. ix. 8; Amos vi. 6, as well as Ps. xxiii. 5.

[9216]2724 Thou gavest me no water, she washed not with water but

tears; no kiss, she kissed my feet; no oil, she unguent; not to the

head, but to the feet. And yet: emphatically - into thy house I came,

&c.

[9217]2725 So literally.

[9218]2726 Mark the tense.

[9219]2727 So, properly rendered. Romanism, in this also arrogating to

man more than Christ Himself ever spoke, has it: Absolvo te, not 'thy

sins have been forgiven,' but I absolve thee!

[9220]2728 So literally.

[9221]2729 This distinction between the two modes of expression is

marked in Moed. K. 29 a: 'into peace,' as said to the living; 'in

peace,' as referring to the dead.

[9222]2730 St. Luke viii. 1-3; St. Matt. ix. 35.

[9223]2731 'Out of whom went seven devils.' Those who are curious to

see one attempt at finding a 'rational' basis for some of the

Talmudical legends about Mary Magdalene and others connected with the

history of Christ, may consult the essay of Rösch in the Studien and

Kritiken for 1873, pp. 77-115 (Die Jesus-Mythen d. Judenth.)

[9224]2732 The suggestion that the word meant 'curler of hair,' which

is made by Lightfoot, and repeated by his modern followers, depends on

entire misapprehension.

[9225]2733 In Baba Mets. 25 a, middle, R. Isaac the Magdalene is

introduced in a highly characteristic discussion about coins that are

found. His remark about three coins laid on each other like a tower

might, if it had not been connected with such a grave discussion, have

almost seemed a pun on Magdala.

[9226]2734 Jer. Erub. 22 d, end.

[9227]2735 Ber. R. 79.

[9228]2736 Jer. Taan. 69 a, line 15 from bottom.

[9229]2737 Thus in regard to another village (not mentioned either by

Relandus or Neubauer) in the Midr. on Lament. ii. 2, ed. Warsh. p. 67

b, line 13 from bottom.

[9230]2738 Midr. on Lament. ii. 2.

[9231]2739 Jer. Taan. 69 a.

[9232]2740 Jer. Taan. u.s.; Midr. on Lament. ii. 2, ed. Warsh. p. 67 b

middle.

[9233]2741 Midr. on Eccl. x. 8, ed. Warsh p. 102 b.

[9234]2742 This Synagogue is introduced in the almost blasphemous

account of the miracles of Simon ben Jochai, when he declared Tiberias

free from the defilement of dead bodies, buried there.

[9235]2743 This has been well shown by Neubauer, Géogr. de la

Palestine, pp. 217, 218.

[9236]2744 Jewish War iii. 10.

[9237]2745 Baedeker's Palastina, pp. 268, 269.

[9238]2746 It is at any rate remarkable that the Talmud (Megill. 6 a)

finds in the ancient territory of Zebulun the Chilzon ({hebrew}) so

largely used in dyeing purple and scarlet, and so very precious.

Spurious dyes of the same colour were also produced (comp. Lewysohn,

Zool. d. Talm. pp. 281-283).

[9239]2747 St. Matt. xxvii. 56.

[9240]2748 ver. 61.

[9241]2749 St. Luke xxiii. 55.

[9242]2750 ver. 56.

[9243]2751 St. Luke xxiv. 10.

[9244]2752 Seb. 62 b.

[9245]2753 Curiously enough, the Greek term x _p_tropov x (steward)

has passed into the Rabbinic Aphiterophos.

[9246]2754 St. John iv. 46-54.

[9247]2755 Delitzsch (Zeitsch. für Luther Theol. for 1876, p. 598),

seems to regard Kuzith ({hebrew}) as the Jewish equivalent of Chuza.

The word is mentioned in the Aruch (ed. Landau, p. 801 b, where the

references, however, are misquoted) as occurring in Ber. R. 23 and 51.

No existing copy of the Midrash has these references, which seem to

have been purposely omitted. It is curious that both occur in

connection with Messianic passages. In any case, however, Kuzith was

not a proper name, but some mystic designation. Lightfoot (Horæ Hebr.

on Luke viii. 3) reads in the genealogy of Haman (in Sopher. xiii. 6)

Bar Kuza. But it is really Bar Biza, 'son of contempt' - all the names

being intended as defamatory of Haman. Similarly, Lightfoot asserts

that the designation does not occur in the genealogy of Haman in the

Targum Esther. But in the Second Targum Esther (Miqraoth Gedol. Part

vi. p. 5 a) the name does occur in the genealogy as 'Bar Buzah.'

[9248]2756 Yebam. 70 a.

[9249]2757 Dr. Neubauer (Studia Bibl. p. 225) regards Chuza as an

Idumæan name, connected with the Edomite god Kos.

[9250]2758 St. Matt. ix. 27-31.

[9251]2759 St. Matt. ix. 34.

[9252]2760 St. Mark iii. 23-30.

[9253]2761 I regard St. Mark iii. 23-30 as combining the event in St.

Matt. ix. (see St. Mark iii. 23) with what is recorded in St. Matt.

xii. and St. Luke xi., and I account for this combination by the

circumstance that the latter is not related by St. Mark.

[9254]2762 St. Matt. xi. 16-19.

[9255]2763 St. Luke vii. 17.

[9256]2764 St. Matt. ix. 34.

[9257]2765 St. Mark iii. 32.

[9258]2766 St. Mark iii. 22.

[9259]2767 St. Matt. xii. 22 &c.; St. Luke xi. 14 &c.

[9260]2768 St. Matt. xi. 17, 18; St. Luke vii. 31-32.

[9261]2769 St. Matt. ix. 33, 34.

[9262]2770 At the same time I have, with not a few authorities, strong

doubts whether St. Matt. ix. 34 is not to be regarded as an

interpolation (see Westcott and Hort, New Testament). Substantially,

the charge was there; but it seems doubtful whether, in so many words,

it was made till a later period.

[9263]2771 St. Matt. xii. 46 &c.; St. Mark iii. 31 &c. St. Luke viii.

19 &c.

[9264]2772 St. Matt. ix. 11.

[9265]2773 u. s. ver. 14.

[9266]2774 Jer. Peah i. 1.

[9267]2775 An instance of this has been given in the previous chapter,

p. 567, note. Other examples of filial reverence are mentioned, some

painfully ludicrous, others touching, and accompanied by sayings which

sometimes rise to the sublime.

[9268]2776 Bengel remarks on St. Matt. xii. 46: 'Non plane hic

congruebat sensus Mariæ cum sensu Filii.'

[9269]2777 'Non spernit Matrem, sed anteponit Patrem.'

[9270]2778 St. Matt. vii. 25.

[9271]2779 It adds interest to these Solomon-like lilies that the

Mishnah designates one class of them, growing in fields and vineyards,

by the name 'royal lily' (Kil. v. 8, Bab. Talmud, p. 29 a). At the

same time, the term used by our Lord need not be confined to 'lilies'

in the strictest sense. It may represent the whole wild flora of

spring, chiefly the anemones (comp. Tristram, Nat. Hist. of the Bible,

pp. 462-465). A word with the same letters as kr_nov (though of

different meaning) is the Rabbinic Narkes, the narcissus - of course

that {hebrew} (of fields), not {hebrew} (of gardens).

[9272]2780 u.s. vi. 28-30.

[9273]2781 vii. 16-20.

[9274]2782 St. Matt. xiii. 1, 2.

[9275]2783 St. Matt. xii. 24 &c.

[9276]2784 This seems to be the view of Goebel in his 'Parabeln Jesu,'

a book to which I would here, in general, acknowledge my obligations.

The latest work on the subject (F. L. Steinmeyer, d. Par. d. Herrn,

Berlin 1884) is very disappointing.

[9277]2785 St. Matt. xiii.

[9278]2786 St. Luke x.-xvi., xviii., passim.

[9279]2787 Admonitory, hortatory - a term used in theology, of which

it is not easy to give the exact equivalent.

[9280]2788 St. Luke xi.-xiv.

[9281]2789 St. Luke xi. 14-36; St. Matt. xii. 22-45; St. Mark iii.

22-30.

[9282]2790 St. Matt. xviii., xx., xxi., xxii., xxiv., xxv.; St. Luke

xix.

[9283]2791 Even Goebel, though rightly following the purely historical

method, has, in the interest of so-called higher criticism, attempted

such artificial grouping.

[9284]2792 St. Mark iv. 11.

[9285]2793 From parab_llw, projicio, admoveo rem rei comparationis

causa (Grimm). Little can be learned from the classical definitions of

the parabol_. See Archbishop Trench on the Parables.

[9286]2794 F. L. Steinmeyer has most strangely attempted to deny this.

Yet every ancient Rabbinic work is literally full of parables. In

Sanh. 39 b we read that R. Meir's discourses consisted in third of

legal determinations, in third of Haggadah, and in third of parables.

[9287]2795 I am here referring only to the form, not the substance, of

these Jewish parables.

[9288]2796 St. Luke xv. 8-10.

[9289]2797 In the Midrash on Cant. i. i

[9290]2798 It is, indeed, possible that the framework of some of

Christ's Parables may have been adopted and adapted by later Rabbis.

No one who knows the early intercourse between Jews and Jewish

Christians would deny this à priori.

[9291]2799 Midr. on Cant. i. 1.

[9292]2800 I must here refer to the various Biblical Dictionaries, to

Professor Westcott's Introduction to the Study of the Gospels (pp. 28,

286), and to the works of Archbishop Trench and Dr. Goebel.

[9293]2801 St. Matt. xxiv. 32; St. Mark iii. 23; St. Luke v. 36.

[9294]2802 St. Luke iv. 23

[9295]2803 St. Matt. xv. 15

[9296]2804 Every reader of the Gospels will be able to distinguish

these various classes.

[9297]2805 Cremer (Lex. of N.T. Greek, p. 124) lays stress on the idea

of a comparison, which is manifestly incorrect; Goebel, with not much

better reason, on that of a narrative form.

[9298]2806 St. Luke v. 36.

[9299]2807 St. Luke vi. 39.

[9300]2808 St. Matt. xxiv. 32.

[9301]2809 St. Luke iv. 23.

[9302]2810 St. John x.

[9303]2811 St. John xv.

[9304]2812 St. Mark iv. 26-29.

[9305]2813 St. Matt. xiii. 33.

[9306]2814 vv. 45, 46.

[9307]2815 St. Mark iv. 26-29.

[9308]2816 So by Goebel.

[9309]2817 Phil. iii 17; 1 Tim. iv. 12.

[9310]2818 1 Cor. x. 6, 11.

[9311]2819 St. Matt. xiii.

[9312]2820 St. Matt. xiii. 3, and parallels.

[9313]2821 St. Matt. xiii. 34; St. Mark iv. 33, 34.

[9314]2822 In the Old Testament there are parabolic descriptions and

utterances - especially in Ezekiel (xv.; xvi.; xvii.; xix.), and a

fable (Judg. ix. 7-15), but only two Parables: the one typical (2 Sam.

xii. 1-6), the other symbolical (Is. v. 1-6).

[9315]2823 St. Matt. xiii. 10, and parallels.

[9316]2824 St. Matt. xiii. 36, 44-52.

[9317]2825 St. Matt. xi. 13-17.

[9318]2826 St. Matt. xiii. 1-9, 24-33.

[9319]2827 So even Goebel (i. pp. 33-42, and especially p. 38.)

[9320]2828 St. Matt. xiii. 13-15.

[9321]2829 Is. vi. 9, 10.

[9322]2830 St. Matt. xiii.

[9323]2831 The correct reading in St. Matt. xiii. 18 is to_

spe_rantov, not spe_rontov as in the T. R.

[9324]2832 St. Mark iv. 26-29.

[9325]2833 With the definite article - not 'a Sower,' as in our A.V.,

but the Sower.

[9326]2834 Arach. 25 a, line 18 from bottom.

[9327]2835 par_ t_n _d_n, not par_ t_n _gr_n. I cannot understand how

this road could be within the ploughed and sowed field. Our view is

further confirmed by St. Luke viii. 5, where the seed is described as

'trodden down' - evidently on the highway.

[9328]2836 Comp. the slight variations in the three Gospels.

[9329]2837 Comp. the chapter on the Temptation.

[9330]2838 St. Luke viii. 14.

[9331]2839 St. Mark iv. 26-29.

[9332]2840 I would here remark in general, that I have always adopted

what seemed to me the best attested readings, and endeavoured to

translate literally, preserving, where it seemed desirable, even the

succession of the words.

[9333]2841 This is a Hebraism - explaining the Hebrew use of the verb

{hebrew} in analogous circumstances.

[9334]2842 Kil. i. 1.

[9335]2843 Jer. Kil. 26 d.

[9336]2844 Ber. R. 28 ed. Warsh. p. 53 a, about the middle.

[9337]2845 The tense should here be marked.

[9338]2846 The Greek ziz_nion is represented by the Hebrew {hebrew} or

{hebrew}.

[9339]2847 The expression is of great importance. The right reading is

_p_speiren (insuper sero - to sow above), not _speire (sowed).

[9340]2848 St. Matt. xiii. 36.

[9341]2849 St. John vi. 66-70.

[9342]2850 Æon, or 'age,' without the article in ver. 40, and so it

should also be in ver. 39.

[9343]2851 With the two articles: the well-known oven of the

well-known fire - Gehenna.

[9344]2852 Without here anticipating what may have to be said as to

Christ's teaching of the final fate of the wicked, it cannot be

questioned that at that period the doctrine of endless punishment was

the common belief of the Jews. I am aware, that dogmas should not be

based upon parabolic teaching, but in the present instance the Parable

would have been differently worded, if such dogmatic teaching had not

been in the mind of Speaker and hearers.

[9345]2853 Certainly the Sinapis nigra, and not the Salvadora persica.

[9346]2854 St. Matt. xvii. 20.

[9347]2855 Ber. 31 a.

[9348]2856 Nidd. v. 2.

[9349]2857 Vayyik. R. 31, ed. Warsh., vol. iii. p. 48 a.

[9350]2858 St. Luke xiii. 18, 19.

[9351]2859 Comp. Tristram, Nat. Hist. of the Bible, p. 472. The

quotations in Buxtorf's Lex. Rabb. pp. 822, 823, on which the supposed

Rabbinic illustrations of the growth of the plant are based

(Lightfoot, Schöttgen, Wetstein, even Vorstius and Winer), are wholly

inapt, being taken from legendary descriptions of the future glory of

Palestine - the exaggerations being of the grossest character.

[9352]2860 Canon Tristram's rendering of the verb (u. s. p. 473) as

merely perching or resting does not give the real meaning of it. He

has very aptly noticed how fond birds are of the mustard-seed.

[9353]2861 St. Mark iv. 32.

[9354]2862 Jer. Shabb. 16 c.

[9355]2863 Ezek. xxxi. 6, 12; Dan. iv. 12, 14, 21, 22.

[9356]2864 Ezek. xvii. 23.

[9357]2865 Men. vii.

[9358]2866 Erub. viii. 2; 83 a.

[9359]2867 Comp. Herzfeld, Handelsgesch. d. Juden, pp. 183-185.

[9360]2868 Comp. Gen. xviii. 6; Judg. vi. 19; 1 Sam. i. 24; Jos. Ant.

ix. 4, 5; Babha B. 9 a, &c.

[9361]2869 St. Matt. xiii. 36; comp. ver. 10, and St. Mark iv. 10.

[9362]2870 St. John iv. 35.

[9363]2871 On Is. lxi. 10, we read the following beautiful

illustration, alike of the words of our Lord in St. Matt. xiii. 16,

and of the exclamation of the woman in St. Luke xi. 27: 'Seven

garments there are with which the Holy One, blessed be His Name,

clothed Himself, from the time the world was created to the hour when

He will execute punishment on Edom the wicked (Rome). When He created

the world, He clothed himself with glory and splendour (Ps. civ. 1);

when He manifested Himself by the Red Sea, He clothed Himself with

majesty (Ps. xciii. 1); when He gave the Law, He clothed Himself with

strength (ib.); when He forgives the iniquity of Israel, He clothes

Himself in white (Dan. vii. 9); when He executeth punishment on the

nations of the world, He clothes himself with vengeance (Is. lix. 17).

The sixth garment He will put on in the hour when the Messiah shall be

revealed. Then shall He clothe Himself with righteousness (ib.). The

seventh garment is when He taketh vengeance on Edom, then shall He be

clothed in red (Is. lxiii. 2). And the garment with which in the

future He will clothe Messiah shall shine forth from one end of the

world to the other, according to Is. lxi. 10. And Israel shall enjoy

His light, and say, Blessed the hour in which Messiah was born;

blessed the womb which bare Him; blessed the generation which seeth,

blessed the eye which is deemed worthy to behold Him, because that the

opening of His lips is blessing and peace, His speech rest to the

soul, and security and rest are in His Word. And on His tongue pardon

and forgiveness; His prayer the incense of accepted sacrifice; His

entreaty holiness and purity. Blessed are ye Israel - what is reserved

for you! Even as it is written' (Ps. xxxi. 20; 19 in our A. V.).

(Pesiqta, ed. Bub. p. 149 a and b.)

[9364]2872 The _mporov - in opposition to the k_pjlov, or huckster,

small trader - is the en gros merchant who travels from place to place

and across waters (from p_rov) to purchase.

[9365]2873 B. Mets. 25 a, b.

[9366]2874 But the instance quoted by Wetstein (N. Test. i. p. 407)

from Babha Mez. 28 b is inapt, and depends on entire misunderstanding

of the passage. The Rabbi who found the treasure, so far from

claiming, urged its owner to take it back.

[9367]2875 The so-called Rabbinic illustrations are inapt, except as

per contra. Thus, on St. Matt. xiii. 17 it is to be remarked, that in

Rabbinic opinion revelation of God's mysteries would only be granted

to those who were righteous or learned. The Midr. on Eccl. i. 7

contains the following Parable in illustration (comp. Dan. ii. 21): A

matron is asked, to which of two that would borrow she would lend

money - to a rich or a poor man. And when she answers: To a rich man,

since even if he lost it, he would be able to repay, she is told that

similarly God gives not wisdom to fools, who would employ it for

theatres and baths, &c., but to the sages, who make use of it in the

Academies. A similar and even more strange explanation of Exod. xv. 26

occurs Ber. 40 a, where it is shown that God supports the full, and

not, as man, an empty vessel. Hence, if we begin to learn, or repeat

what we have learned, we shall learn more, and conversely also.

Further, on ver. 12 we note, that 'to have taken away what one hath'

is a Jewish proverbial expression: 'that which is in their hand shall

be taken from them' (Ber. R. 20, ed. Warsh. p. 38 b, last two lines).

Expressions similar to ver. 16 are used by the Rabbis, for ex. Chag.

14 b. In regard to ver. 17, R. Eliezer inferred from Exod. xv. 2 that

servantmaids saw at the Red Sea what neither Ezekiel nor the prophets

had seen, which he corroborates from Ezek. i. 1 and Hos. xii. 10

(Mechilta, ed. Weiss p. 44 a). Another and much more beautiful

parallelism has been given before. On ver. 19 it ought to be remarked

that the Wicked One was not so much represented by the Rabbis as the

Enemy of the Kingdom of God, but as that of individuals - indeed, was

often described as identical with the evil impulse (Yetser haRa, comp.

Chag. 16 a; B. Bathr. 16 a; Succ. 52 a). On ver. 22 we remark, that

not riches, but poverty, was regarded by the Rabbis as that which

choked the good seed. On ver. 39, we may remark a somewhat similar

expression in B. Mez. 83 b: 'Let the Lord of the Vineyard come and

remove the thorns.' On ver. 42, the expression 'oven of fire,' for

Gehenna, is the popular Jewish one ({hebrew}). Similarly, the

expression, 'gnashing of teeth,' chiefly characteristic of the anger

and jealousy of those in Gehinnom, occurs in the Midrash on Eccl. i.

15. On ver. 44 we refer to the remarks and note on that Parable (p.

595). In connection with ver. 46, we remember that, in Shabb. 119 a, a

story is told concerning a pearl for which a man had given his whole

fortune, hoping thereby to prevent the latter being alienated from him

(comp. Ber. R. 11). Lastly, in connection with ver. 47 we notice, that

the comparison of men with fishes is a common Jewish one (Abod. Zar. 3

b; 4 a).

[9368]2876 The definite article (St. Mark iv. 36) marks it as 'the'

ship - a well-known boat which always bore Him.

[9369]2877 Phil. ii. 6.

[9370]2878 St. Mark iv. 37.

[9371]2879 Is. vi. 9, 10.

[9372]2880 Ps. cvi. 9; cvii. 25; Is. li. 10; Nah. i. 4-7; Hab. iii. 8.

[9373]2881 St. Matt. and St. Luke.

[9374]2882 St. Mark.

[9375]2883 St. Matt.

[9376]2884 St. Mark and St. Luke.

[9377]2885 St. Mark probably from St. Peter.

[9378]2886 From the size of these boats it seems unlikely, that any

but His closest followers would have found room in the ship. Besides,

the language of those who called for help and the answer of Christ

imply the same thing.

[9379]2887 St. Mark iv. 38.

[9380]2888 Ps. cvi. 9; Nah. i. 4.

[9381]2889 St. Luke iv. 39.

[9382]2890 St. Mark ix. 25.

[9383]2891 St. Mark i. 27.

[9384]2892 So literally.

[9385]2893 The supposed Rabbinic parallels in Wetstein (Babha Mez. 59

b) and Wünsche's (Chull. 7 a) works are quite inapplicable.

[9386]2894 The strangest commentation, perhaps, is that of Volkmar

(Marcus, pp. 307-312). For I cannot here perceive any kind of

parallelism with the history of Jonah, nor yet see any references to

the history of St. Paul's shipwreck.

[9387]2895 Ps. viii. 4-8.

[9388]2896 Rom. viii 20.

[9389]2897 Ber. R. 12.

[9390]2898 A fact may be the basis of a symbol; but a symbol can never

be the basis of a fact. The former is the principle of Divine history,

the latter of human legend. But, even so, legend could never have

arisen but for a belief in Divine history: it is the counterfeit coin

of Revelation.

[9391]2899 In the history related in St. Matt. xiv. 22, &c. the

embarkation was much later (see next note), and it is expressly stated

that 'the wind was contrary.' But even there, when it ceased they were

'immediately' on shore (St. John vi. 21), although the distance

formerly traversed had been rather less than three-fourths of the way

(twenty-five or thirty furlongs, St. John vi. 19). At that place the

whole distance across would be five or six miles. But the passage from

Capernaum to Gerasa would not be so long as that.

[9392]2900 The distinction between the two evenings seems marked in

St. Matt. xiv. 15, as compared with verse 23. In both verses precisely

the same expression is used. But between the first and the second

evening a considerable interval of time must be placed.

[9393]2901 Comp. Tristram's 'Land of Israel,' p. 465; Bädeker's

(Socin) Palestina, p. 267. The objection in Riehm's Handwörterb. p.

454, that Gerasa did not form part of the Decapolis manifestly derives

no real support from St. Mark v. 20. The two facts are in no way

inconsistent. All other localisations are impossible, since the text

requires close proximity to the lake. Professor Socin describes this

cliff as steep 'as nowhere else by the lake.'

[9394]2902 In this, as in all other instances, I can only indicate the

critical results at which I have arrived. For the grounds, on which

these conclusions are based, I must refer to the works which bear on

the respective subjects.

[9395]2903 St. Matt. viii. 28.

[9396]2904 See Appendix XIII., 'Angelology and Demonology:' and

Appendix XVI., 'Jewish Views about Demons and the Demonised.'

Archdeacon Farrar has misunderstood the reference of Otho (Lex. Rabb.

146). The affections mentioned in Jer. Terum. 40 b are not treated as

'all demoniacs;' on the contrary, most of them, indeed all, with one

exception, are expressly stated to be indications of mental disease

(comp. also Chag. 3 b). The quotations of Gfrörer are, as too often,

for a purpose, and untrustworthy, except after examination of the

context.

[9397]2905 St. Mark v. 3, 4.

[9398]2906 'Ware no clothes' (St. Luke viii. 27) may, however, refer

only to the upper, not the under-garments.

[9399]2907 St. Matt. viii. 28.

[9400]2908 St. Mark v. 5.

[9401]2909 In his endeavour to represent the demonised state as a

species of mania, which was affected by the Presence of Christ,

Archdeacon Farrar makes the following statement: 'The presence, the

look, the voice of Christ, even before He addressed these sufferers,

seems always to have calmed and overawed them.' But surely the very

opposite of this is the fact, and the first effect of contact with

Christ was not calm, but a paroxysm.

[9402]2910 St. Mark v. 6; St. Luke viii. 28.

[9403]2911 Both St. Mark and St. Luke have it: 'Jesus, Son of the Most

High God.'

[9404]2912 So substantially in St. Luke, as in St. Mark.

[9405]2913 This is one of the difficulties mentioned by Dean Plumptre.

Archdeacon Farrar seems to think that the man imagined '6000 devils

were in possession of his soul.' His statement, that it 'was a

thoroughly Jewish belief' that unclean spirits should pass into the

swine, I must take leave to deny. One or another disease, such as

rabies, were, indeed, attributed by some Rabbis to the agency of evil

spirits - but there is no ground for either the general or the

specific statement of Dr. Farrar as regards this 'Jewish belief.'

[9406]2914 The common Rabbinic word for Legion is, indeed, Ligyon or

Ligyona, but the expression (Ber. 51 a) {hebrew} (Istalginith)

{hebrew} cannot mean anything else than a legion of hurtful spirits.

[9407]2915 Ber. 51 a.

[9408]2916 St. Mark v. 13.

[9409]2917 The verb _pitr_pw is used both in the active sense of

permitting, and in that of not hindering. As to the latter use of the

word, comp. specially St. Matt. xix. 8; St. Mark x. 4.

[9410]2918 This is the view of Archdeacon Farrar. The Gadara of which

the poets Meleager and Philodemus were natives was, of course, not the

scene of this miracle.

[9411]2919 As this healing of the demonised may be regarded as the

'test-case' on the general question, I have entered more fully on the

discussion. The arguments in favour of the general view taken of the

demonised are so clearly and forcibly stated by Archbishop Trench (on

'The Miracles') and in 'The Speaker's Commentary' (N. Test. vol. i. p.

44), that it seems needless to reiterate them. To me at least it seems

difficult to understand, how any reader of the narrative, who comes to

it without preconceived opinions, can arrive at any other conclusion

than that either the whole must be rejected as mythical, or else be

received as implying that there was a demonised state, different from

madness; that Jesus treated the present as such; bade the unclean

spirits go out, and by His word banished them. The objection as to the

morality of the destruction of the herd seems scarcely more weighty

than the sneer of Strauss, that the devils must have been stupid in

immediately destroying their new habitations. The question of morality

cannot even be raised, since Jesus did not command - only not hinder -

the devils entering into the swine, and as for the destruction of

their new dwellings, so far from being stupid, it certainly did secure

their undisturbed continuance in the country and the withdrawal of

Jesus. All attempts to adapt this miracle to our modern experience,

and the ideas based upon it, by leaving out or rationalising one or

another trait in the narrative, are emphatically failures. We repeat:

the history must be received as it stands - or wholly rejected.

[9412]2920 comp. St. Luke viii. 45; St. Mark v. 31.

[9413]2921 Jesu v. Nazar. ii. 2, p. 472.

[9414]2922 Strauss, Leben Jesu ii. p. 135.

[9415]2923 Jos. Jewish War vi. 1. 8, close.

[9416]2924 The name, a well-known O.T. one (Numb. xxxii. 41; Judg., x.

3), does not occur in Rabbinic literature till after the Middle Ages.

[9417]2925 Keim starts the theory that, according to St. Matthew,

Jairus was an _rcwn in the sense of a civil magistrate. This, in order

to make St. Matthew contradict St. Mark and St. Luke, as if _rcwn were

not one of the most common designations of Synagogue-rulers.

[9418]2926 The particulars of her history must be gathered from a

comparison of the three Gospels.

[9419]2927 A woman came of age at twelve years and one day, and boys

at thirteen years and one day.

[9420]2928 Godet points out a like summarisation in St. Matthew's

account of the Centurion's servant.

[9421]2929 The following are the instances in which silence was

enjoined: - St. Matt. viii. 4 (St. Mark i. 44; St. Luke v. 14); St.

Matt. ix. 30; xii. 16; St. Mark iii. 12; v. 43 (St. Luke viii. 56);

St. Mark vii. 36; viii. 26.

[9422]2930 In general, we would once more thus formulate our views: In

the Days of Christ men learned first to believe in His Person, and

then in His Word; in the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit we learr

first to believe in His Word, and then in His Person.

[9423]2931 Shabb. 110 a and b.

[9424]2932 Such as the ashes of an Ostrich-Egg, carried in summer in a

linen, in winter in a cotton rag; or a barley-corn found in the dung

of a white she-ass, &c.

[9425]2933 In Ber. 43 b, it is explained to refer to such shoes as had

'clouts on the top of clouts.'

[9426]2934 Shabb. 114 a.

[9427]2935 Derekh Erets s. x towards the end.

[9428]2936 Babha Mez. 52 a; Chull. 84 b.

[9429]2937 Accordingly, when a person applied for relief in food,

inquiry was be made as to his means, but not if he applied for raiment

(Babha B 9 a).

[9430]2938 Erub. 65 b.

[9431]2939 Jer. Horay. 48 a, 4 lines from bottom.

[9432]2940 Babha Mez. 85 a.

[9433]2941 But I admit that the passage (Vayyik. R. 2) is not quite

clear. The Maaphoreth there mentioned may not have been an official

dress, but one which the man otherwise used, and which was only

specially endeared to him by the recollection that he had worn it at

his ordination.

[9434]2942 Ber. 28 a.

[9435]2943 Horay. 13 b.

[9436]2944 In general, I would here acknowledge my indebtedness on the

very difficult subject of dress to Sachs, Beiträge z. Sprach- u.

Alterth.-Forsch.; to the Articles in Levy's Dictionaries; and

especially to Brüll, Trachten d. Juden. The Article in Hamburger's

Real-Encykl. is little more than a repetition of Brüll's. From other

writers I have not been able to derive any help.

[9437]2945 Shabb. 120 a; Jer. Shabb. 15 d.

[9438]2946 So Landau renders one of the words in Shabb. 120 a. I need

scarcely say that the rendering is very doubtful.

[9439]2947 Deiekh Erest R. x p. 33 d.

[9440]2948 Brüll regards this as controversial to the practices of the

early Christians. But he confounds sects with the Church.

[9441]2949 Shabb. 129 a; comp. Pes. 112 a.

[9442]2950 Jer. Shabb. vi. 2.

[9443]2951 St. Matt. x. 10.

[9444]2952 B. Bathra 58 a, lines 2 and 3 from top.

[9445]2953 On the other hand, to walk about with shoes loosed was

regarded as a mark of pride.

[9446]2954 Exod. xiv. 8.

[9447]2955 The like expression occurs in the Targum on Judg. v. 9.

[9448]2956 Kel. xxix. 1.

[9449]2957 Pes. 111 b. See also the somewhat profane etymology of

{hebrew} in Shabb. 77 b, {hebrew}.

[9450]2958 Also, Kittanitha, and Kittunita.

[9451]2959 Jer. Shan. 20 c, bottom.

[9452]2960 Baha B. 57 b.

[9453]2961 Meod. K.14 a.

[9454]2962 St. Matt. x. 10, and parallels.

[9455]2963 St. John xix. 23.

[9456]2964 As to the mode of weaving such garments, see the pictorial

illustration in Braunius, Vest. Sacred. Hebræor., which is reproduced,

with full details for various other works, in Hartmanns Hebr. am

Putzt. vol. i., explanatory notes being added at the beginning of vol.

iii. Sammter's note in his edition of B. Mezia, p. 151 a, is only a

reproduction of Hartmann's remarks.

[9457]2965 Comp. Rev. i. 13.

[9458]2966 It was worn outside (Jer. Ber. 14 c, top). This is the

girdle which was not to be worn in the Temple, probably as being that

of a person engaged in business.

[9459]2967 This is the explanation of the Aruch (ed. Landau, i. p. 157

b).

[9460]2968 Jer. Ber. 14 c, top.

[9461]2969 Kel. xxix. 1; Ber. 23 b; 24 b, in the sense of kerchief

worn in an accessible position; Pesiqt. 15 b, as lying close to the

body and yet contracting dust; Jer. Ber. 4 c, line 14 from top, as

used for wrapping the upper part of the body.

[9462]2970 This passage is both curious and difficult. It seems to

imply that the Aphqarsin was a garment worn in summer, close to the

body, and having sleeves.

[9463]2971 Jer. Moed, K. 83 d.

[9464]2972 Nidd. 48 b.

[9465]2973 Sanh. 102 b, and often.

[9466]2974 Sot. 22 b.

[9467]2975 Jer, Sanh. 28 c.

[9468]2976 Menach. 37 b.

[9469]2977 Siphré, ed. Friedmann, p. 117 a.

[9470]2978 Menach. iv. 1.

[9471]2979 Targ. Ps.-Jon. on Numb. xvi. 2.

[9472]2980 u. s. on Numb. xv. 38.

[9473]2981 The number of knots and threads at present counted are, of

course, later additions. The little tractate Tsitsith Kirchheim,

Septem Libri Talm. P. pp. 22-24 is merely a summary. The various

authorities on the subject - and not a few have been consulted - are

more or less wanting in clearness and defective. Comp. p. 277, note 2,

of this volume.

[9474]2982 The difference between it and the Aphqarsin seems to be,

that the latter was worn and fastened inside the dress. The Maaphoreth

would in some measure combine the uses of the Sudar and the Aphqarsin.

[9475]2983 Tos. Megill. iv. p. 45 b, lines 17 and 16 from bottom.

[9476]2984 St. John xix. 23.

[9477]2985 Canon Westcott (Speaker's Comment. on St. John xix. 23)

seems to imply that the girdle was worn outside the loose outer

garment. This was not the case.

[9478]2986 St. Matt. xviii. 5.

[9479]2987 On this subject I must take leave to refer to the Bibl.

Cyclopaedias and to 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 220-224.

[9480]2988 Zebhach. 19 a, b.

[9481]2989 As the question is of considerable practical importance,

the following, as bearing upon it, may be noticed. From Jer. Ber. 4 c,

we gather: 1. That at one time it was the practice to wear the

phylacteries all day long, in order to pass as pious. This is

denounced as a mark of hypocrisy. 2. That it was settled, that

phylacteries should be worn during a considerable part of the day, but

not the whole day. [In Ber. 23 a to 24 a we have rules and discussions

about depositing them under certain circumstances, and where to place

them at night.] 3. That it was deemed objectionable to wear them only

during prayer. 4. That celebrated Rabbis did not deem it necessary

always to wear the phylacteries both on the head and on the arm. This

seems to prove that their obligation could not have been regarded as

absolutely binding. Thus, R. Jochanan wore those for the head only in

winter, but not in summer, because then he did not wear a headgear. As

another illustration, that the wearing of phylacteries was not deemed

absolutely requisite, the following passage may be quoted (Sanh. xi.

3): 'It is more culpable to transgress the words of the Scribes than

those of the Torah.' He that says, There are no phylacteries,

transgresses the word of the Torah, and is not to be regarded as a

rebel (literally, is free); but he who says, There are five

compartments (instead of four), to add to the words of the Scribes, he

is guilty.

[9482]2990 St. John xix. 23.

[9483]2991 I find that the lowest price mentioned for an upper garment

was 7½ dinars, or about 4s. 7d. (Jer. Kilay. ix. 1). The more common

price, however, seems to have been 12 dinars, or about 7s. 6d. The

cost of making seems to have been 8 dinars, or about 5s. (Jer. Babha

Mets. vi. 1), leaving 4 dinars, or 2s. 6d., for the material. Of

course, the latter might be much more expensive, and the cost of the

garment increased accordingly.

[9484]2992 This, however, does not necessarily follow, although in New

Testament language kraspedon seems to bear that meaning. Comp. the

excellent work of Braunius (Vest. Sac. Heb. pp. 72, 73 - not p. 55, as

Schleusner notes).

[9485]2993 So literally in St. Mark's Gospel.

[9486]2994 This gives the full meaning - but it is difficult to give a

literal translation which would give the entire meaning of the

original.

[9487]2995 The Revised Version renders it: 'And straightway Jesus,

perceiving in Himself that the power proceeding from Him had gone

forth, turned Him about.' Mark the position of the first comma. In the

Speaker's Commentary it is rendered: 'And immediately Jesus, having

perceived in Himself that the virtue had gone forth from Him.' Dean

Plumptre translates: 'Knowing fully in Himself the virtue that had

gone out from Him.'

[9488]2996 The arrangement of the words in the A.V. is entirely

misleading. The word 'immediately' refers to His turning round, not to

His perceiving in Himself.

[9489]2997 St. Luke viii. 47.

[9490]2998 So literally.

[9491]2999 St. John xi. 6.

[9492]3000 I adopt the reading parako_sav which seems to me better

rendered by 'overhearing' than by 'not heeding,' as in the Revised

Version.

[9493]3001 The word unquestionably means, literally, Teacher - but in

the sense of Rabbi, or Master.

[9494]3002 Those who believe in an 'antiPetrine' tendency in the

Gospel by St. Luke must find it difficult to account for the

prominence given to him in the Third Gospel.

[9495]3003 I confess myself unable to see any real discrepancy between

the accounts of St. Mark and St. Luke, such as Strauss, Keim, and

others have tried to establish. In St. Mark it is: 'He suffered no man

to accompany Him' (whither?); in St. Luke: 'He suffered not any man to

enter in with Him.'

[9496]3004 They are specially called 'flutes for the dead' (B. Mez.

vi. 1): {hebrew}.

[9497]3005 Is. xlii. 3.

[9498]3006 The reading which accordingly seems best is that adopted by

Westcott and Hort, Taleiq_ ko_m. The Aramaic or Rabbinic for maiden is

either Talyetha or Talyutha ({hebrew}). In the second Targum on Esther

ii. 7, 8, the reading is {hebrew} (Talutha), where Levy conjectures

the reading {hebrew} (Talitha) or else Talyetha. The latter seems also

the proper equivalent of taleiq_, while the reading 'Talitha' is very

uncertain. As regards the second word, qum [pronounced kum], most

writers have, without difficulty, shown that it should be qumi, not

qum. Nevertheless, the same command is spelt {hebrew} in the Talmud

(as it is pronounced in the Syriac) when a woman is addressed. In

Shabb. 110 b, the command qum, as addressed to a woman suffering from

a bloody flux, occurs not less than seven times in that one page

({hebrew}).

[9499]3007 St. Mark vii. 37.

[9500]3008 We cannot call the trivial objections urged other than

'cavils.'

[9501]3009 According to Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. vii. 18) there was a

statue in Paneas in commemoration of this event, which was said to

have been erected by this woman to Christ.

[9502]3010 Jesu v. Nazar. ii. 2, p. 475.

[9503]3011 The passage which Strauss quotes from Bertholdt (Christol.

Jud. p. 179), is from a later Midrash, that on Proverbs. No one would

think of deriving purely Jewish doctrine either from the Sohar or from

IV. Esdras, which is of post-Christian date, and strongly tinged with

Christian elements. Other passages, however, might be quoted in favour

of this view (comp. Weber, Altsynagog. Theol. pp. 351, 352), and on

the other side, Hamburger, Real-Encykl. (II. Abth. 'Belebung der

Todten'). The matter will be discussed in the sequel.

[9504]3012 2 Tim. i. 10.

[9505]3013 Although in Ber. R. 23 the origin of that name is rightly

traced to the Emperor Tiberius, it is characteristic that the Talmud

tries otherwise to derive the name of what afterwards was the sacred

capital of Palestinian Rabbinism, some explaining that it lay in the

navel (tibura) of the land, others paraphrasing the name 'because the

view was good' (Meg. 6 a). Rabbinic ingenuity declared it one of the

cities fortified since the time of Joshua, so as to give it the

privileges attaching to such.

[9506]3014 St. Mark vi. 1.

[9507]3015 St. Luke iv. 16-31.

[9508]3016 Compare Chapters X. and XI.

[9509]3017 St. Mark vi. 3.

[9510]3018 They seem to have settled in Capernaum, having followed

Jesus to that place on His first removal to it. We can readily

understand, that their continuance in Nazareth would have been

difficult. The death of Joseph is implied in his not being mentioned

in the later history of Jesus.

[9511]3019 St. Mark vi. 3.

[9512]3020 St. Mark vi. 2.

[9513]3021 St. Matt. ix. 36-38.

[9514]3022 St. Luke x. 2.

[9515]3023 Comp. St. Matt. x. 26 with St. Luke xii. 1, 2.

[9516]3024 So in St. Matt. ix. 36.

[9517]3025 St. Matt. x. 5 to the end.

[9518]3026 St. Matt. x. 5-15.

[9519]3027 ver. 15.

[9520]3028 St. Mark vi. 7-11; St. Luke ix. 1-5.

[9521]3029 St. Mark vi. 7.

[9522]3030 So also in St. Matthew and in St. Mark. But this

'authority' sprang from the power which he gave them.

[9523]3031 Dean Plumptre remarks: 'The words ("raise the dead") are

omitted by the best MSS.'

[9524]3032 Weiss (Matth. Evang. p. 262) has the curious idea that the

prohibitions about money, &c., refer to their not making gain on their

journey.

[9525]3033 Sandals, but not shoes. As regards the marked difference

about 'the staff,' Ebrard (Evang. Gesch. p. 459) points out the

agreement of thought in all the Gospels. Nothing was to be taken -

they were to go as they stood, without preparation or provision.

Sometimes there was a secret receptacle at the top of the staff to

hold valuables, or, in the case of the poor, water (Kel. xvii. 16).

[9526]3034 Comp. for this latter aspect 1 Tim. v. 18.

[9527]3035 According to Jewish Law, 'the labourers' (the{hebrew}, at

least), would be secured their food. Not so always, however, slaves

(Gitt. 12 a). In general, the Rabbinic Law of slavery is exceeding

harsh - far more so than that of the Pentateuch (comp. an abstract of

the Laws of Slavery in Fassel, Mos.-Rabb. Civil-Recht, vol. ii. pp.

393-406).

[9528]3036 The direction is recorded by St. Matthew only. But St.

Matt. xxviii. 19 would, if it were necessary, sufficiently prove that

this is not a Judaistic limitation.

[9529]3037 Sanh. 15 b; Ned. 53 b.

[9530]3038 Jer. Abhod. Z 44 d.

[9531]3039 Jer. Sheq. i. 5, p. 46 b.

[9532]3040 Ab. i. 13.

[9533]3041 Ab. iv. 5; Bekhor. 29 a.

[9534]3042 At the same time the statement in Bekhor. 29 a, that 'if

needful money was to be paid for the acquisition of learning,'

according to Prov. xxiii. 23 ('by the truth'), implies that the rule

cannot always have been strictly observed.

[9535]3043 The Manal ({hebrew}) or shoe, in contradistinction to the

Sandal ({hebrew}), as in Jer. Shabb. 8 a.

[9536]3044 Ber. ix. 5.

[9537]3045 The Pundah ({hebrew}), or Aphundah ({hebrew}). Comp. for

ex. Jer. Shabb. 12 c.

[9538]3046 St. Luke ii. 49.

[9539]3047 Sanh. x. 3.

[9540]3048 Deut. xiii. 17.

[9541]3049 The explanations of this expression generally offered need

not here be repeated.

[9542]3050 Jer. Peah 16 a.

[9543]3051 Sanh. 64 a.

[9544]3052 According to Gen. xiii. 3.

[9545]3053 Arach. 16 b, lines 12 and 11 from bottom.

[9546]3054 So common, indeed, was this view as to have become

proverbial. Thus, it was said concerning learned descendants of a

learned man, that 'the Torah returned into its Akhsanya ((xenia),' or

hospice (Baba Mez. 85 a, bis, in the curious story about the

successful attempts made to convert to study the dissolute son of a

great Rabbi).

[9547]3055 St. Matt. x. 1-15.

[9548]3056 St. Matt. x. 16-23.

[9549]3057 vv. 16-18.

[9550]3058 ver. 23.

[9551]3059 Dan. vii. 13.

[9552]3060 On Esther viii. 2, ed. Warsh. p. 120 b.

[9553]3061 On Cant. ii. 14.

[9554]3062 The question of the constitution and jurisdiction of the

various Sanhedrin will be discussed in another place.

[9555]3063 St. Matt. x. 17.

[9556]3064 ver. 18.

[9557]3065 vv. 21, 22.

[9558]3066 St. John xi. 48.

[9559]3067 St. Luke xxi. 29-31.

[9560]3068 St. Matt. xxi. 33-46, and the parallels.

[9561]3069 St. Matt. xvi. 28, and parallels.

[9562]3070 St. Matt. xxiv. and parallels.

[9563]3071 St. Matt. xxiv. 34; St. Mark xiii.30; St. Luke xxi. 32.

[9564]3072 St. Matt. xxv. 1-30.

[9565]3073 Sot. ix. 15; comp. Sanh. 97 a to 99 a, passim.

[9566]3074 Hos. xii. 12.

[9567]3075 Ex. ii. 15.

[9568]3076 1 Sam. xix. 12; comp. Bemidb. R. 23, ed. Warsh. p. 86 b,

and Tanch.

[9569]3077 St. Matt. x. 24-34.

[9570]3078 So Ber. 58 b; Siphra on Lev. xxv. 23; Ber. R. 49; Shem. R.

42; Midr. on Ps. xxvii. 4.

[9571]3079 This is undoubtedly the correct reading, and not Beelzebub.

Any reference to the Baalzebub, or 'fly-god' of 2 Kings i. 2, seems,

rationally, out of the question.

[9572]3080 Zebhul ({hebrew}) is also the name of the fourth of the

seven heavens in which Jewish mysticism located the heavenly Jerusalem

with its Temple, at whose altar Michael ministered (Chag. 12 b).

[9573]3081 Jer. Ber. 13 b.

[9574]3082 The primary meaning is: manuring (land) with dung.

[9575]3083 Abod. Z. 18 b, and often.

[9576]3084 It could not possibly mean, as has been supposed, 'lord of

dung,' because dung is {hebrew} and not {hebrew}.

[9577]3085 This alone explains the meaning of Beelzebul. Neither

Beelzebub nor Baalzebul were names given by the Jews to any demon, but

Beelzebul, the 'lord of sacrificing to idols,' would certainly be the

designation of what they regarded as the chief of the demons.

[9578]3086 St. Matt. x. 26.

[9579]3087 Mark the same meaning of the expression in St. Luke viii.

17; xii. 2.

[9580]3088 Lev. xviii. 5.

[9581]3089 Sanh. 74 a comp. Yoma 82 a.

[9582]3090 I confess myself unable to understand the bearing of the

special pleading of Wünsche against this inference from Sanh. 74 a.

His reasoning is certainly incorrect.

[9583]3091 The Isar ({hebrew}), or assarion, is expressly and

repeatedly stated in Rabbinic writings to be the twenty-forth part of

a dinar, and hence not a halfpenny farthing, but about the third of a

penny. Comp. Herzfeld, Handelsgeschichte, pp. 180-182.

[9584]3092 Ber. R. 79, ed. Warsh. p. 142 b; Jer. Shebh. ix. 1; Midr.

on Eccl. x. 8; on Esth. i. 9; on Ps. xvii. 14.

[9585]3093 This is the literal rendering.

[9586]3094 Chull. 7 b; comp. also the even more realistic expression,

Shabb. 107 b.

[9587]3095 Pesiqta 18 a.

[9588]3096 This appears more clearly when we translate literally (ver.

32): 'Who shall confess in Me' - and again: 'in him will I also

confess.'

[9589]3097 St. Matt. x. 34.

[9590]3098 The original is very peculiar: 'Think not that I came to

cast peace on the earth,' as a sower casts the seed into the ground.

[9591]3099 The meaning of the expression, losing and finding one's

life, appears more markedly by attending to the tenses in the text:

'He that found his life shall lose it, and he that lost his life for

My sake shall find it.'

[9592]3100 B. Mets 33 a.

[9593]3101 Especially if he taught him the highest of all lore, the

Talmud, or explained the reason for the meaning of what it contained.

[9594]3102 On Ruth i. 17.

[9595]3103 Ber. R. 56, on Gen. xxii. 6.

[9596]3104 St. Matt. x. 40-42.

[9597]3105 Comp. for example the long discussion in Ber. 63 b.

[9598]3106 1 Kings xviii. 4.

[9599]3107 Sanh. 39 b.

[9600]3108 According to Is. viii. 16.

[9601]3109 Ber. R. 42, on Gen. xiv. 1.

[9602]3110 Sanh. 99 a.

[9603]3111 This is the only occasion on which they are designated as

Apostles in the Gospel by St. Mark.

[9604]3112 St. Matt. xi. 1.

[9605]3113 Their mission seems to have been short, probably not more

than two weeks or so. But it seems impossible, in consistency with the

facts, to confine it to two days, as Bishop Ellicott proposes (Hist.

Lect. p. 193).

[9606]3114 St. Mark vi. 12, 13; St. Luke ix. 6.

[9607]3115 St. Matt xiv. 12, 13; St. Mark vi. 30.

[9608]3116 St. John vi. 1.

[9609]3117 St. Mark vii. 24.

[9610]3118 St. John iii. 22 to iv. 3.

[9611]3119 Comp. chapter vii. of this Book. For the sake of clearness

and connection, some points formerly referred to have had to be here

repeated.

[9612]3120 St. John ii. 13 to iii. 21.

[9613]3121 St. John iii. 25 &c.

[9614]3122 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 152, 153.

[9615]3123 These verses contain the reflections of the Evangelist, not

the words of the Baptist, just as previously vv. 16 to 21 are no

longer the words of Christ but those of St. John.

[9616]3124 St. John iii. 16 to 21.

[9617]3125 Comp. Caspari, Chronolog. Georgr. Einl. pp. 83-91.

[9618]3126 Ænon may even have been in Peræa itself - in that case, on

the eastern bank of the Jordan.

[9619]3127 St. John iii. 24.

[9620]3128 St. John vi. i.

[9621]3129 Comp. Schürer, Neutest. Zeitgesch. p. 233. As to the name

Tiberias, comp. p. 635, note 1.

[9622]3130 St. Matt. xiv. 1.

[9623]3131 Numb. xxxii. 36; Josh. xiii. 27.

[9624]3132 Ant. xviii. 2. 1.

[9625]3133 Jerus. Shev. 38 d.

[9626]3134 Comp. the references in Böttger, Lex. zu Jos. p. 58.

[9627]3135 See the description of the site in Tristram, Land of Moab,

p. 348.

[9628]3136 Ant. xviii. 5. 2.

[9629]3137 St. Matt. xiv. 5.

[9630]3138 St. Matt. xiv. 3, 4; St. Mark vi 17, 18.

[9631]3139 Sot. 22 b.

[9632]3140 St. John iv. 1, 2.

[9633]3141 St. Luke xiii. 31-33.

[9634]3142 Ant. xviii. 5. 2.

[9635]3143 A little before that it seems belonged to Aretas. We know

not, how it again passed into the hands of Antipas, if, indeed, it

ever was fully ceded by him to the Arabs. Comp. Schürer, u.s. p. 239,

and Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p. 244, Beitr, pp. 5, &c., whose positions

are, however, not always quite reliable.

[9636]3144 Gen. xiv. 5.

[9637]3145 Jewish War i. 8. 5.

[9638]3146 Here Bassus made his attack in the fast Jewish war (Jos.

War vii. 6. 1-4).

[9639]3147 Canon Tristram Land of Moab, pp. 255-265; comp. Baedeker

(Socin) Palästina, p. 195 and, for the various passages in Josephus

referring to Machærus, Böttger, u.s. pp. 165-167.

[9640]3148 War vii. 6. 1, 2.

[9641]3149 St. John iii. 26.

[9642]3150 Thus viewed there is no contradiction, not even real

variation, between St. Matt. ix. 14, St. Mark ii. 18, and St. Luke v.

33.

[9643]3151 St. Matt. ix. 14-17 and parallels.

[9644]3152 B. Mez. 85 a, 2 towards the end.

[9645]3153 Altogether, Baba Mez, 84 a to 85 a contains a mixture of

the strangest, grossest, and profanest absurdities.

[9646]3154 Thus a three day's fast would be on the second, fifth, and

again on the second day of the week.

[9647]3155 Taan. 12 a; St. Luke xviii. 12.

[9648]3156 Taan i. 4-7.

[9649]3157 Comp. 'The Temple, its Ministry and Services,' pp. 296-298.

[9650]3158 St. Mark ii. 18.

[9651]3159 This is the real import of the original.

[9652]3160 St. John iii. 29.

[9653]3161 Ber. 6 b.

[9654]3162 Yoma viii. 1.

[9655]3163 Jer. Sukk. 53 a, near the middle.

[9656]3164 {hebrew} Jer. Megill. 72 d 1.

[9657]3165 'And all bride-chambers were only within the portions of

Benjamin' (the Tabernacle and the Temple). Hence Benjamin was called

'the host of the Lord.'

[9658]3166 Strangely, the two designations are treated as identical in

most Commentaries.

[9659]3167 St. John iii. 29.

[9660]3168 St. Matt. ix. 16, 17.

[9661]3169 Godet has shown objections against all previous

interpretations. But his own view seems to me equally untenable.

[9662]3170 St. Luke v. 39 seems either a gloss of the writer, or may

be (though very doubtfully) an interpolation. There is a curious

parallel to the verse in Ab. iv. 20.

[9663]3171 St. Luke vii. 18-35; St. Matt. xi. 2-19.

[9664]3172 St. Mark vi. 20.

[9665]3173 This is both the correct reading and rendering.

[9666]3174 The distinction between the two expressions will be further

explained in the sequel.

[9667]3175 St. Luke vii. 21.

[9668]3176 Negative criticism charges St. Luke with having inserted

this trait, forgetting that it is referred to by St. Matthew.

[9669]3177 St. Matt. xi. 5.

[9670]3178 The two terms are different. The query was: would they go

out 'to gaze at' a reed, and 'to see' one in soft clothing.

[9671]3179 The reader will mark the difference between the quotation

as made by all the three Evangelists, and our present Hebrew text and

the LXX., and possibly draw his own inferences.

[9672]3180 St. Luke vii. 29, 30.

[9673]3181 This is a sort of parenthetic note by St. Luke.

[9674]3182 St. Matt. xi. 12-14.

[9675]3183 St. Matt. xi. 14-19.

[9676]3184 The common interpretations of this verse have seemed to me

singularly unsatisfactory.

[9677]3185 Comp. the Appendix on the Jewish Interpretation of

Prophecy.

[9678]3186 Sanh. 99 a; Ber. 34 b; Shabb. 63 a.

[9679]3187 The pipe was used both in feasts and at mourning. So the

Messianic hope had both its joyous and its sorrowful aspect.

[9680]3188 Literally, justified. The expression is a Hebraism.

[9681]3189 I cannot accept the reading 'works' in St. Mark.

[9682]3190 St. John i. 11-13.

[9683]3191 As, according to Josephus, John was executed at Machærus,

the scene must have been there, and not either at Tiberias or at

Julias.

[9684]3192 The expression gen_sia leaves it doubtful, whether it was

the birthday of Herod or the anniversary of his accession. Wieseler

maintains that the Rabbinic equivalent (Ginuseya, or Giniseya) means

the day of accession, Meyer the birthday. In truth it is used for

both. But in Abod. Z. 10 a (about the middle) the Yom Ginuseya is

expressly and elaborately shown to be the day of accession. Otherwise

also the balance of evidence is in favour of this view. The event

described in the text certainly took place before the Passover, and

this was the time of Herod's death and of the accession of Antipas. It

is not likely, that the Herodians would have celebrated their

birthdays.

[9685]3193 From the circumstance that Josephus calls him Herod and not

Philip, a certain class of critics have imputed error to the

Evangelists (Schürer, u. s., p. 237). But it requires to be kept in

view, that in that case the Evangelists would be guilty not of one but

of two gross historical errors. They would (1) have confounded this

Herod with his half-brother Philip. the Tetrarch, and (2) made him the

husband of Herodias, instead of being her son-in-law, Philip the

Tetrarch having married Salome. Two such errors are altogether

inconceivable in so well-known a history, with which the Evangelists

otherwise show such familiarity. On the other hand, there are internal

reasons for believing that this Herod had a second name. Among the

eight sons of Herod the Great there are three who bear his name

(Herod). Of only one, Herod Antipas, we know the second name

(Antipas). But, as for example in the case of the Bonaparte family, it

is most unlikely that the other two should have borne the name of

Herod without any distinctive second name. Hence we conclude, that the

name Philip, which occurs in the Gospels (in St. Luke iii. 19 it is

spurious), was the second name of him whom Josephus simply names as

Herod. If it be objected, that in such case Herod would have had two

sons named Philip, we answer (1) that he had two sons of the name

Antipas, or Antipater, (2) that they were the sons of different

mothers, and (3) that the full name of the one was Herod Philip (first

husband of Herodias), and of the other simply Philip the Tetrarch

(husband of Salome, and son-in-law of Herodias and of Herod Philip her

first husband). Thus for distinction's sake the one might have been

generally called simply Herod, the other Philip.

[9686]3194 Jos. Ant. xviii. 7. 1, 2; War ii. 9. 6.

[9687]3195 St. Matt. xiv. 8.

[9688]3196 A spekoul_twr, speculator, one of a body-guard which had

come into use, who attended the Cæsars, executed their behests and

often their sudden sentences of death (from speculor). The same word

occurs in Rabbinic Hebrew as Sephaqlator ({hebrew}), or Isphaqlator

({hebrew}), and is applied to one who carries out the sentence of

execution (Shabb. 108 a).

[9689]3197 St. Luke ix. 9.

[9690]3198 The common reading, 'House of fishes,' is certainly

inaccurate. Its Aramaic equivalent would be probably {hebrew}. Tseida

means literally hunting as well as fishing, having special reference

to catching in a snare or net. Possibly, but not so likely, it may

have been {hebrew} (Tsayyada), house of a snareer-huntsman, here

fisher. It will be noticed, that we retain the textus receptus of St.

Luke ix. 10.

[9691]3199 Jos. War iii. 3. 5.

[9692]3200 Jos. Ant. xviii. 2. 1.

[9693]3201 I do not quite understand the reasoning of Captain Conder

on this point (Handb. of the Bible, pp. 321, &c.), but I cannot agree

with his conclusions.

[9694]3202 St. John xii. 21; comp. i. 44; St. Mark vi. 45.

[9695]3203 On the whole question comp. the Encyclopædias, Caspari u.

s. pp. 81, 83; Baedeker (Socin), p. 267; Tristram, Land of Israel, p.

443 &c.

[9696]3204 St. John v.

[9697]3205 Professor Westcott notes, that the account of St. John

could neither have been derived from those of the Synoptists, nor from

any common original, from which their narratives are by some supposed

to have been derived.

[9698]3206 St. John vi. 4.

[9699]3207 There is no valid reason for doubting the genuineness of

these words, or giving them another meaning than in the text. Comp.

Westcott, ad. loc.

[9700]3208 St. Mark vi. 39.

[9701]3209 Even those who hold such views assert them in this instance

hesitatingly. It seems almost impossible to conceive, that a narrative

recorded in all the four Gospels should not have an historical basis,

and the appeal to the precedent of Elisha is the more inapt, that in

common Jewish thinking he was not regarded as specially the type of

the Messiah.

[9702]3210 This seems the fair meaning of St. Mark vi. 31-33, comp.

with St. Matt. xiv. 13.

[9703]3211 St. Mark vi. 32 has it 'by (or rather in) the ship,' with

the definite article. Probably it was the same boat that was always at

His disposal, perhaps belonging to the sons of Jonas or to the sons of

Zebedee.

[9704]3212 St. Mark vi. 33.

[9705]3213 St. Mark v. 1-16.

[9706]3214 St. John vi. 3.

[9707]3215 St. Matt. xiv. 14.

[9708]3216 Canon Westcott supposes that 'a day of teaching and healing

must be intercalated before the miracle of feeding,' but I cannot see

any reason for this. All the events fit well into one day.

[9709]3217 St. John vi. 4.

[9710]3218 St. Mark vi. 34.

[9711]3219 St. Mark vi. 34.

[9712]3220 St. Luke ix. 11.

[9713]3221 St. John vi. 6.

[9714]3222 Comp. St. John xiv. 8, 9.

[9715]3223 Comp. St. John vi. 9 with St. Matt. xiv. 17; St. Mark vi.

38; St. Luke ix. 13.

[9716]3224 The expression in St. Mark vi. 35 is literally, 'a late

hour,' _ra poll_.

[9717]3225 Comp. Jos. Ant. xvi. 6. 2.

[9718]3226 Orach Chajim 261.

[9719]3227 St. Mark vi. 38.

[9720]3228 St. John vi. 9.

[9721]3229 Sotah. ii. 1.

[9722]3230 Babha. B. 740 b.

[9723]3231 {hebrew} Beza 16 a.

[9724]3232 Ber. 40 a, near the middle.

[9725]3233 Comp. Herzfeld, Handelsgesch. pp. 305, 306. In my view he

has established the meaning of this name as against Lewysohn, Zool. d.

Talm. pp. 255, 256, and Levy, Neuhebr. Wörterb. ii. 192 a.

[9726]3234 St. John xxi. 9, 10, 13.

[9727]3235 St. Matt. xiv. 19.

[9728]3236 St. Mark vi. 39.

[9729]3237 St. John vi. 10 .

[9730]3238 sump_sia St. Mark vi. 39.

[9731]3239 klis_av, St. Luke ix. 14.

[9732]3240 St. Mark vi. 40.

[9733]3241 The literal rendering of prasi_ is 'garden-bed.' In Mark

vi. 40, prasia_ prasia_, 'garden-beds, garden-beds.' In the A. V. 'in

ranks.'

[9734]3242 Ber.46 a.

[9735]3243 The expression is different from that used by the

Synoptists; but in St. Matt. xv. 36, and in St. Mark viii. 6, the term

is also that of thanksgiving, not blessing (e_carist_w, not e_log_w).

[9736]3244 St. John vi. 48-58.

[9737]3245 Rosh haSh 29 b.

[9738]3246 Sot. vii. 1.

[9739]3247 Jer. Sot. p. 21 b.

[9740]3248 Ber. 44 a.

[9741]3249 Not an Egyptian basket, as even Jost translates in his

edition of the Mishnah. The word is derived from {hebrew} (Metser),

wicker or willow.

[9742]3250 Comp. Sotah. ii. 1.

[9743]3251 See the meaning of that expression in the previous chapter.

[9744]3252 Note here the want of the article: _na poi_swsin a_t_n

basil_a. We owe this notice to the Fourth Gospel, and it is in marked

inconsistency with the theory of its late Ephesian authority.

[9745]3253 St. John vi. 15.

[9746]3254 St. Matt. xiv. 23.

[9747]3255 Ber. 3 b.

[9748]3256 Probably from 3 to about 6 a.m.

[9749]3257 Even the beautiful allegory into which Keim would resolve

it - that the Church in her need knows not, whether her Saviour may

not come in the last watch of the night - entirely surrenders the

whole narrative. And why should three Evangelists have invented such a

story, in order to teach or rather disguise a doctrine, which is

otherwise so clearly expressed throughout the whole New Testament, as

to form one of its primary principles? Volkmar (Marcus, p. 372)

regards this whole history as an allegory of St. Paul's activity among

the Gentiles! Strange in that case, that it was omitted in the Gospel

by St. Luke. But the whole of that section of Volkmar's book

(beginning at p. 327) contains an extra-ordinary congeries, of

baseless hypotheses, of which it were difficult to say, whether the

language is more painfully irreverent or the outcome more extravagant.

[9750]3258 Ps. viii. 5, 6; comp. Hebr. ii. 6-9.

[9751]3259 On the other hand, the miraculous feeding of the multitude

seems to exhibit rather the humanly-Divine aspect of His Person.

[9752]3260 Literally, a phantasma. This word is only used in this

narrative (St. Matt. xiv. 26 and St. Mark vi. 49.)

[9753]3261 Acts xxvi. 8.

[9754]3262 1 Cor. xv. 12-19.

[9755]3263 Acts xvii. 31, 32.

[9756]3264 1 Cor. xv. 1-8.

[9757]3265 2 Pet. iii. 4.

[9758]3266 The authenticity of the Second Epistle of St. Peter is here

taken for granted, but the drift of the argument would be the same, to

whatever authorship it be ascribed.

[9759]3267 St. Matt. xiv. 22.

[9760]3268 St. John vi. 22.

[9761]3269 Weiss (Matthaus-Evang. p. 372) sees a gross contradiction

between what seems implied as to His original purpose and His walking

on the sea, and hence rejects the narrative. Such are the assumptions

of negative criticism. But it seems forgotten that, according to St.

Matt. xiv. 24, the journey seems at first to have been fairly

prosperous.

[9762]3270 Weiss (u. s.) certainly argues on the impossibility of His

having seen the boat so far out on the Lake.

[9763]3271 According to St. Matt. xiv. 24, they seem only to have

encountered the full force of the wind when they were about the middle

of the Lake. We imagine that soon after they embarked there may have

been a fresh breeze from the other side of the Lake, which by and by

rose into a violent contrary wind.

[9764]3272 St. John, in distinction to the Synoptists, here uses the

expression qewre_n (St. John vi. 19), which in the Gospels has the

distinctive meaning of fixed, earnest, and intent gaze, mostly

outward, but sometimes also inward, in the sense of earnest and

attentive consideration. The use of this word as distinguished from

merely seeing, is so important for the better understanding of the New

Testament, that every reader should mark it. We accordingly append a

list of the passages in the Gospels where this word is used: St. Matt.

xxvii. 55; xxviii. 1; St. Mark iii. 11; v. 15, 38; xii. 41; xv. 40,

47; xvi. 4; St. Luke x. 18; xiv. 29; xxi. 6; xxiii. 35, 48; xxiv. 37,

39; St. John ii. 23; iv. 19; vi. 2 (Lachm. and Treg.), 19, 40, 62;

vii. 3; viii. 51; ix. 8; x. 12; xii. 19, 45; xiv. 17, 19; xvi. 10, 16,

17, 19; xvii. 24; xx. 6, 12, 14. It will thus be seen, that the

expression is more frequently used by St. John than in the other

Gospels, and it is there also that its distinctive meaning is of

greatest importance.

[9765]3273 St. Mark vi. 48.

[9766]3274 This seems to me implied in the expression, St. John vi.

21: 'Then they were willing to take Him into the ship.' Some negative

critics have gone so far as to see in this graphic hint a

contradiction to the statements of the Synoptists. (See Lücke,

Comment. ü. d. Evang. Joh. ii. pp. 120-122.).

[9767]3275 As to the physical possibility of it, we have to refer to

our former remarks.

[9768]3276 The word 'boisterous' must be struck out as an interpolated

gloss.

[9769]3277 I cannot see (with Meyer) any variation in the narrative in

St. John vi. 21. The expression, 'they were willing to take him into

the ship,' certainly does not imply that, after, the incident of

Peter's failure, He did not actually enter the boat.

[9770]3278 Weiss (p. 373) assures us that this view is 'impossible;'

but on no better ground than that no others than ten disciples are

mentioned in St. Matt. xiv. 22, as if it had been necessary to mention

the embarkation of the boatmen.

[9771]3279 St. Matt. xv. 21.

[9772]3280 St. Mark vi. 45.

[9773]3281 St. John xii. 21.

[9774]3282 I have myself counted twelve different places in England

bearing names which might be freely rendered by 'Bethsaidsa,' not to

speak of the many suburbs and quarters which bear a like designation,

and, of course, my list is anything but complete.

[9775]3283 In Jer. Megill. (p. 70 a, line 15 from bottom) we read of a

{hebrew}, but the locality scarcely agrees with our Beth-Saida.

[9776]3284 St. Mark vi. 45.

[9777]3285 St. John vi. 17.

[9778]3286 Comp. Bäedeker (Socin) Paläst. page 270.

[9779]3287 St. John i. 44; xii. 21.

[9780]3288 St. Mark i. 29.

[9781]3289 May this connection of Capernaum and Beth-Saida account for

the mention of the latter as one of the places which had been the

scene of so many of His mighty works (St. Matt. xi. 21; St. Luke x.

13)?

[9782]3290 St. John vi. 59.

[9783]3291 There is no article in the original.

[9784]3292 St. John vi. 22-24.

[9785]3293 St. Mark vi. 53.

[9786]3294 Jewish War iii. 10.7, 8.

[9787]3295 Pes. 8 b; Meg. 6 a; Ber. R. 98.

[9788]3296 Bäedeker (Socin) has grouped together the reasons against

identifying Khân Minyeh with Capernaum itself.

[9789]3297 St. Matt. xiv. 34-36; St. Mark vi. 53-56.

[9790]3298 Mr. Brown McClellan (N.T. vol. i. p. 570) holds, that both

the Passover and Pentecost had intervened - I know not on what

grounds. At the same time the language in St. Mark vi. 56, might imply

more than one occasion on which the same thing happened.

[9791]3299 St. John vi. 22-25.

[9792]3300 ver. 59.

[9793]3301 St. John vi. 4.

[9794]3302 This is propounded in Wieseler, Chronolog. Synopse, pp.

276, 290, as a possible view.

[9795]3303 Pes. 55 a.

[9796]3304 St. Matt. xv. 1; St. Mark vii. 1.

[9797]3305 St. John vi. 59.

[9798]3306 St. Matt. xv. 1 &c.

[9799]3307 St. Matt. xv. 12-14.

[9800]3308 St. John vi. 60-66.

[9801]3309 St. Matt. xv. 10; St. Mark vii. 14, 15.

[9802]3310 St. Matt. xv. 12-14.

[9803]3311 St. Matt. xv. 15-20; St. Mark vii. 17-23.

[9804]3312 St. John ix. 16, 24.

[9805]3313 The word quite corresponds to the Jewish term.

Notwithstanding the objection of the learned Bishop Haneberg (Relig.

Alterth. p. 475, note 288) I believe it corresponds to the Rabbinic

{hebrew} or {hebrew} (Hebr. {hebrew}) profanus, in the sense of

'common,' 'not hallowed.'

[9806]3314 The fullest account of it within reach of ordinary readers

is in the Notes to Pocock's Porta Mosis (pp. 350-402) though it is

confused, not quite accurate, and based chiefly on later Jewish

authorities. Spencer (de Leg. Hebr. pp. 1175-1179) only adds

references to similar Gentile rites. Goodwin, even under the revision

of Hottinger (pp. 182-188), is in this instance inferior to Pocock.

Buxtorf (Synag. pp. 179-184) gives chiefly illustrative Jewish

legends; Otho (Lex. Rabb. pp. 335, 336) extracts from his

predecessors, to little advantage. The Rabbinic notes of Lightfoot,

Wünsche, Schöttgen, and Wetstein give no clear account; and the

Biblical Dictionaries are either silent, or (as Herzog's) very meagre.

Other accounts are, unfortunately, very inaccurate.

[9807]3315 Yadayim, in four chapters, which, however, touches on other

subjects also, notably on the canonicity of certain parts of the O.T.

[9808]3316 We refer here generally to Chull. 105 a, b, 106 b.

[9809]3317 Sot. 4 b.

[9810]3318 Shabb. 62 b.

[9811]3319 Sot. 4 b.

[9812]3320 Eduy. v. 6; Ber. 19 a.

[9813]3321 Chull. 106 a; Bemidb. R. 20, ed. Warsh. p. 81 b.

[9814]3322 Many illustrative stories are given of its importance, on

the one hand, and of the danger of neglecting it on the other. With

these legends it is not necessary to cumber our pages.

[9815]3323 Chull. 106 a.

[9816]3324 Chull. 106 a.

[9817]3325 Lev xi. 44.

[9818]3326 Ber. 53 b, end.

[9819]3327 Erub. 17 b; Chull. 105 b.

[9820]3328 The danger from 'Salt of Sodom' is specially mentioned.

[9821]3329 Chull. 105 a, b.

[9822]3330 {hebrew}, sometimes though rarely, {hebrew}, but not

{hebrew}, which refers to ordinary washing. Occasionally it is simply

designated by the term Netilah.

[9823]3331 {hebrew}(Chull. 107 a and b).

[9824]3332 Chag. ii. 5, 6.

[9825]3333 This and what follows illustrates St. John ii. 6.

[9826]3334 _tg_on

[9827]3335 Chull. 107 a; Baba B. 58 b, and often.

[9828]3336 The language of the Mishnah shows that the word {hebrew},

which bears as vague and wide meaning as pugm_, which seems a literal

translation of it, can only apply to the wrist.

[9829]3337 Comp. Yad. ii. 3; Chull. 106 a and b.

[9830]3338 St. Mark vii. 3.

[9831]3339 The rendering 'wash diligently,' gives no meaning; that

'with the fist' is not in accordance with Jewish Law; while that 'up

to the elbow' is not only contrary to Jewish Law, but apparently based

on a wrong rendering of the word {hebrew}. This is fully shown by

Wetstein (N. T. i. p. 585), but his own explanation, that pugm_ refers

to the measure or weight of the water for washing, is inadmissible.

[9832]3340 Shabb. 14 a.

[9833]3341 In Yad. iv. 6, the Pharisees in dispute with the Sadducees

indicate what seems to me a far more likely reason, in the desire to

protect the Scriptures from profane use.

[9834]3342 Yad. iii. 2.

[9835]3343 Yad. iii. 5.

[9836]3344 Numb. x. 35, 36.

[9837]3345 Yad. iii. 3-5.

[9838]3346 By a curious inversion the law ultimately came to be, that

the Scriptures everywhere defiled the hands, except those of the

Priests in the Temple (Kel. xv. 6). This on the ground that, taught by

former enactments, they had learned to keep the Terumah far away from

the sacred rolls, but really, as I believe, because the law, that the

Priests' hands became defiled if they touched a copy of the sacred

rules, must have involved constant difficulties.

[9839]3347 Chull. 106 b.

[9840]3348 Shabb. 14 b, end.

[9841]3349 Or. Sib. iii. 591-593.

[9842]3350 We must bear in mind, that it was the work of an Egyptian

Jew, and I cannot help feeling that the language bears some likeness

to what afterwards was one of the distinctive practices of the

Essenes.

[9843]3351 Shabb. 14 b, about the middle.

[9844]3352 {hebrew}

[9845]3353 Jer. Shabb. p. 3 c, d.

[9846]3354 Shabb. 13 b to 14 b.

[9847]3355 Jer. Shabb. 3 c.

[9848]3356 Jer. Shabb. 3 d.

[9849]3357 Shabb.13 b; 14 b.

[9850]3358 Shabb. 14 b, towards end.

[9851]3359 In the 'Speaker's Commentary' (ad loc.) this 'extreme

minuteness of details' is, it seems to me not correctly, accounted for

on the ground of 'special reference to the Judaisers who at a very

early period formed an influential party at Rome.'

[9852]3360 Ab. Z. 35 a.

[9853]3361 This is the more striking as the same expression is used in

reference to the opposition or rather the 'invalidating' by R. Eliezer

ben Chanokh of the ordinance of hand-washing, for which he was

excommunicated ({hebrew}, Eduy. v. 6). The term {hebrew}, which

originally means to stop up by pouring or putting in something, is

used for contemning or bringing into contempt, invalidating, or

shaking a decree, with the same signification as {hebrew}. This is

proved from the use of the latter in Ab. Z. 35 a, line 9 from bottom,

and 36 a, line 12 from top.

[9854]3362 Ab. Zar. v, passim.

[9855]3363 Jer. Chag. 76 d.

[9856]3364 In this passage there is a regular discussion, whether that

which is written (the Pentateuch), or that which is oral (tradition)

is more precious and to be loved ({hebrew}). The opinion is in favour

of the oral ({hebrew}).

[9857]3365 Jer. Ber. 3 b; Sanh. xi. 3; Erub. 21 b.

[9858]3366 Targum (ed. Ven.) on Cant. v. 10; comp. Ab. Z. 3 b.

[9859]3367 Baba Mez. 86 a.

[9860]3368 Ab. Z. u. s.

[9861]3369 Comp. Chag. 5 b.

[9862]3370 Ber. 3 a.

[9863]3371 Ber. 59 a.

[9864]3372 Ber. 7 a; Ab. Z. 4 b.

[9865]3373 Ber. 7 a.

[9866]3374 Shem. R. 42, comp. Rosh haSh. 17 b.

[9867]3375 Ber. 6 a.

[9868]3376 Shem. R. 15, ed. warsh. p. 22 a, line 13 from top.

[9869]3377 Is. lxvi. 15; comp. Numb. xxxi. 23.

[9870]3378 Jer. Taan. 66 a, about the middle.

[9871]3379 It was, however, admitted that the Halakhah sometimes went

beyond the Pentateuch (Sot. 16 a).

[9872]3380 St. Matt. xv. 3, 6; St. Mark vii. 9, 13.

[9873]3381 See the remarks this point in vol. i. pp. 567, 576, 577.

[9874]3382 Ab. iii. 18.

[9875]3383 Ber. R. 81.

[9876]3384 Nedar. 9 a; 22 a.

[9877]3385 According to Nedar. 10 a, the Rabbis invented this word

instead of 'Qorban to the Lord' (Lev. i. 2), in order that the Name of

God might not be idly taken.

[9878]3386 Nedar. i. 1-3.

[9879]3387 Jer. Nedar. 36 d, line 20 from top.

[9880]3388 u. s.

[9881]3389 {hebrew} (Jer. Nedar. 36 d, line 22).

[9882]3390 See Maimonides, Yad haChas., Hilkh. Nedar. i. 1, 2.

[9883]3391 {hebrew}

[9884]3392 {hebrew}

[9885]3393 Jer. Ned. u. s.

[9886]3394 Tos. Arach. iv.

[9887]3395 {hebrew} 'they open a door.'

[9888]3396 Nedar. ix. passim.

[9889]3397 Maimonides u. s. Hilk. Shebh. v. 1.

[9890]3398 Chag. i. 8.

[9891]3399 This is altogether a very curious Mishnah. It adds to the

remark quoted in the text this other significant admission, that the

laws about the Sabbath, festive offerings, and the malversation of

things devoted to God 'are like mountains hanging by one hair,' since

Scripture is scant on these subjects, while the traditional Laws are

many.

[9892]3400 On the subject of Vows see also 'The Temple and its

Services,' pp. 322-326. The student should consult Siphré, Par.

Mattoth, pp. 55 b to 58 b.

[9893]3401 Nedar. ii. 2.

[9894]3402 I can only express surprise, that Wünsche should throw

doubt upon it. It is fully admitted by Levy, Targ. Wörterb. sub

{hebrew}.

[9895]3403 {hebrew}

[9896]3404 Ned. ix. 1.

[9897]3405 Nedar. v.

[9898]3406 In this case the son, desirous that his father should share

in the festivities at his marriage, proposed to give to a friend the

court in which the banquet was to be held and the banquet itself, but

only for the purpose that his father might eat and drink with him. The

proposal was refused as involving sin, and the point afterwards

discussed and confirmed - implying, that in no circumstances could a

parent partake of anything belonging to his son, if he had pronounced

such a vow, the only relaxation being that in case of actual

starvation ('if he have not what to eat') the son might make a present

to a third person, when the father might in turn receive of it.

[9899]3407 Ex. xxi. 17.

[9900]3408 Comp. Wünsche, ad loc.

[9901]3409 Other translations have been proposed, but the above is

taken from Nedar. viii. 7, with the change only of Qonam into Qorban.

[9902]3410 The quotation is a 'Targum,' which in the last clause

follows almost entirely the LXX.

[9903]3411 Mark the definite article.

[9904]3412 The words in St. Mark vii. 16 are of very doubtful

authenticity.

[9905]3413 St. Matt. xv. 10; St. Mark vii. 14.

[9906]3414 Both these sayings seem to have been proverbial at the

time, although I am not able to quote any passage in Jewish writings

in which they occur in exactly the same form.

[9907]3415 In St. Mark vii. 21 these outcomings of 'evil thoughts' are

arranged in three groups of four, characterised as in the text; while

in St. Matt. xv. 19 the order of the ten commandments seems followed.

The account of St. Mark is the fuller. In both accounts the expression

'blasphemy' (blasfjm_a) - rendered in tho Revised Version by 'railing'

- seems to refer to calumnious and evil speaking about our fellow-men.

[9908]3416 Midr. on Eccles. i. 16.

[9909]3417 St. Mark vii. 19, last clause.

[9910]3418 I have accepted this rending of the words, first propounded

by St. Chrysostom, and now adopted in the Revised Version, although

not without much misgiving. For there is strong objection to it from

the Jewish usus and views. The statement in Ber. 61 a, last line, 'The

oesophagus which causeth to enter and which casteth out all manner of

meat' ({hebrew}) seems to imply that the words of Christ were a

proverbial expression. The Taimudic idea is based on the curious

physiological notion (Midr. on Eccles. vii. 19), that the food passed

from the oesophagus first into the larger intestine (Hemses, {hebrew},

perhaps = omasum), where the food was supposed to be crushed as in a

mill (Vayyik R. 4, 18; Midr. on Eccl. xii. 3), and thence only,

through various organs, into the stomach proper. (As regards the

process in animals, see Lewysohn, Zool. d. Talm. pp. 37-40). (The

passage from Ber. 61 a has been so rendered by Wünsche, in his note on

St. Matt. xv. 17, as to be in parts well nigh unintelligible.) It may

interest students that the strange word _fedr_n rendered both in the

A.V. and the R.V. by 'draught,' seems to correspond to the Rabbinic

Aphidra ({hebrew}) which Levy renders by 'the floor of a stable formed

by the excrements of the animals which are soaked and stamped into a

hard mass.'

[9911]3419 Acts x.14.

[9912]3420 It is, of course, well known that the reasoning of the

Tübingen school and of kindred negative theology is based on a

supposed contrariety between the Petrine and Pauline direction, and

that this again is chiefly based on the occurrence in Antioch recorded

in Gal. ii. 11 &c.

[9913]3421 It is specially requested that this chapter be read along

with the text of Scripture.

[9914]3422 We are here involuntarily reminded of the fate of Elijah on

the morning after the miracle on Mount Carmel. But how different the

bearing of Christ from that of the great prophet!

[9915]3423 vv. 22, 24.

[9916]3424 St. John vi. 53-58.

[9917]3425 ver. 59.

[9918]3426 Westcott, ad. loc.

[9919]3427 vi. 25-65.

[9920]3428 vv. 25-36.

[9921]3429 vv. 41-52.

[9922]3430 vv. 52-58.

[9923]3431 vv. 61-65.

[9924]3432 ver. 26.

[9925]3433 St. John vi. 25-29.

[9926]3434 Canon Westcott notes the intended realism in the choice of

words: 'Literally, "were satisfied with food as animals with fodder."'

- _cort_sqjte.

[9927]3435 Shabb. 30 b; Jer. Sheqal. vi. 2.

[9928]3436 Kethub. 111 b.

[9929]3437 Jer. Sanh. 18 a; Ber. R. 81.

[9930]3438 St John vi. 30-36.

[9931]3439 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 256, 257.

[9932]3440 Yoma 75 b.

[9933]3441 Shem. R. 25.

[9934]3442 Midr. on Eccles. i. 9.

[9935]3443 Targ. PseudoJon. on Deut. xxxiv. 8; Taan. 9 a.

[9936]3444 Not as in the A.V. of ver. 33: 'He Which cometh down from

heaven.' The alteration is most important in the argument as addressed

to the Jews: the one they could understand and would admit, not so the

other.

[9937]3445 Prov. ix. 5.

[9938]3446 Shem. R. 25.

[9939]3447 Comp. Chag. 14 a.

[9940]3448 In the Midrash on Eccl. ii. 24; iii. 12; viii. 15, we are

told, that when in Ecclesiastes we read of eating and drinking, it

always refers to the Law and good works.

[9941]3449 St. John vi. 37-40.

[9942]3450 ver. 41.

[9943]3451 After having arrived at this conclusion, I find that Canon

Westcott has expressed the same views, and I rejoice in being

fortified by so great an authority.

[9944]3452 But not here and there one dead. In general, see vol. i. p.

633, where the question of Jewish belief on that subject is discussed.

[9945]3453 Sanh. 98 b.

[9946]3454 Midrash on Ps. xciii. 1; Pirké de R. Eliez. 32, ed. Lemb.

p. 39 b.

[9947]3455 So Canon Westcott; and also Godet ad loc.

[9948]3456 Mark the special meaning of qewr_n as previously explained.

[9949]3457 St. John vi. 40.

[9950]3458 St. John vi. 41-51.

[9951]3459 This is not narrated in the Fourth Gospel. But allusions

like this cover the whole early history of Jesus, and prove that

omissions of the most important facts in the history of Jesus are

neither due to ignorance of them on the part of the writer of the

Fourth Gospel, nor to the desire to express by silence his dissent

from the accounts of the Synoptists.

[9952]3460 St. John iii. 3 &c.

[9953]3461 Canon Westcott has called attention to this.

[9954]3462 St. John xii. 32.

[9955]3463 Is. liv. 13 in Ber. R. 95 on Gen. xlvi. 28; Jerem. xxxi. 34

in Yalkut vol ii. p. 66 d.

[9956]3464 For other Rabbinic applications of these verses to the

Messiah and His times, see the Appendix on Messianic passages.

[9957]3465 The words 'on Me' are spurious.

[9958]3466 ver. 48.

[9959]3467 The words in the A.V., 'which I will give,' are spurious.

[9960]3468 vv. 53-58.

[9961]3469 Canon Westcott (ad loc.) clearly shows, that the reference

to the Holy Supper can only be secondary. Mark here specially, that in

the latter we have 'the Body,' not 'the Flesh' of the Lord.

[9962]3470 ver. 42.

[9963]3471 Comp. here the remarks on ver. 27, about Truth as the seal

with which God sealed the Christ.

[9964]3472 ver. 55.

[9965]3473 ver. 56.

[9966]3474 Mark here also the special meaning of qewr_te.

[9967]3475 ver. 62.

[9968]3476 ver. 65; comp. vv. 37, 44.

[9969]3477 St. Matt. xv. 12.

[9970]3478 St. John vi. 66.

[9971]3479 vv. 68, 69.

[9972]3480 This is the reading of all the best MSS., and not as in the

A.V. 'that Christ, the Son of the Living God.' For the history of the

variations by which this change was brought about, see Westcott, ad

loc.

[9973]3481 The right reading of ver. 71 is: 'Judas the son of Simon

Iscariot,' that is, 'a man of Kerioth.' Kerioth was in Judæa (Josh.

xv. 25), and Judas, it will be remembered, the only Judæan disciple of

Jesus.

[9974]3482 Jos. War iii. 3. 1.

[9975]3483 St. Matt. xv. 21.

[9976]3484 So correctly rendered.

[9977]3485 Or, the Passover-eve may have been Monday evening.

[9978]3486 St. Matt. xv. 23.

[9979]3487 St. Mark vii. 24, 25.

[9980]3488 Ezra ix. 1.

[9981]3489 St. Mark vii. 25.

[9982]3490 Comp. Cannon Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the

Gospels, Appendix C.

[9983]3491 This view is advocated by Dean Plumptre with remarkable

beauty, tenderness, and reverence. It is also that of Meyer and of

Ewald. The latter remarks, that our Lord showed twofold greatness:

First, in his calm limitation to His special mission, and then in His

equally calm overstepping of it, when a higher ground for so doing

appeared.

[9984]3492 The term means 'little dogs,' or 'house - dogs.'

[9985]3493 Midr. on Ps. iv. 8; Meg. 7 b.

[9986]3494 Many passages might be quoted either similar, or based on

this view of Gentiles.

[9987]3495 Rev. xxii. 15.

[9988]3496 Canon Cook (Speaker's Comm. on St. Mark vii. 26) regards

this 'as one of the very few instances in which our Lord's words

really differ in the two accounts.' With all deference, I venture to

think it is not so, but that St. Mark gives what St. Peter had

received as the impression of Christ's words on his mind.

[9989]3497 St. Matt. xv. 28.

[9990]3498 For the Rabbinic views of the boundaries of Palestine see

'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' ch. ii.

[9991]3499 The correct reading of St. Mark vii. 31, is 'through

Sidon.' By the latter I do not understand the town of that name. which

would have been quite outside the Saviour's route, but (with Ewald and

Lange) the territory of Sidon.

[9992]3500 The fullest notice of the 'Ten Cities' is that of Caspari,

Chronolog. Geogr. Einl. pp. 83-91, with which compare Menke's

Bibel-Atlas, Map V.

[9993]3501 Comp. Schürer, pp. 382, 383.

[9994]3502 St. Matt xv. 29-31.

[9995]3503 mogil_lov or moggil_lov does not mean one absolutely dumb.

It is literally: difficulter loquens. The Rabbinic designation of such

a person would have been Cheresh (Ter. i. 2) although different

opinions obtain as to whether the term includes impediment of speech

(comp. Meg. ii. 4; Gitt. 71 a).

[9996]3504 St. Mark viii. 23.

[9997]3505 In St. John ix. 6 it is really application of clay.

[9998]3506 sten_zw occurs only here in the Gospels. Otherwise it

occurs in Rom. viii. 23; 2 Cor. v. 2, 4; Hebr. xiii. 17; James v. 9;

the substantive in Acts vii. 34; Rom, viii. 26.

[9999]3507 So literally.

[10000]3508 Kull_v means here incurvatus, and not as in ix. 43

mutilatus.

[10001]3509 Kull_v means here incurvatus, and not as in ix. 43

mutilatus.

[10002]3510 St. Mark vii. 31-37.

[10003]3511 Shabb. 108 b; Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7; Suet. Vesp. 7.

[10004]3512 Wünsche (ad. loc.) is guilty of serious misapprehension

when he says that the Talmud condemns to eternal punishment those who

employ this mode of healing. This statement is incorrect. What it

condemns is the whispering of magical formulas over a wound (Sanh. 90

a), when it was the custom of some magicians to spit before (Sanh. 101

a), of others after pronouncing the formula (Jer. Sanh. 28 b). There

is no analogy whatever between this and what our Lord did, and the use

of saliva for cures is universally recognised by the Rabbis.

[10005]3513 _ffaq_ = {hebrew}

[10006]3514 So literally, or rather 'hearings' - in the plural.

[10007]3515 St. Mark viii. 22-26.

[10008]3516 Most commentators regard this as the eastern Bethsaida, or

Bethsaida-Julias. The objection (in the Speaker's Commentary) that the

text speaks of 'a village' (vv. 23, 26) is obviated by the

circumstance that similarly we read immediately afterwards (ver. 27)

about the 'villages of Cæsarea Philippi.' Indeed, a knowledge of

Jewish law enables us to see here a fresh proof of the genuineness of

the Evangelic narrative. For, according to Meg. 3 b the villages about

a town were reckoned as belonging to it, while, on the other hand, a

town which had not among its inhabitants ten Batlanin (persons who

devoted themselves to the worship and affairs of the Synagogue) was to

be regarded as a village. The Bethsaida of ver. 22 must refer to the

district, in one of the hamlets of which the blind man met Jesus. It

does not appear, that Jesus ever again wrought miracles, either in

Capernaum or the western Bethsaida, if, indeed, He ever returned to

that district. Lastly, the scene of that miracle must have been the

eastern Bethsaida (Julias), since immediately afterwards the

continuance of His journey to Cæsarea Philippi is related without any

notice of crossing the Lake.

[10009]3517 The better reading of the words is given in the Revised

Version.

[10010]3518 Jer. Shabb. xiv. 4; Baba B. 126 b.

[10011]3519 Jer. Sot. 16 d, about the middle.

[10012]3520 Comp. St. Mark viii. 24.

[10013]3521 ver. 26.

[10014]3522 St. Matt. ix. 27-31.

[10015]3523 Thus, the healing recorded immediately after this history,

in St. Matt. ix. 32-35, belongs evidently to a later period. Comp. St.

Luke xi. 14.

[10016]3524 I admit that especially the latter argument is

inconclusive, but I appeal to the general context and the setting of

this history. It is impossible to regard St. Matt. ix. as a

chronological record of events.

[10017]3525 He is addressed as 'Son of David,' in this passage, by the

Syro-Phoenician woman (St. Matt. xv. 22), and by the blind men near

Jericho (St. Matt. xx. 30, 31; St. Mark x. 47, 48; St. Luke xviii, 38,

39), and proclaimed as such by the people in St. Matt. xii. 23; xxi.

9, 15.

[10018]3526 _mbrim_omai - the word occurs in that sense only here and

in St. Mark i. 43; otherwise also in St. Mark xiv. 5, and in St. John

xi. 33, 38.

[10019]3527 St. Mark i. 40, 41.

[10020]3528 It should be borne in mind, that the country,

surroundings, &c., place these men in a totally different category

from the Syro-Phoenician woman.

[10021]3529 St. Mark i. 45.

[10022]3530 Roman Catholic writers mostly praise, while Protestants

blame, their conduct.

[10023]3531 Sanh. vii. 4.

[10024]3532 Peah viii. 7.

[10025]3533 In Prov. x. 22.

[10026]3534 Ex. xx. 8.

[10027]3535 Comp. Ber. R. 11 on Gen. ii. 3.

[10028]3536 See Appendix XVII: The Ordinances and Law of the Sabbath.

[10029]3537 Comp. St. John v. 9, 16.

[10030]3538 Comp. 'The Temple and its Services,' pp. 222, 226, 230,

231.

[10031]3539 The great majority of critics are agreed as to its

authenticity.

[10032]3540 The view which I have adopted is that of Scaliger and

Lightfoot; the alternative one mentioned, that of Delitzsch. In regard

to the many other explanations proposed, I would lay down this canon:

No explanation can be satisfactory which rests not on some ascertained

fact in Jewish life, but where the fact is merely 'supposed' for the

sake of the explanation which it would afford. Thus, there is not the

slightest support in fact for the idea, that the first Sabbath of the

second month was so called (Wetstein, Speaker's Commentary), or the

first Sabbath in the second year of a septennial cycle, or the Sabbath

of the Nisan (the sacred) year, in contradistinction to the Tishri or

secular year, which began in autumn. Of these and similar

interpretations it is enough to say, that the underlying fact is

'supposed' for the sake of a 'supposed' explanation; in other words,

they embody an hypothesis based on an hypothesis.

[10033]3541 There were only three Paschal feasts during the public

ministry of Christ. Any other computation rests on the idea that the

Unknown Feast was the Passover, or even the Feast of Esther.

[10034]3542 St. John v.

[10035]3543 Comp. Appendix XV.

[10036]3544 St. John ii. 13.

[10037]3545 St. John iii. 22; v. 1-3.

[10038]3546 St. John iv. 35.

[10039]3547 St. Matt. iv. 18-22.

[10040]3548 Few would be disposed to place St. Matt. xii. before St.

Matt. iv.

[10041]3549 St. John v.

[10042]3550 Adverbs answer to the questions, How, When, Why, Where.

[10043]3551 Meyer insists that the _d_n, poie_n, or more correctly

_dopoie_n, (St. Mark ii. 23) should be translated literally, that the

disciples began to make a way by plucking the ears of corn.

Accordingly, he maintains, that there is an essential difference

between the account of St. Mark and those of the two other

Evangelists, who attribute the plucking of the ears to hunger. Canon

Cook (Speaker's Commentary, New Testament i. p. 216) has to my mind,

conclusively shown the untenableness of Meyer's contention. He

compares the expression of St. Mark to the Latin 'iter facere.' I

would suggest the French 'chemin faisant.' Godet points out the

absurdity of plucking up ears in order to make a way through the corn.

[10044]3552 In St. Mark also the better reading is diapore_esqai.

[10045]3553 St. Matthew.

[10046]3554 St. Mark.

[10047]3555 St. Luke.

[10048]3556 Deut xxiii. 25.

[10049]3557 Shabb. 70 a.

[10050]3558 Thus (Shabb. 74 b, lines 12, 11 from bottom), if a person

were to pull out a feather from the wing of a bird, cut off the top,

and then pluck off the fluff below it would involve three labours and

three sin-offerings.

[10051]3559 Macc. 21 b.

[10052]3560 Jer. Shabb. p. 10 a, lines 28 to 26 from bottom.

[10053]3561 Shabb. 142 b, line 6 from bottom.

[10054]3562 Shabb. 146 a.

[10055]3563 But only where the life of an Israelite, not of a heathen

or Samaritan, was in danger (Yoma 84 b).

[10056]3564 Maimonides, Hilkh. Shabb. ii. 1 (Yad haCh. vol. i. part

iii. p. 141 a): 'The Sabbath is set aside on account of danger to

life, as all other ordinances (hebrew)'.

[10057]3565 Jer. Shabb. xiv. 4, pp. 14 d, 15 a.

[10058]3566 Jer. Shabb. xvi. 1.

[10059]3567 According to 1 Sam. xxii. 9 Ahimelech (or Ahijah, 1 Sam.

xiv. 3) was the high Priest. We infer, that Abiathar was conjoined

with his father in the priesthood. Comp. the 'Bible-History,' vol. iv.

p. 111.

[10060]3568 Lev. xxiv 5-9.

[10061]3569 The question discussed in the Talmud is, whether,

supposing an ordinary Israelite discharged priestly functions on the

Sabbath in the temple, it would involve two sins: unlawful service and

Sabbath-desecration; or only one sin, unlawful service.

[10062]3570 Yalkut ii. par. 130, p. 18 d.

[10063]3571 Jer. Shabb. ii. 5, p. 5 a.

[10064]3572 Mechilt. on Ex. xxxi. 13, ed. Weiss, p. 109 b.

[10065]3573 We may here again state,that Cod. D has this after St.

Luke vi. 4: 'The same day, having beholden a man working on the

Sabbath, He said to Him: "Man, if thou knowest what thou dost, blessed

are thou: but if thou knowest not, thou art accursed and a

transgressor of the Law"' (Nicholson, Gospel according to the Hebrews,

p. 151). It need scarcely be said, that the words, as placed in St.

Luke, are a spurious addition, although as Canon Westcott rightly

infers, 'the saying [probably] rests on some real incident' (Introd.

to the Study of the Gospels, p. 454, note.

[10066]3574 Debar. R. 10.

[10067]3575 Yoma viii. 6.

[10068]3576 Yoma 84 a.

[10069]3577 Shabb. xiv. 3.

[10070]3578 Thus, when a Rabbi was consulted, whether a man might on

the Sabbath take a certain drink which had a purgative effect, he

answered: 'If for pleasure it is lawful; if for healing forbidden'

(Jer. Shabb. 14 c).

[10071]3579 u. s. 4.

[10072]3580 Thus one of the Rabbis regarded foetor of the breath as

possibly dangerous (u. s. 14 d).

[10073]3581 Displacement of the frontal bone, disease of the nerves

leading from the ear to the upper jaw, an eye starting from its

socket, severe inflammations, and swelling wounds, are specially

mentioned.

[10074]3582 Comp. Jer. Shabb. 14 d.

[10075]3583 St. Mark iii. 4.

[10076]3584 St. Matt. xii. 12.

[10077]3585 Shabb. 128 b.

[10078]3586 Shabb. 117 b, about the middle.

[10079]3587 St. Luke vi. 6.

[10080]3588 The tense indicates, that it was restored as he stretched

it out. And this is spiritually significant. According to St. Jerome

(Comm. in Matt. xii. 13), in the Gospel of the Nazarenes and Ebionites

this man was described as a mason, and that he had besought Jesus to

restore him, so that he might not have to beg for his bread.

[10081]3589 St. Luke vi. 11.

[10082]3590 Comp. ch. xxix. of this Book.

[10083]3591 This appears from the whole context. Comp. Bp. Ellicott's

Histor. Lect. pp. 220, 221, and notes.

[10084]3592 For a summary of the great differences between the two

miracles, comp. Bp. Ellicott, u. s. pp. 221, 222. The statements of

Meyer ad loc. are unsatisfactory.

[10085]3593 The k_finov (St. Matt. xiv. 20) was the small handbasket

(see ch. xxix), while the spur_v (the term used at the feeding of the

four thousand) is the large provision-basket or hamper, such as that

in which St. Paul was let down over the wall at Damascus (Acts ix.

25). What makes it more marked is, that the distinction of the two

words is kept up in the reference to the two miracles (St. Matt. xvi.

9, 10).

[10086]3594 See ch. xxix.

[10087]3595 St. Mark viii. 6, 7.

[10088]3596 St. Matt. xiv. 19; St. Mark vi. 39; St. John vi. 10.

[10089]3597 Literally, 'upon the earth.'

[10090]3598 The word _rjmia means a specially lonely place.

[10091]3599 Of Bleek.

[10092]3600 By Dean Plumptre, ad loc.

[10093]3601 Ezek. xxxvii. 3.

[10094]3602 Compare, however, vol. i. pp. 238, 240, and Book V. ch.

iii. Where the political element was dominant, the religious

distinction might not be so clearly marked.

[10095]3603 St. Matt. xv. 39.

[10096]3604 It need scarcely be said that the best reading is Magadan,

not Magdala.

[10097]3605 It has been ingeniously suggested, that Magadan might

represent a Megiddo, being a form intermediate between the Hebrew

Megiddon and the Asyrian Magadu.

[10098]3606 St. Mark viii. 11.

[10099]3607 Canon Cook in the 'Speaker's Commentary,' ad loc.

[10100]3608 Sepp, ap. Böttger, Topogr. Lex. zu Fl. Josephus, p. 240.

[10101]3609 Bearing in mind that Tarichæa was the chief depôt for

salting the fish for export, the disciples may have had some

connections with the place.

[10102]3610 The word here used would, to judge by analogous instances,

be {hebrew} (Oth), and not {hebrew} (Siman), as Wünsche suggests, even

though the word is formed from the Greek sjme_on. But the Rabbinic

Siman seems to me to have a different shade of meaning.

[10103]3611 Sanh. 98 a last 4 lines.

[10104]3612 However, this (and, for that matter, the next Haggadah

also) may have been intended to be taken in an allegoric or parabolic

sense, though there is no hint given to that effect.

[10105]3613 Baba Mez. 59 b, line 4 from top, &c.

[10106]3614 St. Mark viii. 12.

[10107]3615 See ch. xxvii. vol. i. p. 647.

[10108]3616 Although some of the best MSS. omit St. Matt. xvi. 2,

beginning 'When it is evening,' to the end of ver. 3, most critics are

agreed that it should be retained. But the words in italics in vv. 2

and 3 should be left out, so as to mark exclamations.

[10109]3617 So according to the best reading.

[10110]3618 St. Mark viii. 12.

[10111]3619 St. Luke xix. 41-44.

[10112]3620 St. John vii.

[10113]3621 The figurative meaning of leaven, as that which morally

corrupts, was familiar to the Jews. Thus the word {hebrew} (Seor) is

used in the sense of 'moral leaven' hindering the good in Ber. 17 a

while the verb {hebrew} (chamets) 'to be come leavened,' is used to

indicate moral deterioration in Rosh haSh. 3 b, 4 a.

[10114]3622 Jos. Jew. War iii. 10.

[10115]3623 If it were for no other reason than the mode in which the

ex-general of the Galileans, Josephus, tells this story, he would

deserve our execration.

[10116]3624 For the geographical details I must refer to the words of

Stanley and Tristram, and to Bädeker's Palästina. I have not deemed it

necessary to make special quotation of my authority in each case.

[10117]3625 Ps. xiii. 6.

[10118]3626 Josh. xi. 1-5.

[10119]3627 Deut. xxxiii. 23.

[10120]3628 2 Sam. xx. 14.

[10121]3629 Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 586.

[10122]3630 So Dean Stanley, with his usual charm of language, though

topographically not quite correctly (Sinai and Palestine, p. 395).

[10123]3631 Nothing in the above obliges us to infer, that the words

of Peter's confession were spoken in Cæsarea itself. The place might

have been in view or in the memory.

[10124]3632 2 Pet. i. 19.

[10125]3633 St. John vii. 1-5.

[10126]3634 St. John vi. 60-66; comp. St. Matt. xv. 12.

[10127]3635 St. John vi. 67.

[10128]3636 St. Luke ix. 18.

[10129]3637 I confess, however, to strong doubts on this point.

Legends of the hiding of the tabernacle, ark, and altar of incense on

Mount Nebo by Jeremiah, were, indeed, combined with an expectation

that these precious possessions would be restored in Messianic times

(2 Macc. ii. 1-7), but it is expressly added in ver. 8, that 'the

Lord' Himself, and not the prophet, would show their place of

concealment. Dean Plumptre's statement, that the Pharisees taught, and

the Jews believed in, the doctrine of the transmigration of souls must

have arisen from the misapprehension of what Josephus said, to which

reference has already been made in the chapter on 'The Pharisees,

Sadducees, and Essenes.' The first distinct mention of the

reappearance of Jeremiah, along with Elijah, to restore the ark, &c.,

is in Josippon ben Gorion (lib. i. c. 21), but here also only in the

Cod. Munster., not in that used by Breithaupt. The age of the work of

Josippon is in dispute; probably we may date it from the tenth century

of our era. The only other testimony about the reappearance of

Jeremiah is in 4 Esd. (2 Esd.) ii. 18. But the book is post-Christian,

and, in that section especially, evidently borrows from the Christian

Scriptures.

[10130]3638 On the vague fears of Herod, see vol. i. p. 675.

[10131]3639 A vision of Jeremiah in a dream was supposed to betoken

chastisements (Ber. 57 e, line 7 from top).

[10132]3640 St. Mark viii. 27, 29.

[10133]3641 St. Matt. xvi. 16.

[10134]3642 Rom. x. 10.

[10135]3643 Comp. Rom. i. 4.

[10136]3644 St. Matt. xiv. 33.

[10137]3645 St. John vi. 69.

[10138]3646 This is the correct reading.

[10139]3647 St. Luke ix. 18.

[10140]3648 There could have been no anti-Petrine tendency in this,

since it is equally omitted in the Petrine Gospel of St. Mark.

[10141]3649 Ecclus, xiv. 18; xvii. 31.

[10142]3650 1 Cor. xv. 60; Gal. i. 16; Eph. vi. 12.

[10143]3651 St. John i. 42.

[10144]3652 Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 158 a, line 8 from bottom.

[10145]3653 See the remarks on Matthew-Levi in vol. i. ch. xvii. p.

514 of this Book.

[10146]3654 Thus, for example, Andrew was both HAndr_av and {hebrew}

(Anderai) 'manly,' 'brave.' A family Anderai is mentioned Jer. Kethub.

33 a.

[10147]3655 Is. li 1.

[10148]3656 Yalkut on Numb. xxiii. 9, vol. i. p.243, b, last 6 lines,

and c, first 3 lines.

[10149]3657 The same occurs in Shem. R. 15, only that there it is not

only Abraham but 'the fathers' who are 'the Rocks' (the word used

there is not Petra but Tsur) on whom the world is founded.

[10150]3658 Erub.19 a, Ber. R. 48.

[10151]3659 There was a strange idea about Jewish children who had

died uncircumcised and the sinners in Israel exchanging their position

in regard to circumcision. Could this, only spiritually understood and

applied, have been present to the mind of St. Paul when he wrote

Romans ii. 25, 26, last clauses?

[10152]3660 See Appendix XVIII.

[10153]3661 The reader will have no difficulty in recognizing a

reference to the See of Rome, perhaps 'the Chair of St. Peter,' mixed

up with the meaning of the name of Peter.

[10154]3662 The other views of the words are (a) that Christ pointed

to Himself as the Rock, (b) or to Peter as a person, (c) or to Peter's

confession.

[10155]3663 The other word is Edah. Comp. Bible Hist. vol. ii. p. 177,

note.

[10156]3664 Ecclus. xxiv. 2.

[10157]3665 Comp. Acts vii. 38, and even St. Matt. xviii. 17.

[10158]3666 It is important to notice that the word is Hades, and not

Gehenna. Dean Plumptre calls attention to the wonderful character of

such a prophecy at a time when all around seemed to foreshadow only

failure.

[10159]3667 Those who apply the words 'upon this Rock, &c.,' to Peter

or to Christ must feel, that they introduce an abrupt and inelegant

transition from one figure to another.

[10160]3668 Acts xv. 7.

[10161]3669 Acts x. 48.

[10162]3670 Jer. Ber. 3 b; Jer. Meg. 71 a; Jer. Sanh. 30 a.

[10163]3671 St. John xx. 23.

[10164]3672 The word used by St. Matthew (dieste_lato) means

'charged;' that by St. Mark (_pet_mjsen) implies rebuke; while the

expression employed by St. Luke (_pitim_sav a_to_v par_ggeile) conveys

both rebuke and command.

[10165]3673 Otherwise they could not afterwards have been in such

doubt about His Death and Resurrection.

[10166]3674 It is very remarkable that the expression _le_v soi

literally 'have mercy on thee,' is the exact transcript of the

Rabbinic Chas lecha ({hebrew}). See Levy, Neuhebr. Wörterb. vol. ii,

p. 85. The commoner expression is Chas ve Shalom, 'mercy and peace,'

viz. be to thee, and the meaning is, God forbid, or God avert, a thing

or its continuance.

[10167]3675 So the Greek literally.

[10168]3676 In those days the extreme suffering which a man might

expect from the hostile power (the Romans) was the literal cross; in

ours, it is suffering not less acute, the greatest which the present

hostile power can inflict: really, through perhaps not literally, a

cross.

[10169]3677 St. Matt. xvi. 24-27.

[10170]3678 This is an exact translation of the phase {hebrew}, which

is of such very frequent occurrence in Rabbinic writings. See our

remarks on St. John viii. 52 in Book IV. ch. viii.

[10171]3679 St. Matt. xvi. 28.

[10172]3680 According to an old tradition, Christ had left Cæsarea

Philippi, and the scene of the Transfiguration was Mount Tabor. But

(1) there is no notice of His departure, such as in generally made by

St. Mark; (2) on the contrary, it is mentioned by St. Mark as after

the Transfiguration (ix. 30); (3) Mount Tabor was at that time crowned

by a fortified city, which would render it unsuitable for the scene of

the Transfiguration.

[10173]3681 This is implied not only in the disciples being heavy with

sleep, but in the morning scene (St. Luke ix. 37) which followed.

[10174]3682 Canon Tristram writes: 'We were before long painfully

affected by the rarity of the atmosphere.' In general, our description

is derived from Canon Tristram ('Land of Israel'), Captain Conder

('Tent-Work in Palestine'), and Bädeker-Socin's Palästina, p. 354.

[10175]3683 One of its names, Shenir (Deut. iii. 9; Cant. iv. 8; Ezek.

xxvii. 5) means Mont Blanc. In Rabbinic writings it is designated as

the 'snow-mountain.'

[10176]3684 Tristram, u.s., p. 607.

[10177]3685 Conder, u.s., vol. i. p. 264.

[10178]3686 Our description is based on the graphic account of the

ascent by Canon Tristram (u.s. pp. 609-613).

[10179]3687 Prov. xxv. 13.

[10180]3688 2 Kings vi. 16, 17.

[10181]3689 St. Matt. xxvi. 43; St. Mark xiv. 40.

[10182]3690 The word is the same. It also occurs in a figurative sense

in 2 Cor. i. 8; v. 4; 1 Tim. v. 16.

[10183]3691 Meyer strongly advocates the rendering: 'but having kept

awake.' See, however, Godet's remarks ad loc.

[10184]3692 Meyer is in error in supposing that the tradition, on

which St. Luke's account is founded, amplifies the narratives of St.

Matthew and St. Mark. With Canon Cook I incline to the view of Resch,

that, judging from the style, &c., St. Luke derived this notice from

the same source as the materials for the large portion from ch. ix. 51

to xviii. 17.

[10185]3693 On the peculiar meaning of the word morf_ comp. Bishop

Lightfoot on Philip. pp. 127-133.

[10186]3694 St. Luke.

[10187]3695 This expression of St. Luke, so far from indicating

embellishment of the other accounts, marks, if anything, rather

retrogression.

[10188]3696 St. Matthew.

[10189]3697 It is scarcely a Rabbinic parallel - hardly an

illustration - that in Rabbinic writings also Moses' face before his

death is said to have shone as the sun, for the comparison is a

Biblical one. Such language would, of course, be familiar to St.

Matthew.

[10190]3698 The words 'as snow,' in St. Mark ix. 3, are, however,

spurious - an early gloss.

[10191]3699 St. Mark.

[10192]3700 St. Luke.

[10193]3701 St. Luke.

[10194]3702 Godet points out the emphatic meaning of o_tinev in St.

Luke ix. 30=quippe qui: they were none other than.

[10195]3703 St. Luke.

[10196]3704 In some of the Apocrypha and Josephus, as well as in 2

Pet. i. 15.

[10197]3705 e_sodov, Acts xiii. 24.

[10198]3706 Conder, u.s. vol. i. p 265.

[10199]3707 Wünsche (ad loc.) quotes as it seems to me, very inaptly,

the Rabbinic realistic idea of the fulfilment of Is. iv. 5, 6, that

God would make for each of the righteous seven booths, varying

according to their merits (Baba B. 75 a) or else one booth for each

(Bemid. R. 21, ed. Warsh. p. 85 a). Surely, there can be no similarity

between this and the words of Peter.

[10200]3708 A comparison of the narratives leaves on us the impression

that the disciples also were touched by the cloud. I cannot agree with

Godet, that the question depends on whether we adopt in St. Luke ix.

34 the reading of the T.R. _ke_nouv, or that of the Alex. a_to_v.

[10201]3709 The more correct reading in St. Luke seems to be 'Elect

Son.'

[10202]3710 St. Matthew adds, 'in Whom I am well pleased.' The reason

of this fuller account is not difficult to understand.

[10203]3711 St. Mark indicates this by the words: 'And suddenly, when

they looked round about.'

[10204]3712 This part of the argument is well worked out by Meyer, but

his arguments for regarding the appearance of Moses and Elijah as

merely a vision, because the former at least had no resurrection-body,

are very weak. Are we sure, that disembodied spirits have no kind of

corporeity, or that they cannot assume a visible appearance?

[10205]3713 Even if that Epistle were not St. Peter's, it would still

represent the most ancient tradition.

[10206]3714 St. John i. 14.

[10207]3715 On Ex. xii.

[10208]3716 Moses and the Messiah are placed side by side, the one as

coming from the desert, the other from Rome. 'This one shall lead at

the head of a cloud, and that one shall lead at the head of a cloud,

the Memra of Jehovah leading between them twain, and they going' - as

I would render it - 'as one' (Ve-innun mehalkhin kachada), or, as some

render it, 'they shall walk together.' The question here arises,

whether this is to be understood as merely figurative language, or to

be taken literally. If literally, does the Targum refer to a kind of

heavenly vision, or to something that was actually to take place, a

kind of realism of what Philo had anticipated (see vol. i. p. 82)? It

may have been in this sense that Fr. Tayler renders the words by 'in

culmine nubis equitabit.' But on careful consideration the many and

obvious incongruities involved in it seem to render a literal

interpretation well nigh impossible. But all seems not only plain but

accordant with other Rabbinic teaching (see vol. i. p. 176), if we

regard the passage as only indicating a parallelism between the first

and the second Deliverer and the deliverances wrought by them. Again,

although the parallel is often drawn in Rabbinic writings between

Moses and Elijah, I know only one passage, and that a dubious one, in

which they are conjoined in the days of the Messiah. It occurs in Deb.

R. 3 (seven lines before the close of it), and is to this effect,

that, because Moses had in this world given his life for Israel,

therefore in the Æon to come, when God would send Elijah the prophet,

they two should come, keachath, either 'together' or 'as one,' the

proof passage being Nah. i. 3, 'the whirlwind' there referring to

Moses, and 'the storm' to Elijah. Surely, no one would found on such a

basis a Jewish mythical origin of the Transfiguration.

[10209]3717 Godet has also aptly pointed out, that the injunction of

silence on the disciples as to this event is incompatible with the

mythical theory. It could only point to a real event, not to a myth.

[10210]3718 Deut. xviii. 15.

[10211]3719 St. Matt. iii. 17.

[10212]3720 While writing this, we fully remember about the title of

St. John as he 'whom Jesus loved' specially, even in that inner and

closer circle.

[10213]3721 St. Mark ix. 10.

[10214]3722 St. Mark ix. 10.

[10215]3723 St. Matt. xi. 14.

[10216]3724 The meaning remains substantially the same whether we

insert 'him' or 'it.'

[10217]3725 The question, whether there is to be a literal

reappearance of Elijah before the Second Advent of Christ does not

seem to be answered in the present passage. Perhaps it is purposely

left unanswered.

[10218]3726 In St. Matthew and St. Mark.

[10219]3727 The reading 'little faith' instead of 'unbelief,' though

highly attested, seems only an early correction. On internal grounds

it is more likely, that the expression 'little faith' is a correction

by a later apologete, than 'unbelief.' The latter also corresponds to

'faithless generation.'

[10220]3728 ver. 14.

[10221]3729 There is no hint in the text, that their amazement was due

to the shining of His Face.

[10222]3730 St. Mark.

[10223]3731 In St. Mark ix. 16 the better reading is, 'He asked them,'

and not, as in the T. R., 'the Scribes.'

[10224]3732 St. Matthew.

[10225]3733 The addition of the word 'fasting' in St. Mark is probably

spurious. It reads like a later gloss. It is not unlikely that St.

Matt. xvii. 21 is merely a spurious insertion from St. Mark. However,

see Meyer on this point.

[10226]3734 The expression 'generation' although embracing in its

reproof all the people, is specially addressed to the disciples.

[10227]3735 Godet.

[10228]3736 The weight of the evidence from the MSS. accepted by most

modern critics (though not by that very judicious commentator, Canon

Cook) is in favour of the reading and rendering: 'If Thou canst! all

things are possible,' &c. But it seems to me, that this mode of reply

on the part of Christ is not only without any other parallel in the

Gospels, but too artificial, too Western, if I may use the expression.

While the age of a MS. or MSS. is, of course, one of the outward

grounds on which the criticism of the text must proceed, I confess to

the feeling that, as age and purity are not identical, the interpreter

must weigh all such evidence in the light of the internal grounds for

or against its reception. Besides, in this instance, it seems to me

that there is some difficulty about the t_ if piste_sai is struck out,

and which is not so easily cleared up as Meyer suggests.

[10229]3737 'Omnipotentiæ Divinæ se fides hominis, quasi organon,

accommodat and recipiendum, vel etiam ad agendum.' - Bengel.

[10230]3738 'In this sign shalt thou conquer' - the inscription on the

supposed vision of the Cross by the Emperor Constantine before his

great victory and conversion to Christianity.

[10231]3739 The words with 'tears,' in the T.R. are apparently a

spurious addition.

[10232]3740 The interpretation of Meyer: 'Do not withhold thy help,

notwithstanding my unbelief' seems as Jejune as that of others: 'Help

me in my unbelief.'

[10233]3741 But it is rather too wide an application, when Euthymius

Zygabenus (one of the great Byzantine theologians of the twelfth

century), and others after him, note 'the kind of all demons.'

[10234]3742 The Rabbinic use of the expression, 'grain of mustard

seed,' has already been noted. The expression 'tearing up' or

'removing' 'mountains' was also proverbial among the Rabbis. Thus, a

great Rabbi might be designated as one who 'uprooted mountains' (Ber.,

last page, line 5 from top; and Horay, 14 a), or as one who pulverised

them (Sanh. 24 a). The expression is also used to indicate apparently

impossible things, such as those which a heathen government may order

a man to do (Baba B. 3 b).

[10235]3743 The expression in St. Matthew abode, but a temporary stay

- a going to (xvii. 22) does not imply permanent abode, but a

temporary stay - a going to and fro.

[10236]3744 St. Mark.

[10237]3745 According to Neh. x. 32, immediately after the return from

Babylon the contribution was a third of a shekel - probably on account

of the poverty of the people.

[10238]3746 Comp. 2 Kings xii. 4; 2 Chron. xxiv. 6; Neh. x. 32.

[10239]3747 But only one Alexandrian (comp. LXX. Gen. xxiii. 15; Josh.

vii. 21).

[10240]3748 Could there have been an intended, or - what would be

still more striking - an unintended, but very real irony in this, when

Judas afterwards cast down the pieces of silver in the Temple (St.

Matt. xxvii. 5)?

[10241]3749 Sheq. iii. 3.

[10242]3750 Sheq. iii. 4.

[10243]3751 Yoma 64 a.

[10244]3752 Dean Plumptre is mistaken in comparing, as regarded the

Sadducees, the Temple-rate with the Church-rate question. There is no

analogy between them, nor did the Sadducees ever question its

propriety. The Dean is also in error in supposing, that the

Palestinians were wont to bring it at one of the other feasts.

[10245]3753 The penalty of distraint had only been enacted less than a

century before (about 78), during the reign of Queen Salome-Alexandra,

who was entirely in the hands of the Pharisees.

[10246]3754 Sheqal. vi. 5.

[10247]3755 Yoma 55 b.

[10248]3756 Ps. ii. 4.

[10249]3757 Jos. War vii. 6. 6.

[10250]3758 See Book III. ch. xxxi.

[10251]3759 If it were not for the authority of Wieseler, who supports

it, the suggestion would scarcely deserve serious notice, that the

reference here is not to the Temple-tribute, but to the Roman polltax

o census. Irrespective of the question whether a census was then

levied in Galilee, the latter is designated both in St. Matt. xvii.

25, and in xxii. 17, as well as in St. Mark xii. 14, as k_nsov, while

here the well-known expression didrachma is used.

[10252]3760 The Revised Version renders it by: 'spake first.' But the

word (profq_nw) does not bear this meaning in any of the fifteen

passages in the LXX., where it corresponds to the Hebrew Qiddem, and

means 'to anticipate' or 'to prevent' in the archaic sense of that

word.

[10253]3761 In Succ. 30 a, we read a parable of a king who paid toll,

and being asked the reason, replied that travellers were to learn by

his example not to seek to withdraw themselves from paying all dues.

[10254]3762 Shabb. 119 a, lines 20 &c. from top.

[10255]3763 In the Midrash: 'On the eve of the great fast' (the Day of

Atonement). But from the connection it is evidently intended to apply

to the distinction to be put on the Sabbath-meal.

[10256]3764 Ber. R. 11 on Gen. ii. 3.

[10257]3765 St. Mark ix. 34.

[10258]3766 St. Matt. xviii. 1.

[10259]3767 St. Matt. xvii. 23; St. Mark ix. 31.

[10260]3768 St. Mark ix. 42-50.

[10261]3769 St. Matt. xviii. 15, 21.

[10262]3770 St. Mark ix. 38.

[10263]3771 St. Matt. xviii. 21.

[10264]3772 Taan. iii. 8; comp. especially Jer. Taan. 67 a.

[10265]3773 The almost blasphemous story of how Choni or Onias, 'the

circle-drawer,' drew a circle around him, and refused to leave it till

God had sent rain - and successively objected to too little and too

much, stands by no means alone. Jer. Taan. 67 a gives some very

painful details about this power of even altering the decrees of God.

[10266]3774 Baba B. 75 a.

[10267]3775 Ber. 34 b.

[10268]3776 St. Matt. xx. 20.

[10269]3777 St. Mark ix. 38; St. Luke ix. 49.

[10270]3778 St. Luke ix. 50.

[10271]3779 Readers of ordinary sobriety of judgment will form their

opinions of the value of modern negative criticism, when we tell them

that it has discovered in this man who did not follow with the

disciples an allusion to 'Pauline Christianity,' of which St. Mark

took a more charitable view than St. Matthew! By such treatment it

would not be difficult to make anything of the facts of history.

[10272]3780 St. Matt. xii. 30.

[10273]3781 St. Luke.

[10274]3782 St. Mark ix. 33.

[10275]3783 ver. 35.

[10276]3784 Verbal parallels could easily be quoted, and naturally so,

since Jesus spoke as a Jew to Jews - but no real parallel. Indeed, the

point of the story lies in its being so utterly un-Jewish.

[10277]3785 St. Luke xvii. 1-7.

[10278]3786 Comp. for example St. Mark ix. 50 with St. Matt. v. 13.

[10279]3787 Or else St. Luke may have gathered into connected

discourses what may have been spoken at different times.

[10280]3788 St. Matt. xviii. 2-6, and parallels.

[10281]3789 Kethub. 59 b, line 18 from bottom.

[10282]3790 Moed K. 10 b, first line.

[10283]3791 Kidd. 29 b, lines 10 and 9 from bottom.

[10284]3792 Vayyikra R. 26.

[10285]3793 St. Matt. xviii. 8-9; St. Mark, ix. 43-48.

[10286]3794 St. Mark ix. 44 the last clause of ver. 45, and ver. 46,

seem to be spurious. But ver. 48 (except the words to_ pur_v, for

which read simply: 'into Gehenna') as well as the expression 'fire

that never shall be quenched,' and in St. Matthew, 'everlasting fire,'

are on all hands admitted to be genuine. The question of 'eternal

punishment,' from the standpoint of Jewish theology, will be treated

in a later part.

[10287]3795 St. Mark ix. 49, 50.

[10288]3796 The rendering 'Salted for the fire,' viz., as a sacrifice,

has been adopted by other critics.

[10289]3797 We can readily understand how that clause, which was one

of the most ancient explanations, perhaps a marginal gloss on the text

'Everyone shall be salted for the fire,' crept into the text when its

meaning was no longer understood.

[10290]3798 These words are spurious.

[10291]3799 Lev. ii. 13.

[10292]3800 Menach. 20 b.

[10293]3801 Nidd. 31 a.

[10294]3802 Kidd. 29 b.

[10295]3803 Bekhor. 8 b, lines 14 and 13 from bottom.

[10296]3804 {hebrew} -'the salt, when it becomes ill-savouring, with

what shall it be seasoned?' The passage occurs in a very curious

Haggadah, and the objection that salt would not become ill-savouring,

would not apply to the proverb in the form given it by Christ.

[10297]3805 See the Appendix on 'Angelology and Demonology.'

[10298]3806 Chag. 12 b; Pirké de R. Eliez. 4.

[10299]3807 St. Matt. xviii. 11.

[10300]3808 Except that the history of Zacchæus, in which the words

occur, is really an application real life of the Parable of the Lost

Sheep.

[10301]3809 St. Luke xv. 3-7.

[10302]3810 St. Matt. xviii. 15.

[10303]3811 Yoma viii. 9.

[10304]3812 Yoma 87 a.

[10305]3813 Shabb. 119 b; Tamid 28 a; Arakh. 16 b.

[10306]3814 Arakh. u.s.

[10307]3815 Titus iii. 10.

[10308]3816 It is both curious and interesting to find that the

question, whether the Priests exercised their functions as 'the sent

of God' or 'the sent of the congregation' - that is, held their

commission directly from God, or only as being the representatives of

the people, is discussed already in the Talmud (Yoma 18 b & c.; Nedar.

35 b). The Talmud replies that, as it is impossible to delegate what

one does not possess, and since the laity might neither offer

sacrifices nor do any like service, the Priests could not possibly

have been the delegates of the Church, but must be those of God. (See

the essay by Delitzsch in the Zeitschr. fur Luther. Theol. for 1854,

pp. 446-449.)

[10309]3817 St. Matt. xviii. 19.

[10310]3818 The Mishnah (Ab. iii. 2), and the Talmud (Ber. 6 a), infer

from Mal. iii. 16, that, when two are together and occupy themselves

with the Law, the Shekhinah is between them. Similarly, it is argued

from Lament. iii. 28, and Exod. xx. 21, that if even one alone is

engaged in such pursuits, God is with him and will bless him.

[10311]3819 St. Matt. xviii. 19, 20.

[10312]3820 St. Matt. xviii. 21.

[10313]3821 Babha K. viii. 7.

[10314]3822 Jer. Babha K. 6 c.

[10315]3823 Yoma 86 b.

[10316]3824 Yoma 87.

[10317]3825 It makes no difference in the argument, whether we

translate seventy times seven, or else seventy times and seven.

[10318]3826 The Parable, with which the account in St. Matthew closes,

will be explained by and by in the Second Series of Parables.

[10319]3827 St. John vii. to x.

[10320]3828 x. 22-42.

[10321]3829 St. Matt. xx. 17 &c.; St. Mark x. 32 &c.; St. Luke xvii.

11 &c.

[10322]3830 St. John xi.

[10323]3831 xi. 54.

[10324]3832 St. Luke iv. 1; v. 16; vii. 24.

[10325]3833 St. Luke viii. 29.

[10326]3834 St. Luke ix. 51; xiii. 22; xviii. 31.

[10327]3835 St. Matt. xix. 1; St. Mark x. 1.

[10328]3836 Comp. the suggestions in Neubauer, Geog. de Talm. p. 155.

[10329]3837 in St. John xi. 54.

[10330]3838 St. Luke ix. 51-xviii. 14.

[10331]3839 St. Matthew and St. Mark.

[10332]3840 See Renan, Les Evangiles, p.266.

[10333]3841 This seems unaccountable on the modern negative theory of

its being an Ephesian Gospel.

[10334]3842 Of course, putting aside the question of the arrangement

into chapters, the reader might profitably make the experiment of

arranging the Gospels into parts and sections, nor could he have a

better guide to help his own investigations than Canon Westcott's

Introduction to the Study of the Gospels.

[10335]3843 St. Luke ix. 31.

[10336]3844 The substantive _n_ljyiv occurs only in this place, but

the cognate verb repeatedly, as referring to the Ascension. The

curious interpretation of Wieseler would not even call for notice, it

it had not the authority of his name.

[10337]3845 The word ka_, omitted in translations, seems to denote

Christ's full determination by the side of the fulfilment of the time.

It could scarcely be argued that it stands merely for the Hebrew

copulative {hebrew}.

[10338]3846 The term is used in the LXX as denoting firmly setting. In

connection with pr_swpon it occurs twelve times.

[10339]3847 St. John vi. 4.

[10340]3848 St. John vii. 2.

[10341]3849 Other and deeper reasons will also suggest themselves, and

have been hinted at when treating of this event.

[10342]3850 St. John vi.

[10343]3851 St. John vii.

[10344]3852 The term 'Jews' is generally used by St. John in that

sense.

[10345]3853 According to Babha K. 113 a, regular festive lectures

commenced in the Academies thirty days before each of the great

Feasts. Those who attended them were called Beney Rigla, in

distinction to the Beney Khallah, who attended the regular Sabbath

lectures.

[10346]3854 The same term {hebrew} (Parhesya) occurs in Rabbinic

language.

[10347]3855 The verb is the significant one, qewr_w.

[10348]3856 Godet remarks, that the style of ver. 4 is peculiarly

Hebraistic.

[10349]3857 See especially the cognate occurrence and expressions at

the marriage feast in Cana.

[10350]3858 kair_v.

[10351]3859 Godet infers from the word 'secretly,' that the journey of

St. Luke ix. 51 could not have been that referred to by St. John. But

the qualified expression, 'as it were in secret,' conveys to my mind

only a contrast to the public pilgrim-bands, in which it was the

custom to travel to the Feasts - a publicity, which His 'brethren'

specially desired at this time. Besides, the 'in secret' of St. John

might refer not so much to the journey as to the appearance of Christ

at the Feast: comp. St. John vii. 11, 14.

[10352]3860 It does not necessarily follow, that the company at

starting was a large one. But they would have no host nor quarters

ready to receive them in Samaria. Hence the despatch of messengers.

[10353]3861 At the same time, according to the best MSS. the words (in

St. Luke ix. 54): 'Even as Elias did,' and those (in verses 55 and 56)

from 'and said. . .' to 'save them,' are interpolated. They are 'a

gloss,' though a correct one.

[10354]3862 St. Matt. viii. 18.

[10355]3863 St. Matt. viii. 19-22.

[10356]3864 The word tiv, here designates a certain one - one, viz.,

of the company. The arrangement of the words undoubtedly is, 'one of

the company said unto Him by the way,' and not as either in the A.V.

or R.V. Comp. Canon Cook, ad loc. in the 'Speaker's Commentary.'

[10357]3865 St. Luke xi. 27.

[10358]3866 We mark, that the designation 'Son of Man' is here for the

first time applied to Christ by St. Matthew. May this history have

been inserted in the First Gospel in that particular connection for

the purpose of pointing out this contrast in the treatment of the Son

of Man by the sons of men - as if to say: Learn the meaning of the

representative title: Son of Man, in a world of men who would not

receive Him? It is the more marked, that it immediately precedes the

first application on the part of men of the title 'Son of God' to

Christ in this Gospel (St. Matt. vii. 29).

[10359]3867 It is scarcely necessary to discuss the suggestion, that

the first two referred to in the narrative were either Bartholomew and

Philip, or else Judas Iscariot and Thomas.

[10360]3868 St. Luke ix. 59.

[10361]3869 Ber. iii. 1; 17 b, and other passages, but especially

Megill. 3.

[10362]3870 Perhaps this may be a fuller English equivalent than

'appoint.'

[10363]3871 The reading: 'Seventy-two' seems a correction, made for

obvious reasons.

[10364]3872 St. John xi. 54.

[10365]3873 St. Matt. x. 5 &c.; St. Mark vi. 7 &c.; St. Luke ix. 1 &c.

[10366]3874 Num. xi. 16.

[10367]3875 In Bemidb. R. 15, ed. Warsh. p. 64 b, the mode of electing

these Seventy is thus described. Moses chose six from every tribe, and

then put into an urn seventy-two lots, of which seventy had the word

Zaqen (Elder) inscribed on them, while two were blanks. The latter are

supposed to have been drawn by Eldad and Medad.

[10368]3876 Comp. Sanh. i. 6.

[10369]3877 St. Matt. xi. 7-19.

[10370]3878 St. Matt. xi. 20-24; comp. with St. Luke x. 12-16.

[10371]3879 St. Matt. ix. 36-38.

[10372]3880 St. John iv. 35.

[10373]3881 The first word means literally 'torn.' The second occurs

sixty-two times in the LXX. as equivalent for the Hebrew (Hiphil)

Hishlikh, projicio, abjicio.

[10374]3882 St. Luke x. 2.

[10375]3883 See Book III. ch. xxvii.

[10376]3884 St. Matt. x. 7, 8; comp. St. Luke x. 9.

[10377]3885 Ber. 30 b.

[10378]3886 u.s. 32 b.

[10379]3887 But it might be interrupted for a scorpion, Ber. 33 a.

Comp. page 141, note 1.

[10380]3888 Ber. 14 a.

[10381]3889 Ber. 14 a; 32 b.

[10382]3890 St. Luke x. 6.

[10383]3891 St. Matt. x. 13.

[10384]3892 Comp. Job xxi. 9, both in the original and the Targum.

[10385]3893 St. Luke x. 7, 8.

[10386]3894 Canon Cook (ad loc.) regards this as evidence that the

Seventy were also sent to the Samaritans; and as implying permission

to eat of their food, which the Jews held to be forbidden. To me it

conveys the opposite, since so fundamental an alteration would not

have been introduced in such an indirect manner. Besides, the

direction is not to eat their food, but any kind of food. Lastly, if

Christ had introduced so vital a change, the later difficulty of St.

Peter, and the vision on the subject, would not be intelligible.

[10387]3895 St. Matt. xi. 16-42.

[10388]3896 St. Luke x. 13-16.

[10389]3897 St. Matt. xi. 20-24.

[10390]3898 St. John xxi. 25.

[10391]3899 Fasting ' in sackcloth and ashes' was the practice in

public humiliations (Taan. ii. 1).

[10392]3900 The R.V., following what are regarded as some of the best

MSS., renders it interrogatively: 'Shalt thou be exalted,' &c.? But

such a question is not only without precedent, but really yields no

meaning. We have, therefore, adopted the reading of Alford, Meyer,

&c., which only differs in tense from the A.V.

[10393]3901 See Book III. ch. xxxi.

[10394]3902 Canon Tristram.

[10395]3903 Menach. 85 a; comp. Neubauer, p. 220.

[10396]3904 Godet infers this from the use of the word 'returned,' St.

Luke x. 17.

[10397]3905 St. John xii. 31.

[10398]3906 Godet, ad loc.

[10399]3907 So far from seeing here, with Wünsche (ad loc.), Jewish

notions about Satan, I hold that in the Satanology of the New

Testament, perhaps more than anywhere else, do we mark not only

difference, but contrast, to Jewish views.

[10400]3908 Rev. xii. 7-12.

[10401]3909 The word over ('on,' A. V.) must be connected with

'power.'

[10402]3910 Comp. Ps. xci. 13; St. Mark xvi. 18.

[10403]3911 I presume, that in the same symbolical sense must be

understood the Haggadah about a great Rabbinic Saint, whom a serpent

bit without harming him, and then immediately died. The Rabbi brought

it to his disciples with the words: It is not the serpent that

killeth, but sin (Ber. 33 a).

[10404]3912 The word 'rather' in the A.V. is spurious.

[10405]3913 The figure is one current in Scripture (comp. Exod. xxxii.

32: Is. iv. 3; Dan. xii. 1). But the Rabbis took it in a grossly

literal manner, and spoke of three books opened every New Year's Day -

those of the pious, the wicked, and the intermediate (Rosh haSh. 16

b).

[10406]3914 This is a common Jewish formula: {hebrew}.

[10407]3915 St. Luke x. 22.

[10408]3916 The tense should here be marked.

[10409]3917 St. Matt. xi. 28-30.

[10410]3918 St. Luke x. 23, 24.

[10411]3919 Comp. St. Matt. xiii. 16.

[10412]3920 Melanchthon writes: 'In this "All" thou art to include

thyself, and not to think that thou dost not belong thereto; thou art

not to search for another register of God.'

[10413]3921 Acts xv. 10.

[10414]3922 Abhoth iii. 5.

[10415]3923 Targum, ad loc.

[10416]3924 Similarly we read of 'the yoke of repentance' (Moed K. 16

b), of that 'of man,' or rather 'of flesh and blood' (Ab. de R. Nath.

20), &c.

[10417]3925 Shemoth R. 30.

[10418]3926 Midr. Shoch. Tobh. ed. Lemb. p. 20 a.

[10419]3927 Yalkut ii. p. 43 a, Section 275, lines 10 &c. from bottom.

[10420]3928 This is mentioned as an answer given in the great Academy

of Jerusalem by Elijah the prophet to a question propounded to him by

a student.

[10421]3929 Ber. ii. 2.

[10422]3930 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' p. 270.

[10423]3931 Sanh. 94 b, middle.

[10424]3932 St. Luke x. 23, 24.

[10425]3933 In a rapt description of the Messianic glory (Pesiqta, ed.

Buber. 149 a, end) we read that Israel shall exult in His light,

saying: 'Blessed the hour in which the Messiah has been created;

blessed the womb that bare Him; blessed the eye that sees Him; blessed

the eye that is deemed worthy to behold Him, for the opening of his

lips is blessing and peace, &c.' It is a strange coincidence, to say

the least, that this passage occurs in a 'Lecture' on the portion of

the prophets (Is. Lxi. 10), which at present is read in the Synagogues

on a Sabbath close to the Feast of Tabernacles.

[10426]3934 The same words were spoken on a previous occasion (St.

Matt. xiii. 16), after the Parable of the Sower.

[10427]3935 St. Luke x. 25 &c.

[10428]3936 St. Luke x. 38.

[10429]3937 No one who impartially reads St. John xi. can doubt, that

the persons there introduced are the Martha and Mary of this history,

nor hence that their home was in Bethany.

[10430]3938 x. 38-42.

[10431]3939 Comp. 'The Temple and its Services,' p. 237, &c.

[10432]3940 Sukk. ii. 8.

[10433]3941 u.s. 9.

[10434]3942 See Levy, Neuhebr. Wörterb. ad voc.

[10435]3943 Martha occurs, however, also as a male name (in the

Aramaic).

[10436]3944 The name Laazar ({hebrew}), or Lazar, occurs frequently in

Talmudic writings as an abbreviated form of Elazar or Eleazar

({hebrew}).

[10437]3945 Comp. St. Luke x. 38.

[10438]3946 periesp_to.

[10439]3947 This, instead of 'Jesus,' is the reading more generally

received as correct.

[10440]3948 Few would be disposed to adopt the proposed alternative

reading (R.V., margin): 'but few things are needful, or one' -

meaning, not much preparation, indeed, only one dish is necessary.

[10441]3949 Also Cholo shel Moed and Moed Qaton.

[10442]3950 See ch. iii. of this Book.

[10443]3951 Jos. Ant. viii. 4. 1.

[10444]3952 For a full description of the Feast of Tabernacles in the

days of Christ, I must refer to 'The Temple and its Services.'

[10445]3953 Sukk. 55 b; Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 17 a; 194 a; Shabb. 88

[10446]3954 Sukk. v. 1.

[10447]3955 Jer. Sukk. v. 1, p. 55 a.

[10448]3956 Sukk. v. 4.

[10449]3957 This second form is according to R. Jenudah's tradition.

[10450]3958 In the plural it occurs only in this place in St. John,

and once in St. Mark (vi. 33), but sixteen times in St. Luke, and

still more frequently in St. Matthew.

[10451]3959 See above, p. 148.

[10452]3960 St. John x. 23.

[10453]3961 Acts v. 12.

[10454]3962 This, as showing such local knowledge on the part of the

Fourth Gospel, must be taken as additional evidence of its Johannine

authorship, just as the mention of that Porch in the Book of Acts

points to a Jerusalem source of information.

[10455]3963 Jos. Ant. xv. 11. 5; xx. 9. 7.

[10456]3964 St. John vii. 15.

[10457]3965 Comp. Acts xxvi. 24.

[10458]3966 St. John vii. 16-17.

[10459]3967 The passage quoted by Canon Westcott from Ab. ii. 4 does

not seem to be parallel.

[10460]3968 St. John vi. 68, 69.

[10461]3969 St. John vii. 18.

[10462]3970 St. John v. 18.

[10463]3971 I regard this as almost overwhelming evidence against the

theory of an Ephesian authority of the Fourth Gospel. Even the double

question in ver. 19 is here significant.

[10464]3972 St. John vii. 19, 20.

[10465]3973 The words 'on account of it,' rendered in the A.V.

'therefore,' and placed in ver. 22 (St. John vii.), really form the

close of ver. 21. At any rate, they cannot be taken in the sense of

'therefore.'

[10466]3974 This was a well-recognized Rabbinic principle. Comp. for

example Shabb. 132 a, where the argument runs that, if circumcision,

which applies to one of the 248 members, of which, according to the

Rabbis, the human body consists, superseded the Sabbath, how much more

the preservation of the whole body.

[10467]3975 vv. 21-24.

[10468]3976 St. John vii. 25-27.

[10469]3977 In the original: 'Can it be?'.

[10470]3978 Comp. also Sanh. 97 a; Midr. on Cant. ii. 10.

[10471]3979 See Book II. ch. v., and Appendix IX.

[10472]3980 'Cried.'

[10473]3981 The word _ljqin_v has not an exact English equivalent,

scarcely a German one (wahrhaftig ?). It is a favourite word of St.

John's, who uses it eight times in his Gospel, or, if the Revised

reading viii. 16 be adopted, nine times (i. 9; iv. 23, 37; vi. 32;

vii. 28; viii. 16 ?; xv. 1; xvii. 3; xix. 35); and four times in his

First Epistle (ii. 8, and three times in ch. v. 20). Its Johannine

meaning is perhaps best seen when in juxtaposition with _ljq_v (for

example, 1 John ii. 8). But in the Book of Revelation, where it occurs

ten times (iii. 7, 14; vi. 10; xv. 3; xvi. 7; xix. 2, 9, 11; xxi. 5;

xxii. 6), it has another meaning, and can scarcely be distinguished

from our English 'true.' It is used, in the same sense as in St.

John's Gospel and Epistle, in St. Luke xvi. 11, in 1 Thess. i 9; and

three times in the Epistle to the Hebrews (viii. 2; ix. 24; x. 22). We

may, therefore, regard it as a word to which a Grecian, not a Judæan

meaning attaches. In our view it refers to the true as the real, and

the real as that which has become outwardly true. I do not quite

understand, and, so far as I understand it, I do not agree with, the

view of Cremer (Bibl. Theol. Lex., Engl. ed. p. 85), that '_ljqin_v is

related to _ljq_v as form to contents or substance.' The distinction

between the Judæan and the Grecian meaning is not only borne out by

the Book of Revelation (which uses it in the Judæan sense), but by

Ecclus. xlii. 2. 11. In the LXX. it stands for not fewer than twelve

Hebrew words.

[10474]3982 St. John vii. 29.

[10475]3983 On the heads and chief officials of the Priesthood, see

'The Temple and its Services,' ch. iv., especially pp. 75-77.

[10476]3984 Only those unacquainted with the judicial procedure of the

Sanhedrin could imagine that there had been a regular meeting and

decree of that tribunal. That would have required a formal accusation,

witnesses, examination, &c.

[10477]3985 Canon Westcott marks, that the word here used (_p_gw)

indicates a personal act, while another word (pore_omai) marks a

purpose or mission, and yet a third word (_p_rcomai) expresses simple

separation.

[10478]3986 vv. 33, 34.

[10479]3987 Comp. Yoma 3 a, and often.

[10480]3988 Hence the benediction said at the beginning of every Feast

is not only said on the first of that of Tabernacles, but also on the

octave of it (Sukk. 48 a). The sacrifices for that occasion were quite

different from those for 'Tabernacles;' the 'booths' were removed; and

the peculiar rites of the Feast of Tabernacles no longer observed.

This is distinctly stated in Sukk. iv. 1, and the diverging opinion of

R. Jehudah on this and another point is formally rejected in Tos.

Sukk. iii. 16. For the six points of difference between the Feast of

Tabernacles and its Octave, see note at the end of ch. viii.

[10481]3989 Bishop Haneberg speaks of the anniversaries of the Martyrs

as part-fulfilment of the typical meaning of that Feast.

[10482]3990 Also Lulabha and Luleybha.

[10483]3991 Targ. Onkelos, and Pseudo-Jon. and Jerus. on Lev. xxiii.

40; Jos. Ant. xiii. 13. 5.

[10484]3992 Vayy. R. 30, towards end, ed. Warsh., p. 47 a.

[10485]3993 Sukk. iv. 5.

[10486]3994 Jer. Sukk. iv. 3, p. 54 b.

[10487]3995 For a full discussion of this point, see p. 636, note 3.

[10488]3996 Rather more than two pints.

[10489]3997 Curiously, in that passage the spring of the river is

designated by the word Moza.

[10490]3998 Comp. Neh. iii. 15.

[10491]3999 2 Chron. xxxii. 30; 2 Kings xx. 20.

[10492]4000 St. John ix. 7.

[10493]4001 1 Kings i. 33, 38.

[10494]4002 1 Kings i. 9.

[10495]4003 ver. 41.

[10496]4004 Except on a Sabbath, and on the first day of the Feast. On

these occasions it had been provided the day before.

[10497]4005 Tos. Sukk iii. 8.

[10498]4006 One of the gates that opened from 'the terrace' on the

south side of the Temple.

[10499]4007 Jer. Sukk. iv. 6; Sukk. 44 a.

[10500]4008 On the other hand, R. Akiba maintained, that the

'water-pouring' was prescribed in the written Law.

[10501]4009 Sukk. iv. 9: Jos. Ant. xiii. 13. 5.

[10502]4010 Ps. cxviii. 25.

[10503]4011 ver. 25.

[10504]4012 Sukk. 55 a; Maimonides, Yad haChas. Hilkh. Temid. uMos. x.

11 (vol. iii. p. 204 a).

[10505]4013 For the Psalms chanted on the otherdays of the Feast, and

a detailed description of the Feast itself, see 'The Temple and its

Services,' ch. xiv.

[10506]4014 Ps. cxviii. 25.

[10507]4015 Sukk. iv. 5.

[10508]4016 u. s. 1 and 6.

[10509]4017 u. s. 8.

[10510]4018 I must respectfully differ from Canon Westcott (ad loc.)

when he regards it as a doubtful question whether or not the

'water-pouring' had taken place on the day when our Lord so pointed to

the fulfilment of its symbolical meaning.

[10511]4019 Whether or not the last three words are spurious is, so

far as the sense of the words is concerned, matter of comparative

indifference.

[10512]4020 St. John vii. 17.

[10513]4021 Ps. 49 b.

[10514]4022 Baba B. 8 b.

[10515]4023 Pes. 49 d.

[10516]4024 Kethub. 111 b.

[10517]4025 For further details the reader is referred to Wagenseil's

Sota, pp. 516-519.

[10518]4026 The reader will observe, that the narrative of the woman

taken in adultery, as also the previous verse (St. John vii. 53-viii.

11) have been left out in this History - although with great

reluctance. By this it is not intended to characterise that section as

Apocryphal, nor indeed to pronounce any opinion as to the reality of

some such occurrence. For, it contains much which we instinctively

feel to be like the Master, both in what Christ is represented as

saying and as doing. All that we reluctantly feel bound to maintain

is, that the narrative in its present form did not exist in the Gospel

of St. John, and, indeed, could not have existed. For a summary of the

external evidence against the Johannine authorship of the passage, I

would refer to Canon Westcott's Note, ad loc., in the 'Speaker's

Commentary.' But there is also internal evidence, and, to my mind at

least, most cogent, against its authenticity - at any rate, in its

present form. From first to last it is utterly un-Jewish. Accordingly,

unbiassed critics who are conversant either with Jewish legal

procedure, or with the habits and views of the people at the time,

would feel obliged to reject it, even if the external evidence had

been as strong in its favour as it is for its rejection. Archdeacon

Farrar has, indeed, devoted to the illustration of this narrative some

of his most pictorial pages. But, with all his ability and eloquence,

his references to Jewish law and observances are not such as to

satisfy the requirements of criticism. To this general objection to

their correctness I must add a protest against the views which he

presents of the moral state of Jewish society at the time. On the

other hand, from whatever point we view this narrative - the accusers,

the witnesses, the public examination, the bringing of the woman to

Jesus, or the punishment claimed - it presents insuperable

difficulties. That a woman taken in the act of adultery should have

been brought before Jesus (and apparently without the witnesses to her

crime); that such an utterly un-Jewish, as well as illegal, procedure

should have been that of the 'Scribes and Pharisees'; that such a

breach of law, and of what Judaism would regard as decency, should

have been perpetrated to 'tempt' Him; or that the Scribes should have

been so ignorant as to substitute stoning for strangulation, as the

punishment of adultery; lastly, that this scene should have been

enacted in the Temple, presents a veritable climax of impossibilities.

I can only express surprise that Archdeacon Farrar should have

suggested that the 'Feast of Tabernacles had grown into a kind of

vintage-festival, which would often degenerate into acts of licence

and immorality,' or that the lives of the religious leaders of Israel

'were often stained' with such sins. The first statement is quite

ungrounded; and as for the second, I do not recall a single instance

in which a charge of adultery is brought against a Rabbi of that

period. The quotations in Sepp's Leben Jesu (vol. v. p. 183), which

Archdeacon Farrar adduces, are not to cases in point, however much,

from the Christian point of view, we may reprobate the conduct of the

Rabbis there mentioned.

[10519]4027 This, although St. John vii. 53 must be rejected as

spurious. But the whole context seems to imply, that for the present

the auditory of Jesus had dispersed.

[10520]4028 It is, however, not unlikely that the first address (vv.

12-19) may have been delivered on the afternoon of the 'Last Day of

the Feast,' when the cessation of preparations for the

Temple-illumination may have given the outward occasion for the words:

'I am the light of the World.' The palin of vv. 12 and 21 seems in

each case to indicate a fresh period of time. Besides, we can scarcely

suppose that all from vii. 37 to viii. 59 had taken place the same

day. For this and other arguments on the point, see Lücke, vol. ii.

pp. 279-281.

[10521]4029 St. John viii. 20.

[10522]4030 ver. 21.

[10523]4031 ver. 13.

[10524]4032 The last clauses of ver. 59, 'going through the midst of

them went His way, and so passed by,' must be omitted as spurious.

[10525]4033 ver. 20.

[10526]4034 Sheqal. vi. 5.

[10527]4035 The so-called 'chamber of the silent' (Chashaim), Sheqal.

v. 6.

[10528]4036 The 'chamber of the vessels' (Kelim). It was probably

over, or in this chamber that Agrippi hung up the golden

memorial-chain of his captivity (Jos. Antiq. xix. 6. 1).

[10529]4037 Sheqal v. 6.

[10530]4038 Comp. generally 'The Temple and its Services,' pp. 26, 27.

[10531]4039 The 'Court of the Women' (gunaikwn_v), Jos. Jew. War v. 5.

3; comp. also v. 5. 2), so called, because women could not penetrate

further. It was the real Court of the Sanctuary. Here Jeremiah also

taught (xix. 14; xxvi. 2). But it is not correct to state (Westcott),

that the Council Chamber of the Sanhedrin (Gazith) was 'between the

Court of the Women and the inner court.' It was in the south-eastern

angle of the Court of the Priests - and hence at a considerable

distance from the Court of the Women. But, not to speak of the

circumstance that the Sanhedrin no longer met in that Chamber - even

if it had been nearer, Christ's teaching in the Treasury could not (at

any period) 'have been within earshot of the Sanhedrin,' since it

would not sit on that day.

[10532]4040 Sukk. v. 2.

[10533]4041 Jer. Sukk. 55 b; Sukk. 53 a.

[10534]4042 Although Rabbi Joshua tells (in the Talmud) that during

all the nights of the festive week they 'did not taste sleep,' this

seems scarcely credible, and the statement of the Mishnah is the more

rational. Maimonides, however, adopts the view of the Talmud (Hilch.

Lul. viii. 12).

[10535]4043 Bemidb. R. 15, ed. Warsh. p. 62 a, b.

[10536]4044 St. Luke ii. 32.

[10537]4045 Ber. R. 3.

[10538]4046 Bemidb. R. 15.

[10539]4047 Yalk. on Is. 1x.

[10540]4048 On Lam. i. 16, ed. Warsh. p. 64 a, b.

[10541]4049 The passage is one of the most remarkable, as regards the

Messianic views of the Rabbis. See Appendix IX.

[10542]4050 In Dan. ii. 22.

[10543]4051 St. Luke ii. 32.

[10544]4052 Mark here the definite article.

[10545]4053 St. John viii. 12.

[10546]4054 ver. 13.

[10547]4055 It is substantially the same evidence which is demanded by

the negative physicists of our days. Nor can I imagine a more thorough

misunderstanding of the character and teaching of Christianity than,

for example, the proposal to test the efficacy of prayer, by asking

for the recovery of those in a hospital ward! This would represent

heathenism, not Christianity.

[10548]4056 St. John viii. 13.

[10549]4057 We mark here again the evidence of the Jewish authorship

of the Fourth Gospel.

[10550]4058 Kethub. ii. 9.

[10551]4059 Thus the testimony of a man, that during the heathen

occupancy of Jerusalem his wife had never left him, was not allowed,

and the husband forbidden his wife (Kethub. ii. 9).

[10552]4060 Not, as in the A.V., 'tell.'

[10553]4061 St. John viii. 14.

[10554]4062 vv. 15, 16.

[10555]4063 Kethub. ii. 9. Such solitary testimony only when

favourable, not when adverse. On the law of testimony generally, comp.

Saalschütz, Mos. Recht, pp. 604, 605.

[10556]4064 St. John viii. 19.

[10557]4065 Not 'sins,' as in the A.V.

[10558]4066 St. John viii. 22.

[10559]4067 Generally this is understood as referring to the supposed

Jewish belief, that suicides occupied the lowest place in Gehenna. But

a glance at the context must convince that the Jews could not have

understood Christ as meaning, that He would be separated from them by

being sent to the lowest Gehenna. Besides, this supposed punishment of

suicides is only derived from a rhetorical passage in Josephus (Jew.

War iii. 8. 5), but unsupported by any Rabbinic statements. The

Rabbinic definition - or rather limitation - of what constitutes

suicide is remarkable. Thus, neither Saul, nor Ahitophel, nor Zimri,

are regarded as suicides, because they did it to avoid falling into

the hands of their enemies. For premeditated, real suicide the

punishment is left with God. Some difference is to be made in the

burial of such, yet not such as to put the survivors to shame.

[10560]4068 vv. 23, 24.

[10561]4069 It would be impossible here to enter into a critical

analysis or vindication of the rendering of this much controverted

passage, adopted in the text. The method followed has been to

retranslate literally into Hebrew: {hebrew} This might be rendered

either, 'To begin with - He that I also tell you;' or, 'from the

beginning He that I also tell you.' I prefer the latter, and its

meaning seems substantially that of our A.V.

[10562]4070 vv. 25, 26.

[10563]4071 ver. 26.

[10564]4072 ver. 27.

[10565]4073 As Canon Westcott rightly points out (St. John xii. 32),

the term 'lifting up' includes both the death and the glory. If we ask

ourselves what corresponding Hebrew word, including the sensus malus

as well as the sensus bonus would have been used, the verb Nasa

({hebrew}) naturally occurs (comp. Gen xl. 19 with ver. 13). For we

suppose, that the word used by Christ at this early part of His

Ministry could not have necessarily involved a prediction of His

Crucifixion, and that they who heard it rather imagined it to refer to

His Exaltation. There is a curiously illustrative passage here (in

Pesiqta R. 10), when a king, having given orders that the head of his

son should be 'lifted up' ({hebrew}), that it should be hanged up

({hebrew}), is exhorted by the tutor to spare what was his 'moneginos'

(only begotten). On the king's replying that he was bound by the

orders he had given, the tutor answers by pointing out that the verb

Nasa means lifting up in the sense of exalting, as well as of

executing. But, besides the verb Nasa, there is also the verb Zeqaph

({hebrew}), which in the Aramaic and in the Syriac is used both for

lifting up and for hanging - specifically for crucifying; and, lastly,

the verb Tela ({hebrew} or {hebrew}), which means in the first place

to lift up, and secondarily to hang or crucify (see Levy, Targum,

Wörterb. ii. p. 539 a and b). It this latter verb was used, then the

Jewish expression Taluy, which is still opprobriously given to Jesus,

would after all represent the original designation by which He

described His own death as the 'lifted-up One.'

[10566]4074 ver. 28.

[10567]4075 ver. 28 (comp. ver. 24).

[10568]4076 Not 'my,' as in A.V.

[10569]4077 A new sentence; and 'He,' not 'the Father,' as in the A.V.

[10570]4078 vv. 30-32.

[10571]4079 Ab. Baraitha vi. 2, p. 23 b; Erub. 54 a, line 13 from

bottom.

[10572]4080 With reference to Exod. xxxii. 16, a play being made on

the word Charuth ('graven') which is interpreted Cheyruth ('liberty').

The passage quoted by Wünsche (Baba Mets. 85 b) is not applicable.

[10573]4081 Shabb. 67 a; 128 a.

[10574]4082 Baba Mets. vii. 1.

[10575]4083 St. John viii. 34.

[10576]4084 Here there should be a full stop, and not as in the A.V.

[10577]4085 ver. 35.

[10578]4086 _ntwv. Comp. Westcott ad loc.

[10579]4087 So Canon Westcott aptly renders it.

[10580]4088 Not 'My Father,' as in the A.V. These little changes are

most important, as we remember that the hearers would so far

understand and could have sympathised, had the truth been in them.

[10581]4089 According to the proper reading, the rendering must be

'from your father,' not 'with your father,' as in the A.V.

[10582]4090 vv. 37-40.

[10583]4091 ver. 41.

[10584]4092 ver. 42.

[10585]4093 The word here is lali_.

[10586]4094 vv. 43-47.

[10587]4095 See Book II. ch. v.

[10588]4096 I cannot here regard Canon Westcott's rendering, which is

placed in the margin of the Revised Version, as satisfactory.

[10589]4097 In the text without the article.

[10590]4098 vii. 52.

[10591]4099 St. Luke ix. 53.

[10592]4100 The passage quoted by Schöttgen (Yebam. 47 a) is

inapplicable, as it really refers to a non-Israelite. More apt, but

also unsuitable, is Sot. 22 a, quoted by Wetstein.

[10593]4101 from Kuth or Kutha; comp. 2 Kings xvii. 24, 30.

[10594]4102 Comp. Kohut, Jüd. Angelol. p. 95.

[10595]4103 Ber. R. 36, ed. Warsh. p. 65 b, line 5 from bottom;

Yalkut on Job xxi. vol. ii. p. 150 b line 16 from bottom.

[10596]4104 See the Appendix on Jewish-Angelology and Demonology.

[10597]4105 L'Alcoran trad.par le Sieur du Ryer, p. 247.

[10598]4106 Pirqé de R. Eliez. 45 ed. Lemb. p. 59 b, line 10 from top.

[10599]4107 I need scarcely point out how strongly evidential this is

of the Jewish authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

[10600]4108 St. John viii. 50.

[10601]4109 The word is that peculiar and remarkable one, qe_rew, to

gaze earnestly and intently, to which I have already called attention

(see vol. i. p. 692).

[10602]4110 He spoke of 'seeing,' they of 'tasting' death (vv. 51,

52). The word {hebrew} 'taste,' is used in precisely the same manner

by the Rabbis. Thus, in the Jer. Targum on Deut. xxxii. 1. In Ber. R.

9, we are told, that it was originally destined that the first man

should not taste death. Again, 'Elijah did not taste the taste of

death' (Ber. R. 21). And, tropically, in such a passage as this: 'If

any one would taste a taste (here: have a foretaste) of death, let him

keep his shoes on while he goes to sleep' (Yom. 78 l). It is also used

of sleep, as: 'All the days of the joy of the house of drawing [Feast

of Tabernacles] we did not taste the taste of sleep' (Succ. 53 a). It

is needless to add other quotations.

[10603]4111 vv. 52, 53.

[10604]4112 On the expression 'keep (tjre_n) His work,' Bengel

beautifully observes: doctrinam Jesu, credendo; promissa, sperando;

facienda obediendo.

[10605]4113 Gen. xv. 17.

[10606]4114 Ber. R. 44, ed. Warsh. p. 81 b, lines 8, 7, 6 from bottom.

[10607]4115 In the Targum Jerusalem on Gen. xv. also it seems implied

that Abraham saw in vision all that would befall his children in the

future, and also Gehenna and its torments. So far as I can gather,

only the latter, not the former, seems implied in the Targ.

Pseudo-Jonathan.

Note on the differences between the Feast of Tabernacles and that of

its Octave (see p. 156, note 1). The six points of difference which

mark the Octave as a separate feast are indicated by the memorial

words and letters {hebrew}, and are as follows: (1) During the seven

days of Tabernacles the Priests of all the 'courses' officiated, while

on the Octave the sacrificial services were appointed, as usually, by

lot ({hebrew}). (2) The benediction at the beginning of a feast was

spoken again at the Octave ({hebrew}). (3) The Octave was designated

in prayer, and by special ordinances, as a separate feast ({hebrew}).

(4) Difference in the sacrifices ({hebrew}). (5) Difference in the

Psalms - on the Octave (Soph. xix. 2) probably Ps. xii. ({hebrew}).

(6) According to 1 Kings viii. 66, difference as to the blessing

({hebrew}).

[10608]4116 Godet supposes that it had taken place on the evening of

the Octave of the Feast. On the other hand, Canon Westcott would

relegate both ch. ix. and x. to the 'Feast of the Dedication.' But his

argument on the subject, from another rendering of St. John x. 22, has

failed to convince me.

[10609]4117 St. John ix. 14.

[10610]4118 Acts iii. 2.

[10611]4119 St. John ix. 35.

[10612]4120 Peah viii. 9.

[10613]4121 Jer. Peah viii. 9, p. 21 b.

[10614]4122 So in the original.

[10615]4123 Sanh. 91 b; Ber. R. 34.

[10616]4124 This opinion has, however, nothing to do with 'the

migration of souls' - a doctrine which has been generally, but quite

erroneously, supposed that Josephus imputed to the Pharisees. The

misunderstanding of Jew. War. ii. 8. 14, should be corrected by Antiq.

xviii. 1. 3.

[10617]4125 Shabb. 32 b; 105 b; Yalkut on Ruth, vol. ii. par. 600, p.

163 c.

[10618]4126 Midr. on Ruth. iii. 13.

[10619]4127 Nedar. 20 a.

[10620]4128 At the same time those opinions, which are based on higher

moral views of marriage, are only those of an individual teacher. The

latter are cynically and coarsely set aside by 'the sages' in Nedar.

20 b.

[10621]4129 St. John ix. 4, 5.

[10622]4130 Ab. ii. 15.

[10623]4131 St. John viii. 28, 29; comp. ix. 4.

[10624]4132 viii. 12; comp. ix. 5.

[10625]4133 See Book III. ch. xxxiv. p. 48.

[10626]4134 The etymological correctness of the rendering Siloam by

'Sent' is no longer called in question. As to the spring Siloam, see

ch. vii. of this Book.

[10627]4135 St. John ix. 11.

[10628]4136 ver. 11.

[10629]4137 This is the proper rendering. The organs of sight existed,

but could not be used.

[10630]4138 ver. 12.

[10631]4139 ver. 22.

[10632]4140 Shabb. xxiv. 3.

[10633]4141 Jerus. Shabb. 14 d.

[10634]4142 Jer. Shabb. u. s.

[10635]4143 St. John ix. 15.

[10636]4144 vv. 17 and following.

[10637]4145 It would lead too far to set these forth in detail. But

the shrinking from receiving alms was in proportion to the duty of

giving them. Only extreme necessity would warrant begging, and to

solicit charity needlessly, or to simulate any disease for the

purpose, would, deservedly, bring the reality in punishment on the

guilty.

[10638]4146 _posun_gwgov g_nesqai. So also St. John xii. 42; xvi. 2.

[10639]4147 In Jer. Moed K. 81 d, line 20 from top: {hebrew}

[10640]4148 Both Buxtorf and Levy have made this abundantly clear, but

Jewish authorities are not wanting which regard this as the worst kind

of ban.

[10641]4149 Levy derives it from {hebrew}, to destroy, to root out.

The Rabbinic derivations in Moed K. 17 a, are only a play upon the

word.

[10642]4150 Moed K. 16 a and b.

[10643]4151 1 Tim. v.

[10644]4152 But there certainly were notable exceptions to this rule,

even in Palestine. Among the Babylonian Jews it did not obtain at all.

[10645]4153 Moed K. 17 a; Nedar. 7 b; Pes. 52 a.

[10646]4154 Moed K. 16 a.

[10647]4155 Moed K. 16 a; Shebh. 36 a; Baba Mez. 59 b.

[10648]4156 Buxtorf here reminds us of 1 Cor. v. 5.

[10649]4157 Shebh. 36 a; Sanh. 107 printed in the Chesronoth ha-Shas,

p. 25 b.

[10650]4158 There our Lord is said to have been anathematised to the

sound of 400 trumpets. The passage does not appear in the expurgated

editions of the Talmud.

[10651]4159 Comp. 1 Cor. v. 11.

[10652]4160 Jer. Moed K. 81 d, about the middle.

[10653]4161 The common view (Meyer, Watkins, Westcott) is, that the

expression, 'Give glory to God' was merely a formula of solemn

adjuration, like Josh. vii. 19. But even so, as Canon Westcott

remarks, it implies 'that the cure was due directly to God.'

[10654]4162 In the original: 'If He is a sinner, I know not. One thing

I know, that, being blind, now I see.'

[10655]4163 St. John ix. 26.

[10656]4164 ver. 29.

[10657]4165 Ber. 6 b; Taan. iii. 8; Sukk. 14 a; Yoma 29 a.

[10658]4166 St. John ix. 35.

[10659]4167 With all respect for such authority as that of Professors

Westcott and Hort ('The N.T.' p. 212), I cannot accept the proposed

reading 'Son of Man,' instead of 'Son of God.' Admittedly, the

evidence for the two readings is evenly balanced, and the internal

evidence seems to be strongly in favour of the reading 'Son of God.'

[10660]4168 St. John ix. 36.

[10661]4169 prosek_njsen. The word is never used by St. John of mere

respect for man, but always implies Divine worship. In the Gospel it

occurs ch. iv. 20-24; ix. 38; xii. 20; and twenty-three times in the

Book of Revelation, but always in the sense of worship.

[10662]4170 ver. 39.

[10663]4171 ver. 41.

[10664]4172 The word is not parable, but paroim_a proverb or allegory.

On the essential characteristics of the Parables, see Book III. ch.

xxiii.

[10665]4173 St. John x. 6.

[10666]4174 The figure of a shepherd is familiar in Rabbinic as in

Biblical literature. Comp. Bemidb. R. 23; Yalkut i. p. 68 a.

[10667]4175 This is the view advocated by Archdeacon Watkins, ad loc.

[10668]4176 St. John x. 1-5.

[10669]4177 This is the proper reading: he who locked the door from

within and guarded it.

[10670]4178 This is the literal rendering.

[10671]4179 St. John x. 4, 5.

[10672]4180 ver. 7.

[10673]4181 vv. 7-9.

[10674]4182 The words 'who went before Me' are questioned by many.

[10675]4183 ver. 10.

[10676]4184 Not as in the A.V., 'am come.'

[10677]4185 As Canon Westcott remarks, 'this points to something more

than life.'

[10678]4186 This is the proper rendering.

[10679]4187 Literally 'fair.' As Canon Westcott, with his usual

happiness, expresses it: 'not only good inwardly (_gaq_v) but good as

perceived (kal_v).'

[10680]4188 This would be all the more striking that, according to

Rabbinic law, a shepherd was not called upon to expose his own life

for the safety of his flock, nor responsible in such a case. The

opposite view depends on a misunderstanding of a sentence quoted from

Bab. Mez. 93 b. As the context there shows, if a shepherd leaves his

flock, and in his absence the wolf comes, the shepherd is responsible,

but only because he ought not to have left the flock, and his presence

might have prevented the accident. In case of attack by force

supérieure he is not responsible for his flock.

[10681]4189 See an important note at the end of this chapter.

[10682]4190 See Note 4.

[10683]4191 Not 'fold,' as in the A.V.

[10684]4192 St. John x. 17, 18.

[10685]4193 St. John x. 18.

[10686]4194 St. John x. 19.

[10687]4195 St. John x. 22-39.

[10688]4196 28 a.d.

[10689]4197 29 a.d.

[10690]4198 The reasons for his insertion of this part must be sought

in the character of this Discourse and in the context in St. Matthew's

Gospel.

[10691]4199 St. Luke xi. 14 to xvii. 11.

[10692]4200 On the characteristics of this Section, Canon Cook has

some very interesting remarks in the Speaker's Commentary, N.T. vol.

i. p. 379.

[10693]4201 St. John x. 22-42; xi. 1-45; xi. 46-54.

[10694]4202 The concluding Doxology should be omitted from St.

Matthew's report of the prayer. As regards the different readings

which have been adopted into the Revised Version, the reader is

advised, before accepting the proposed alterations, to consult Canon

Cook's judicious notes (in the Speaker's Commentary ad loc.).

[10695]4203 Yoma 76 a, lines 14-16 from top.

[10696]4204 The same page of the Talmud contains, however, some

absurdly profane legends about the manna.

[10697]4205 According to Ps. cxxxvi. 24, 25.

[10698]4206 Ber. R. 20, ed. Warsh. p. 39 b, last line.

[10699]4207 Ber. R. 97.

[10700]4208 Gen. xlviii. 16.

[10701]4209 Ps. cxiv. 16.

[10702]4210 St. Luke xi. 1.

[10703]4211 St. Luke xi. 14.

[10704]4212 See Book III. ch. xxii.

[10705]4213 St. Matt. xii. 14.

[10706]4214 It marks the chronological place of this miracle that it

seems suitably to follow the popular charge against Jesus, as

expressed in St. John viii. 48 and x. 20.

[10707]4215 St. Mark iii. 22; see Book III. ch. xxii.

[10708]4216 See for example St. Luke xi. 22, 22.

[10709]4217 St. Matt. xii. 25.

[10710]4218 vv. 27-30.

[10711]4219 See the Appendix on Angelology and Demonology.

[10712]4220 St. Matt. xii. 25-28.

[10713]4221 Yalkut on Is. lx.

[10714]4222 See Book II. ch. v., and the Appendix to it, where the

passage is given in full.

[10715]4223 v. 29.

[10716]4224 The reason of the difference between this and the somewhat

similar passage, St. Luke ix 50, is, that there the relationship is to

the disciples, here to the Person of the Christ.

[10717]4225 v. 30.

[10718]4226 vv. 31, 32.

[10719]4227 See Book II. ch. xi. vol. i. p. 267.

[10720]4228 St. Matt. xii. 33-37.

[10721]4229 St. Matt. xii. 38.

[10722]4230 ver. 39.

[10723]4231 St. Matt. xvi. 1-4.

[10724]4232 St. Luke xi. 30.

[10725]4233 This is simply a Hebraism of which, as similar instances,

may be quoted, Exod. xv. 8 ('the heart of the sea'); Deut. iv. 11

('the heart of heaven'); 2 Sam. xviii. 14 ('the heart of the

terebinth'). Hence, I cannot agree with Dean Plumptre, that the

expression 'heart of the earth' bears any reference to Hades.

[10726]4234 St. Matt. xii. 39-42.

[10727]4235 vv. 43-45.

[10728]4236 St. Luke xi. 27.

[10729]4237 Shem. R. 45.

[10730]4238 Chag. 14 b.

[10731]4239 Persiqta, ed. Buber, p. 149 a, last lines.

[10732]4240 For the full quotation see Book II. ch. v., and the

reference to it in Appendix IX.

[10733]4241 See Book III. ch. xxii.

[10734]4242 St. Matt. xii. 46, 47.

[10735]4243 In view of such teaching, itis indeed difficult to

understand the cultus of the Virgin - and even much of that tribute to

the exclusively human in Christ which is so characteristic of

Romanism.

[10736]4244 St. Luke xi. 33-36.

[10737]4245 St. Matt. v. 15; vi. 22, 23.

[10738]4246 See above, page 199 &c.

[10739]4247 In some measure like the demon who returned to find his

house empty, swept and garnished.

[10740]4248 Even St. Luke xx. 45-47 is not an exception. Christ,

indeed, often afterwards answered their questions, but this is His

last formal address to the Pharisees.

[10741]4249 St. Matt. xxiii.

[10742]4250 St. Matt. xxiii.

[10743]4251 See the remarks on St. Luke xi. 39-52 in our analysis of

St. Matt. xxiii. in chap. iv. of Book V.

[10744]4252 St. Luke xi. 37.

[10745]4253 The expression 'one of the Lawyers' (ver. 45) seems to

imply that there were several at table.

[10746]4254 St. Luke xi. 53, 54.

[10747]4255 Not 'to dine' as in the A.V. Although in later Greek the

word _riston was used for prandium, yet its original meaning as

'breakfast' seems fixed by St. Luke xiv. 12, _riston _ de_pnon.

[10748]4256 {hebrew}, of which the German Morgenbrot is a literal

rendering. To take the first meal later in the day was deemed very

unwholesome: 'like throwing a stone into a skin.'

[10749]4257 On the sacredness of the duty of hospitality, see

'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' pp. 47-49.

[10750]4258 Yoma 74 b.

[10751]4259 Bezeh 16 a.

[10752]4260 As always in the East, there were many kinds of bakemeat,

from the coarse barley-bread or rice-cake to the finest pastry. We

read even of a kind of biscuit, imported from India (the Teritha, Ber.

37 b).

[10753]4261 Ber. 41 b.

[10754]4262 Ber. 35 a.

[10755]4263 Ps. xxiv. 1.

[10756]4264 So rigid was this, that it was deemed duty to speak a

blessing over a drink of water, if one was thirsty, Ber. vi. 8.

[10757]4265 Ber. 36 a.

[10758]4266 This, also, was matter of controversy, but the Rabbis

decided that the blessing must first be spoken, and then the loaf cut

(Ber. 39 b).

[10759]4267 Ber. vi. 6.

[10760]4268 Ber. 43 a.

[10761]4269 Ber. 47 b.

[10762]4270 Ber. 40 b.

[10763]4271 Ber. 46 b.

[10764]4272 According to Ber. 46 b, the order in Persia was somewhat

different. The arrangement indicated in the text is of importance as

regards the places taken at the Last Supper, when there was a dispute

among the disciples about the order in which they were to sit (comp.

pp. 493-495).

[10765]4273 Tradition ascribes this benediction to Moses on the

occasion when manna first fell.

[10766]4274 Ber. vii. 5.

[10767]4275 Nidd. ii. 7.

[10768]4276 Pes. 108 b.

[10769]4277 Mentioned in St. Mark xv. 23.

[10770]4278 Terum xi. 2.

[10771]4279 Comp. Ber. 40-44 passim.

[10772]4280 Derekh Erets Suta v. and vii.

[10773]4281 Erub. 65 b.

[10774]4282 For a full account of the laws concerning the washing of

hands and the views entertained of the rite, see Book III. ch. xxxi.

[10775]4283 Ber. 51 b to52 b.

[10776]4284 In connection with St. Matt. xxiii.

[10777]4285 St. Luke xi. 39.

[10778]4286 On the origin and meaning of the ordinance, see Book III.

ch. xxxi.

[10779]4287 ver. 40.

[10780]4288 ver. 41.

[10781]4289 St. Matt. xv. 1-9.

[10782]4290 St. Matt. xv. 10, 11.

[10783]4291 St. Luke xi. 42.

[10784]4292 On 'the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes,' see Book III.

ch. ii. In fact, the fraternity of the Pharisees were bound by these

two vows, that of tithing, and that in regard to purifications.

[10785]4293 ver. 43.

[10786]4294 St. Luke xi. 44. The word 'Scribes and Pharisees,

hypocrites,' are an interpolation.

[10787]4295 St. Luke xii. 1.

[10788]4296 See previous Note.

[10789]4297 As to the estimate of the Pharisees, comp. also 'Sketches

of Jewish Social Life,' p. 237.

[10790]4298 Sot. iii. 4.

[10791]4299 See previous Note.

[10792]4300 St. Luke xi. 45.

[10793]4301 ver. 46.

[10794]4302 vv. 47-52.

[10795]4303 This is both the correct reading and rendering of St. Luke

xi. 53, 54, as given in the Revised Version.

[10796]4304 St. Luke xii. 1-12.

[10797]4305 St. Matt. x.

[10798]4306 With St. Luke xii. 2-9, comp. St. Matt. x. 26-33; with St.

Luke xii. 10, comp. St. Matt. xii. 31, 32; and with St. Luke xii. 11,

12, comp. St. Matt. x. 18-20.

[10799]4307 I prefer this rendering to that which connects the word

'first' as a mark of time with the previous words.

[10800]4308 Wünsche goes too far in saying that {hebrew} and {hebrew}

are only used in the sense of flattering. See Levy, sub verb.

[10801]4309 The Peshito paraphrases it.

[10802]4310 St. Luke xii. 2.

[10803]4311 Thus, and not 'for,' as in the A.V.

[10804]4312 St. Luke seems to use tame_on in that sense (here and in

ver. 24), St. Matthew in the sense of 'inner chamber' (St. Matt. vi.

6; xxiv. 26). In the LXX. it is used chiefly in the latter sense; in

the Apocr. once in the sense of 'inner chamber' (Tob. vii. 16), and

once in that of 'storeroom' (Ecclus. xxix. 12).

[10805]4313 ver. 4.

[10806]4314 vv. 6, 7.

[10807]4315 vv. 8-10.

[10808]4316 vv. 11, 12.

[10809]4317 St. Matt. x.

[10810]4318 St. Matt. x. 18-20.

[10811]4319 St. Matt. x. 21-25.

[10812]4320 St. Luke xii. 10, comp. with St. Matt. xii. 31, 32.

[10813]4321 Concerning the foolish rich man.

[10814]4322 St. Luke xii. 16-21.

[10815]4323 St. Luke xii. 22-34.

[10816]4324 St. Luke xii. 32.

[10817]4325 St. Matt. vi. 25-33.

[10818]4326 St. Luke xii. 29.

[10819]4327 Comp. Jer. xiv. 5.

[10820]4328 The word occurs in that sense twenty-five times in the

LXX. of the old Testament (four times as a noun, thirteen as an

adjective, eight as a verb), and seven times in the Apocrypha (twice

as a verb and as an adjective, and three times as a noun). This must

fix the N.T. usus.

[10821]4329 St. John x.

[10822]4330 St. Luke xii. 33, 34.

[10823]4331 comp. St. Matt. xix. 21.

[10824]4332 1 Cor. vii. 30, 31.

[10825]4333 St. Matt. vi. 19-21.

[10826]4334 St. Luke xii.

[10827]4335 vv. 35-38.

[10828]4336 The first is not mentioned, because it was so early, nor

yet the fourth, because the feast would scarcely be protracted so

long. Anciently, the Hebrews counted three night-watches; but

afterwards, and probably at the time of Christ, they divided the night

into four watches (see the discussion in Ber. 3 a). The latter

arrangement was probably introduced from the Romans.

[10829]4337 St. Matt. xxiv. 43, 44.

[10830]4338 St. Luke xii. 39, 40.

[10831]4339 St. Luke xii. 42-46; comp. St. Matt. xxiv. 45-51.

[10832]4340 So literally.

[10833]4341 St. Luke xii. 47, 48.

[10834]4342 St. Luke xii. 49-53.

[10835]4343 Comp. before, under 1, p. 218.

[10836]4344 This clause is most important for the interpretation of

that which precedes it, showing that it cannot be taken in sensu malo.

It cannot therefore be 'the fire of judgment' (Plumptre.)

[10837]4345 Probably, as Wünsche suggests, the {hebrew} or else the

{hebrew} of the Rabbis.

[10838]4346 vv. 49-50.

[10839]4347 St. Matt. x 34-36.

[10840]4348 St. Luke xii. 51-53.

[10841]4349 ver. 54

[10842]4350 St. Matt. xvi. 2, 3.

[10843]4351 St. Luke xii. 56.

[10844]4352 The observant reader will notice how characteristic the

small differences are. Thus, the sirocco would not be expected in

Galilee, but in Peræa, and in the latter also the first flowers would

appear much earlier.

[10845]4353 ver. 57.

[10846]4354 St. Matt. v. 25, 26.

[10847]4355 St. Luke xii. 58, 59.

[10848]4356 Sanh. 95 b. Its import is thus explained: Prépare ta

vengence, sans que ton ennemi puisse s'en douter (Schuhl, Sent. et.

Prov. d. Talm. p. 3.)

[10849]4357 This omission goes far to prove the groundlessness of the

charge brought by Renan, and lately by Joël (Bl. in d. Relig. Gesch.

ii. pp. 52 &c), that the writings of Josephus have been largely

falsified by Christian copyists.

[10850]4358 St. Luke xiii. 1-5.

[10851]4359 St. Luke xiii. 4.

[10852]4360 Jos. War. ii. 9. 4.

[10853]4361 St. Luke xiii. 6-9.

[10854]4362 For the exposition of this Parable, I refer to that of all

the Parables of that period.

[10855]4363 St. Luke xiii. 10-17.

[10856]4364 St. John v. 16.

[10857]4365 St. Matt. xii. 9-13.

[10858]4366 On the Sabbath-Law, see Appendix XVII.

[10859]4367 St. John v. 16, 17 &c.

[10860]4368 St. Matt. xii. 1-21.

[10861]4369 St. Luke xiii. 15, 16.

[10862]4370 St. Matt. xii. 14.

[10863]4371 This is the view of Godet, who regards the 'Thou hast been

loosed' as referring to the psychical ailment.

[10864]4372 So Dean Plumptre.

[10865]4373 So, and not as in the A. V.

[10866]4374 It was not contrary to the Rabbinic law, as Canon Cook (ad

loc.) supposes. The rule is quite different from that which applied in

St. Matt. xii. 11.

[10867]4375 Erub. 17 b; 20 b.

[10868]4376 28 a.d.

[10869]4377 Wieseler, Chronolog. Synopse, pp. 482, 483.

[10870]4378 St. John x. 22.

[10871]4379 It must, however, be admitted that some commentators draw

an opposite inference from these words.

[10872]4380 The subject has been more fully treated in an article in

the 'Leisure Hour' for Dec. 1873: 'Christmas, a Festival of Jewish

Origin.'

[10873]4381 1 Macc. vi. 52-59.

[10874]4382 u. s. vv. 56-59.

[10875]4383 Ant. xii. 7. 7.

[10876]4384 Ezra vi. 16, 17; Neh. xii. 27; Dan. iii. 2.

[10877]4385 Similarly, the cognate words _gka_nisiv and _gkainism_v as

well as the verb (_gkain_zw), are frequently used both in the LXX. and

the Apocrypha. The verb also occurs Heb. ix. 18; x. 20.

[10878]4386 Ps. cxiii. - cxviii.

[10879]4387 See ch. vii. This was always the case when the Hallel was

chanted.

[10880]4388 2 Macc. x. 7.

[10881]4389 Shabb. 21 b, lines 11 to 8 from bottom.

[10882]4390 Shabb. 21 b, about the middle.

[10883]4391 In regard to the latter Jewish legend, the learned reader

will find full quotations (as, in general, much interesting

information on the 'Feast of the Dedications') in Selden, de Synedriis

(ed. Frcf. 1696) p. 1213, and in general from p. 1207 to 1214.

[10884]4392 The reader will find much that is curious in these four

Midrashim (apud Jellinek, Beth haMidr. i. pp. 130-146): the Maaseh

Jehudith, 2 Midr. for Chanukkah, and he Megillath Antiochos. See also

the Megillath Taanith (ed. Warsh. 1874), pp. 14 a to 15 b.

[10885]4393 Moed K. iii. 9; Shabb. 21 b.

[10886]4394 Bemidb. R. 13, ed. Warsh., p. 49 a, line 15 from top.

[10887]4395 The location of this 'Porch' in the passage under the

present mosque El Aksa (proposed by Caspari, Chronol. Geogr. Einleit.

p. 256, and adopted by Archdeacon Watkins) is contrary to all the

well-known facts.

[10888]4396 Commentators mostly take quite a different view, and

regard their as more or less honest inquiry.

[10889]4397 According to the better reading, in the present tense.

[10890]4398 This clause in ver. 26 of the A.V. must, if retained, be

joined to ver. 27.

[10891]4399 St. John x. 27, 28.

[10892]4400 So, after the precedent of Bengel, especially Luthardt and

Godet, and after them others.

[10893]4401 By Bengel.

[10894]4402 St. Augustine marks, that the word 'one' tells against

Arianism, and the plural 'are' against Sabellianism. And do they not

equally tell against all heresy?

[10895]4403 Ps. lxxxii. 6.

[10896]4404 In Rabbinic writings the word for Law (Torah, or Oreya, or

Oreyan) is very frequently used to denote not only the Law, but the

whole Bible. Let one example suffice: 'Blessed be the Merciful Who has

given the threefold Law ({hebrew}, Pentateuch, Prophets, and

Hagiographa) to a threefold people (priests, Levites, laity) by the

hands of a third (Moses, being the third born of his parents) on the

third day (after the preparation) in the third month (Sivan),' Shabb.

88 a.

[10897]4405 We need scarcely call attention to the evidence which it

affords of the Judæan authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

[10898]4406 We would call attention to the words 'The Scripture cannot

be broken' (ver. 35) as evidential of the views which Jesus took of

the authority of the Old Testament, as well as of its inspiration.

[10899]4407 St. John x. 37.

[10900]4408 Thus, according to the better reading.

[10901]4409 So Meyer.

[10902]4410 The circumstance, that, according to the Gospels, no

miracle was wrought by John, is not only evidential of the

trustworthiness of their report of our Lord's miracles, but otherwise

also deeply significant. It shows that there is no craving for the

miraculous, as in the Apocryphal and legendary narratives, and it

proves that the Gospel-narratives were not cast in the mould of Jewish

contemporary expectation, which would certainly have assigned another

rôle to Elijah as the Forerunner of the Messiah than, first, that of

solitary testimony, then of forsakenness, and, lastly, of cruel and

unavenged murder at the hands of a Herodian. Truly, the history of

Jesus is not that of the Messiah of Judaic conception!

[10903]4411 As in Rom. v. 14.

[10904]4412 As in 1 Cor. x. 6, 11; Phil. iii. 17; 1 Thess. 1. 7; 2

Thess. iii 9; 1 Tim. iv. 12;Tit. ii. 7; 1 Pet. v.3.

[10905]4413 St. Luke x. 25-37.

[10906]4414 A distinction between different classes of Scribes, of

whom some gave themselves to the study of the Law, while others

included with it that of the Prophets, such as Dean Plumptre suggests

(on St. Matt. xxii. 35), did not exist.

[10907]4415 See generally ch. v. of this Book.

[10908]4416 St. Luke xviii. 18-23.

[10909]4417 St. Matt. xix. 16-22; xxii. 34-40.

[10910]4418 Thus: ' "With all thy heart" - with both thy impulses,

that to good and that to evil; "with all thy soul" - even if it takes

away thy soul; "with all thy might" - "with all thy money." Another

interpretation: "With all thy might" - in regard to every measure with

which He measures to thee art thou bound to praise Him' (there is here

a play on the words which cannot be rendered), Ber. 54 a, about the

middle.

[10911]4419 Shabb. 31 a, about the middle.

[10912]4420 Yalkut i. 174 a, end; Siphra on the passage, ed. Weiss, p.

89 b; also Ber. R. 24, end.

[10913]4421 St. Matt. vii. 12.

[10914]4422 Hamburger (Real Encykl., Abth. ii. p. 411) makes the

remarkable admission that the negative form was chosen to make the

command 'possible' and 'practical.' It is not so that Christ has

accommodated the Divine Law to our sinfulness. See previous remarks on

this Law in Book III. ch. xviii.

[10915]4423 Rom. vii.

[10916]4424 Ab Zar. 26 a.

[10917]4425 Babha Mets 32 b.

[10918]4426 Ex. xxiii. 5.

[10919]4427 Babha Mets. 32 b line 3 from bottom.

[10920]4428 As to many of these allegorisations, Calvin rightly

observes: 'Scripturae major habenda est reverentia, quam ut germanum

ejus sensum hac licentia transfigurare liceat.' In general, see

Goebel, u. s.

[10921]4429 '_miqan_ tugc_nonta, Germ., wie er eben war,' Grimm,

Clavis N.T. p. 438 b.

[10922]4430 I cannot (as some writers do) see any irony in the

expression.

[10923]4431 Vol. i. p. 560.

[10924]4432 In the Greek, ver. 33 begins with 'A Samaritan, however,'

to emphasise the contrast to the priest and Levite.

[10925]4433 Jer. Ber. 3 a; Shabb. 134 a.

[10926]4434 St. Matt. xx. 2.

[10927]4435 St. Luke xi. 5-13.

[10928]4436 ver. 1.

[10929]4437 ver. 8.

[10930]4438 di_ ge, Goebel, ad loc.

[10931]4439 St. Luke xii. 13-21.

[10932]4440 Bekhor viii. 2; Baba B. viii.

[10933]4441 Cases might, however, arise when the claim was doubtful,

and then the inheritance would be divided (Baba B. ix. 2). The double

part of an eldest son was computed in the following manner. If five

sons were left, the property was divided into six parts, and the

eldest son had two parts, or one-third of the property. If nine sons

were left, the property was divided into ten parts, and the eldest son

had two parts, or a fifth of the property. But there were important

limitations to this. Thus, the law did not apply to a posthumous son,

nor yet in regard to the mother's property, nor to any increase or

gain that might have accrued since the father's death. For a brief

summary, see Saalschütz, Mos. Recht, pp. 820 &c.

[10934]4442 So literally.

[10935]4443 Shabb. 153 a line 16 &c. from top.

[10936]4444 Ecclus. xi. 18, 19.

[10937]4445 Jer. Shabb. 14 c, top.

[10938]4446 Debar. R. 9, ed. Warsh. p. 19 b, line 6 from top and

onwards.

[10939]4447 St. Luke xiii. 6-9.

[10940]4448 See ch. xiii. of this Book.

[10941]4449 Baba K. 91 b.

[10942]4450 War. iii. 10. 8.

[10943]4451 Phaggim, Shebh. iv 7.

[10944]4452 Shebh. v. 1.

[10945]4453 Shebh. i. 3.

[10946]4454 Peah i. 4.

[10947]4455 Shebh. ii. 5.

[10948]4456 Moreh Nebhukh. iii. 37, apud Wetstein, ad loc.

[10949]4457 Baba B. 19 b.

[10950]4458 Deut. xx, 19; Baba K. 91 b; 92 a.

[10951]4459 Kil. vi. 5.

[10952]4460 Joel i. 7.

[10953]4461 Ber. 57 a; Mikr. on Cant. i. 1.

[10954]4462 St. Matt. xx. 1&c.; xxi. 33 &c. In Jewish thought the two

were scarcely separated.

[10955]4463 Not after three years, but evidently in the third year,

when the third year's crop should have appeared.

[10956]4464 katarge_. Grimm renders the word, enervo, sterilem reddo.

[10957]4465 e_v t_ m_llon. Goebel points to a similiar use of e_v in

St. Luke i. 20; Acts xiii. 42.

[10958]4466 Dean Plumptre regards the fig-tree as the symbol of a soul

making fruitless profession; the vineyard as that of Israel. For

homiletical purposes, or for practical application, this is, of

course, perfectly fair; but not in strict exegesis. To waive other and

obvious objections, it were to introduce modern, Christian ideas,

which would have been wholly unintelligible to Christ's hearers.

[10959]4467 Goebel.

[10960]4468 St. Luke xiv. 16-24.

[10961]4469 St. Luke xiv. 1-11.

[10962]4470 vv. 12, 13.

[10963]4471 St. Luke xiv. 14.

[10964]4472 The expression 'eating bread' is a well-known Hebraism,

used both in the Old Testament and in Rabbinic writings for taking

part in a meal.

[10965]4473 ver. 16.

[10966]4474 Rather the principal meal, which was towards evening.

[10967]4475 Is. xxv. 6, 7.

[10968]4476 St. Luke xiv. 13.

[10969]4477 B. Bathr. 4 a, lines 8-10 from bottom.

[10970]4478 It is most sad, and seems almost incredible, that this

'constrain to come in' has from of old been quoted in justification of

religious persecution.

[10971]4479 See Book III. ch. xvii.

[10972]4480 St. Matt. ix. 10, 11.

[10973]4481 The only other alternative would seem, if one were to

narrow the underlying ideas in a strictly Predestinarian sense. But

this seems not only incompatible with the third Parable, where all

turns on personal resolve, but runs contrary to the whole spirit of

these Parables, which is not of the exclusion of any, but of the

widest inclusion.

[10974]4482 St. Luke xv. 4.

[10975]4483 ver. 8.

[10976]4484 St. Luke xiv. 5.

[10977]4485 There is to some extent a Rabbinic parallel Parable (Ber.

R. 86, ed. Warsh. p. 154 b, about the middle), where one who is

driving twelve animals laden with wine, leaves the eleven and follows

the twelfth into the shop of a Gentile, for fear that the wine which

it bears might be mixed there.

[10978]4486 1 Pet. ii.25.

[10979]4487 Siphré, ed. Friedmann, p. 37 a, line 13 from top.

[10980]4488 In St. Matt. xviii. 12-14, the same Parable is used, but

with different application - not as here to the loss, but to what men

might deem the smallness of the loss, with special reference to the

command in ver. 10 (ver. 11 in the text of our A.V. is spurious).

[10981]4489 See Note on p. 255 of this chapter.

[10982]4490 on Ex. iii. 1.

[10983]4491 Shem. R. 2, ed. Warsh, p. 7 b, about the middle.

[10984]4492 on Prov. ii. 4.

[10985]4493 Midr. on Cant. i. 1, ed. Warsh p. 3 a, about the middle.

[10986]4494 Ber. 34 b about the middle.

[10987]4495 Is. lxiv. 4.

[10988]4496 Jer. iii. 12.

[10989]4497 Debar. R. 2, on Deut. iii. 25, which, in general, contains

several references to repentance, ed. Warsh. p. 7 b, about the middle.

[10990]4498 See ch. xvi. Note 1.

[10991]4499 But in regard to such disinheriting of children, even if

they were bad, it was said, that the Spirit of Wisdom did not rest on

them who made such disposition (Baba B. viii. 5).

[10992]4500 It may be interesting here to quote, in connection with

the interpretation of Heb. vii. 18, viii. 7-13, this Rabbinic

principle: 'A testament makes void a [previous] testament,' Jer. Baba

B. 16 b, below.

[10993]4501 Baba B. viii. 6; Moed K. iii. 3.

[10994]4502 The present Jewish Law of Inheritance is fully given in

Fassel, Mos. Rabb. Civil-Recht, vol. i. pp. 274-412.

[10995]4503 St. Luke xiii. 2, 3.

[10996]4504 More literally, 'was glued.' The LXX. translate thus the

Hebrew {hebrew}, 'to cleave.'

[10997]4505 Baba K. 82 b, and the reference to it in the Midrash on

Eccles. viii. 1.

[10998]4506 This prohibition is connected by tradition with Maccabean

times.

[10999]4507 Vayyik. R. 35 ed. Warsh., pp. 53 b, 54 a.

[11000]4508 The fruit of the carob-tree is regarded in Jewish and

heathen literature as the poorest, and, indeed, only fit for animals.

See Wetstein ad loc. According to Jewish ideas, it took seventy years

before the carob-tree bore fruit (Bekhor. 8 a). It is at least

doubtful whether the tree is mentioned in the Old Testament (the

{hebrew} of 2 Sam. v. 23, 24). In the Mishnah it is frequently

referred to (Peah i. 5; Shabb. xxiv. 2; Baba B. ii. 7). Its fruit

seems to have been the food of ascetics, such as Chanina b. Dosa, &c.

(Ber. 17 b), and Simeon b. Jochai (Shabb. 33 b), even as it had been

that of John the Baptist. Its leaves seem on occasions to have been

used as writing-material (Tos. Gitt. 2).

[11001]4509 Other terms were also substituted (such as 'Might,'

'Mercy,' &c.) - with the view of avoiding needless mention of the

Deity.

[11002]4510 St. Luke xv. 23.

[11003]4511 Or 'kissed him much,' katef_ljsen a_t_n.

[11004]4512 ver. 21. See marg. of R. V.

[11005]4513 Siphré, ed. Friedm. p. 35 a.

[11006]4514 Thus the text correctly. As it seems to me, the words do

not, in the first place, point to a moral change. Dogmatically, the

inference is no doubt correct, but, as Goebel remarks, they would

scarcely have, in that sense, been addressed to the servants.

[11007]4515 St. Luke xv. 32.

[11008]4516 It may be worth mentioning a somewhat similar parable in

Bemidb. R. 15 (ed. Warsh. p. 62 b, near beginning). Reference is made

to the fact, that, according to Numb. vii., all the twelve tribes

brought gifts, except Levi. Upon that follows in Numb. viii. the

consecration of the Levites to the service of the Lord. The Midrash

likens it to a feast which a king had made for all the people, but to

which he does not bid his special friend. And while the latter seems

to fear that this exclusion may imply disfavour, the king has a

special feast for his friend only, and shows him that while the common

meal was for all, the special feast is for those he specially loves.

[11009]4517 St. Luke xvi.

[11010]4518 ver 1.

[11011]4519 ver. 15.

[11012]4520 St. Luke xv. 1, 2.

[11013]4521 St. Luke xvi. 15.

[11014]4522 ver. 16.

[11015]4523 ver. 17.

[11016]4524 ver. 18.

[11017]4525 The reader who wishes to see the different views and

interpretations of this Parable is referred to the modern

commentaries, and especially to Archbishop Trench's Notes on the

Parables (13th ed.). pp. 427-452.

[11018]4526 St. Luke xvi. 1-8.

[11019]4527 ver. 9.

[11020]4528 vv. 10-13.

[11021]4529 vv. 1-8.

[11022]4530 ver. 8.

[11023]4531 St. Luke xv. 13.

[11024]4532 St. Luke xvi. 2, 3.

[11025]4533 A somewhat similar parable occurs in Vayyik. R. 5 (towards

the close) about a 'prudent' farmer. When matters go badly with his

farm, he dresses himself in his best, puts on a cheerful mien, and so

appears before his landlord. By well turned, flattering replies to the

inquiries about the cattle and the crops, he so conciliates favour,

that when the landlord finally inquires what he wished, and he

requests a loan, he receives double the sum he had asked.

[11026]4534 See Herzfield, Handelsgesch, pp. 183-185. I have proceeded

on his computation. I am bound to add, that there are few subjects on

which the statements of writers are more inconsistent or confused. The

statements made in the text are derived from Jewish sources.

[11027]4535 The writer in Smith's Bibl. Dict., vol. iii. p. 1740 b, is

mistaken in saying that 'the Bath is the largest of liquid measures.'

According to Ezek. xlv. 11, the Chomer or Cor = ten bath or ephah, was

equally applied to liquid and dry measures. The Bath (one-tenth of the

Chomer or Cor) = three seah; the seah = two hin; the hin = twelve log;

the log = space of six eggs. Further, one thirty-secondth of a log is

reckoned equal to a large (table), one sixty-fourth to a small

(dessert) spoon.

[11028]4536 This difference between the 'Wilderness,' or 'Mosaic,' and

the 'Galilean' measure removes the difficulty (raised by Thenius)

about the capacity of the 'brazen sea' in Solomon's Temple (1 Kings

vii. 23, 26). The Bath should be calculated, not according to the

Galilean ( = Metrêtês = about thirty-nine litres), but according to

the 'Wilderness' measure ( = amphora = about twenty-six litres).

[11029]4537 The reading in Ant. xv. 9. 2: 'The Attic Medimni,' is

evidently a copyist's error for 'Metrêtai.'

[11030]4538 Ant. viii. 2, 9; comp. ix. 4, 5.

[11031]4539 Jewish War. ii. 21. 2.

[11032]4540 Life, 13.

[11033]4541 Terum. x. 8.

[11034]4542 Jer. Baba M. iv. 2, p. 9 d.

[11035]4543 from Baba M. 105 b, about the middle.

[11036]4544 Peah viii. 7; Erub. viii. 2; Baba B. 91b.

[11037]4545 Baba B 91 a.

[11038]4546 This will appear from the cost of living, labour, &c.

[11039]4547 The word should be written with one m. See Grimm s. v.

[11040]4548 Grimm (after Drusius) derives it from {hebrew}, but this

is most unlikely. The derivation of Lagarde (ap. Kautzsch, p. 173)

seems very difficult. Buxtorf (s. v.) largely, but not very

satisfactorily, discusses its etymology. The view in the text has the

sanction of Levy.

[11041]4549 I must here refer generally to the monograph of Löw

(Graphische Requis. u. Erzeugn., 2 vols.). Its statements require,

however, occasionally to be rectified. See also Herzfeld,

Handelsgesch. pp. 113 &c., and Note 17.

[11042]4550 Sot. 49 b.

[11043]4551 Kel. xxiv. 7.

[11044]4552 Löw, u. s. vol. i. pp.97, 98. It is curious to learn that

in those days also waste paper went to the grocer. (Baba M. 56 b.)

[11045]4553 St. Luke i. 63.

[11046]4554 From earlier times comes to us notice of the Gillayon (Is.

viii. 1) - a smooth tablet of wood, metal, or stone - and of the

Cheret, or stylus (Is. viii. 1), and the Et, which means probably not

only a stylus but also a calamus (Ps. xlv. 2; Jer. viii. 8.)

[11047]4555 Kel. xxiv. 7.

[11048]4556 So Sachs, Beitr. z. Sprach u. Alterth. Forsch. vol. i. p.

165; but Löw (u. s.) seems of different opinion.

[11049]4557 The Deyo seems to have been a dry substance which was made

into black ink. Ink from gall-nuts appears to be of later invention.

[11050]4558 Shabb. xii. 4.

[11051]4559 u. s.

[11052]4560 Jer. Shabb 13 d. about the middle.

[11053]4561 Jos. Ant. xii. 2. 10.

[11054]4562 But the learned Relandus asserts that there were in his

country such texts written in gold letters, and that hence the

Talmudic prohibition could have only applied to the copies used in the

Synagogues (Havercamp's ed. of Josephus, vol. i. p. 593, Note e.)

[11055]4563 Shabb. 103 b; Sopher. i. 9.

[11056]4564 Not to make a distinction between any portions of

Scripture, and also from the curious Kabbalistic idea that somehow

every word in the Bible contained the Divine Name.

[11057]4565 Shabb. viii. 5.

[11058]4566 3 John 13.

[11059]4567 We read of one, Ben Qamtsar, who wrote four letters (the

Tetragram) at once, holding four reeds (Qolemosin) at the same time

between his four fingers (Yoma 38 b). The great R. Meir was celebrated

as a copyist, specially of the Bible, at which work he is said to have

made about 8s. weekly, of which, it is stated, he spent a third on his

living, a third on his dress, and a third on charity to Rabbis (Midr.

on Eccles. ii. 18, ed. Warsh. p. 83 b, last two lines). The codices of

R. Meir seem to have embodied some variations of the common text.

Thus, in the Psalms he wrote Halleluyah in one word, as it it had been

an interjection, and not in the orthodox way, as two words: Hallelu

Yah (Jer. Meg. 72 a). His codices seem also to have had marginal

notes. Thus, on the words 'very good' ({hebrew}), Gen. i. 31, he noted

'death is good' ({hebrew}), a sort of word-play, to support his view,

that death was originally of God and created by Him - a natural

necessity rather than a punishment (Ber. R. 9.). Similarly, on Gen.

iii. 21, he altered in the margin the {hebrew}, 'skin,' of the text

into {hebrew}, 'light,' thus rendering 'garments of light' (u. s. 20).

Again, in Gen. xlvi. 23, he left out the {hebrew} from {hebrew},

rendering it 'And the son of Dan was Chushim' (u. s. 94.). Similarly,

he altered the words, Is. xxi. 11, {hebrew}, 'the burden of Dumah'

into Roma, {hebrew} (Jer. Taan. p. 64 a, line 10 from top.)

[11060]4568 Shabb. i. 3.

[11061]4569 Similarly, the carpenter carried a small wooden rule

behind his ear.

[11062]4570 Already mentioned in Jer. xxxvi. 23, and in the Mishnah

called Olar, {hebrew}. Kel. xii. 8.

[11063]4571 Kel. ii. 7.

[11064]4572 Kel. xii. 8.

[11065]4573 Meg. 16 b.

[11066]4574 Letters, other documents, or bales of merchandise, were

sealed with a kind of red clay.

[11067]4575 Meg. 17 a; 19 a.

[11068]4576 Shabb. viii. 3.

[11069]4577 Kel. xvii. 17.

[11070]4578 Kel. xiii. 2.

[11071]4579 Ab. iii. 16.

[11072]4580 Baba B. 161 b.

[11073]4581 u. s. 163 a, b; 164 a.

[11074]4582 St. Luke xvi. 7.

[11075]4583 Shem. R. 15.

[11076]4584 The designations for the general formulary (Tophos, or

Tiphos (Gitt. iii. 2), = typos), and for the special clauses (Toreph =

Tropos) were of Greek derivation. For the full draft of the various

legal documents we refer the reader to Note ix. at the end of

Sammter's edition of Baba Mets. pp. 144-148. How many documents of

this kind Jewish legalism must have invented, may be gathered from the

circumstance that Herzfeld (u. s. p. 314) enumerates not fewer than

thirty-eight different kinds of them! It appears that there were

certain forms of these and similar documents, prepared with spaces

left blank to be filled in (Gitt. iii. .2)

[11077]4585 Baba M. i. 8.

[11078]4586 The more full designation was Shetar Chobh, a writing of

debt (Baba M. i. 6), or Shetar Milvah (Gitt. iii. 2), a writing of

loan.

[11079]4587 The attestation of the court was called Qiyum Beth Din,

'the establishment of the court,' Ashra, or Asharta, strengthening, or

Henpheq (Baba Mez. 7 b), literally, the production, viz. before the

court.

[11080]4588 Baba B. 163 a, b.

[11081]4589 Babha B. x. 8.

[11082]4590 For the derivation and legal bearing of the term, see Löw,

vol. ii. p. 82.

[11083]4591 Babha M. 7.

[11084]4592 Babha B. x. 8.

[11085]4593 Although it is certain that letters of credit were used by

the Jews of old, there is sufficient reason for believing that 'bills'

were first introduced into commerce by the Italians, and not by Jews.

[11086]4594 But Guisius (in Surenhusius' Mishna, vol. i. pp. 56, 57)

gives a different derivation and interpretation, which the learned

reader may consult for himself.

[11087]4595 Babha B 46 b.

[11088]4596 The difference between the Aris and the Chokher is stated

in Jer. Bikkur. 64 b.

[11089]4597 The difference between the Chokher and the Sokher is

expressed in Tos. Demai vi. 2. Ugolini (Thes. vol. xx. pp. cxix.,

cxx.) not only renders but copies this passage wrongly. A more

composite bargain of letting land and lending money for its better

cultivation is mentioned in B. Mez. 69 b.

[11090]4598 St. Luke xvi. 9.

[11091]4599 This, and not 'they shall fail,' is the correct reading.

[11092]4600 So in the Targ. on Hab. ii. 9, {hebrew}.

[11093]4601 Ps. xv. i.; xxvii. 5, the latter being realistically

understood in Siphra.

[11094]4602 Comp. Schöttgen ad loc.

[11095]4603 Yalkut, vol. i. p. 81 a, lines 19 &c, from top.

[11096]4604 No doubt the equivalent for the Rabbinic {hebrew}

accreditus, and used in the same sense.

[11097]4605 Shem. R., ed. Warsh., p. 7 b, about the middle.

[11098]4606 St. Luke xvi. 10.

[11099]4607 ver. 13.

[11100]4608 St. Luke xvi. 14-31.

[11101]4609 St. Luke xvi. 14.

[11102]4610 ver. 15.

[11103]4611 Comp. St. Matt. xi. 12 and our remarks on the passage.

[11104]4612 St. Luke xvi. 16, 17.

[11105]4613 ver. 18.

[11106]4614 vv. 16-22.

[11107]4615 In later times Palestinian byssus seems to have been in

great repute. See Herzfeld, Handelsgesch. p. 107.

[11108]4616 Yoma iii. 6, 7.

[11109]4617 Jer. Yoma iii. 6, p. 40 d.

[11110]4618 Jer. Kidd. 62 c.

[11111]4619 Shabb.26 a.

[11112]4620 Kel. xxix.

[11113]4621 Jer. Yoma iii. 6.

[11114]4622 The better reading of ver. 20 is that adopted in the

Revised Version: 'And a certain beggar named Lazarus' - only that we

should render 'was cast.'

[11115]4623 I cannot agree with Dean Plumptre that the name Lazarus

had been chosen with special reference, and as a warning, to the

brother of Martha and Mary. If Lazarus of Bethany was thus to be

warned in regard to the proper use of his riches, his name would have

been given to Dives, and not to the beggar. But besides, can we for

one moment believe that Christ would in such manner have introduced

the name of Lazarus of Bethany into such a Parable, he being alive at

the time? Nothing, surely, could be further from His general mode of

teaching than the introduction of such personalities.

[11116]4624 For this see Book V. ch. vi.

[11117]4625 Kethub. 104 a; Bemidb. R. 11, ed. Warsh. p. 42 b; Targ. on

Cant. iv. 12.

[11118]4626 4 Macc. xiii. 16; Kidd. 72 b, 1st line.

[11119]4627 But I cannot think with Grimm (Kurzgef. Exeg. Handb. z. d.

Apokr. Lief. iv. p. 347) that the expression refers to a feast of

fellowship.

[11120]4628 Erub. 19 a.

[11121]4629 St. Luke xvi. 23-26.

[11122]4630 Jer. Targ. on Gen. iii. 24.

[11123]4631 Ber. 34 b.

[11124]4632 Vayyik. R. 32, beginning.

[11125]4633 u.s. p.48 b, lines 8 and 9 from top.

[11126]4634 Midr. on Eccles. i. 15, ed. Warsh. p. 81 b. about the

middle.

[11127]4635 Ber. 18 b.

[11128]4636 According to some of the commentators these were, however,

dreams.

[11129]4637 Jer. Chag. 77 d.

[11130]4638 Comp. also Jer. Sanh. 23 c about the middle.

[11131]4639 The exact rendering in ver. 26 is; 'in order that (_pwv,

so also in ver. 28) they who would pass from hence to you,' &c.

[11132]4640 St. Luke xvi. 27-31.

[11133]4641 ver. 30.

[11134]4642 This is the real meaning of the verb pe_qw in the passive

voice. The rendering 'persuade' is already Targumic - giving it the

sense of moving or influencing the intellect. To us the other sense,

that of influencing the will to repentance, seems more likely to have

been intended.

[11135]4643 ch. xvii.

[11136]4644 St. Luke xi. 5 &c.

[11137]4645 Comp. St. Luke xviii. 7, 8.

[11138]4646 xvii. 20, 21.

[11139]4647 vv. 22-37.

[11140]4648 St. John xi.

[11141]4649 St. Luke xvii. 11.

[11142]4650 St. Luke xvii.

[11143]4651 Even this shows that it is intended to mark an essential

difference between this and the preceding Parables.

[11144]4652 The word a_to_v should be inserted in the text.

[11145]4653 The verbs are, of course, in the infinitive.

[11146]4654 Sometimes it is applied in the opposite direction, from

the greater to the less.

[11147]4655 These ten passages are: Gen. xliv. 8; Exod. vi. 9, 12;

Numb. xii. 14; Deut. xxxi. 27; two instances in Jerem. xii. 5; 1 Sam.

xxiii. 3; Prov. xi. 31; Esth. ix. 12; and Ezek. xv. 5.

[11148]4656 Ber. R. 92, ed. Warsh. p. 164 b from about the middle.

[11149]4657 Pesquita, ed Buber. p. 161 a, lines 3 and 2 from bottom.

[11150]4658 The verb is used in the same sense wherever it occurs in

the N.T.: viz., St. Luke xviii. 1; 2 Cor. iv. 1, 16; Gal. vi. 9; Eph.

iii. 13; and 2 Thess. iii. 13. It is thus peculiar to St. Luke and to

St. Paul.

[11151]4659 Siphré, ed Friedm. p.50 b, line 7 from top.

[11152]4660 Kethub. 104 b.

[11153]4661 Shabb. 10 a.

[11154]4662 Jer. Sheq. 48 a.

[11155]4663 Keth. 105 a; Jer. Keth xiii. 1.

[11156]4664 Comp. Geiger, Urschr. u. Uebers. pp. 119, 120, Note, with

which, however, comp. the two Essays mentioned in Note 3.

[11157]4665 Ant. iv. 8, 14.

[11158]4666 See Geiger, u. s. p. 115.

[11159]4667 Comp. Bloch, Mos. Talm. Polizeirecht, which is, however,

only an enlargement of Frankel's essay in the Monatschr. fur Gesch. d.

Judenth. for 1852, pp. 243-261.

[11160]4668 Babha K.114 a.

[11161]4669 St. Luke xviii. 4.

[11162]4670 Comp. St. Luke xi. 8.

[11163]4671 This, as the only possible rendering of the verb in this

instance, is also vindicated by Meyer ad loc. The Judge seems afraid

of bodily violence from the exasperated woman. For a significant

pugilistic use of the verb, comp. 1 Cor. ix. 27.

[11164]4672 St. Luke xviii. 8.

[11165]4673 ver. 7.

[11166]4674 St. Luke xviii. 9-14.

[11167]4675 The objection of Schleiermacher (followed by later

commentators), that, in a Parable addressed to Pharisees, a Pharisee

would not have been introduced as the chief figure, seems of little

force.

[11168]4676 Comp. St. Luke ii. 27, 37; Acts ii. 46; v. 12, 42.

[11169]4677 For the philological vindication of this rendering, see

Goebel, Parabeln (i.p. 327). The arguments in its favour are as

follows: 1. It corresponds to the description of the position of the

Publican, who also stood by himself 'afar off.' 2. Otherwise, the

mention that the Pharisee 'stood' would seem utterly idle. He could

not have sat. 3. The rendering 'prayed with himself,' is not correct.

The words mean: 'to himself' - and this would give no meaning. But

even were we to render it 'with himself' in the sense of silent

prayer, the introduction of such a remark as that he prayed silently,

would be both needless and aimless. But what decides us is the

parallelism with the account of the posture of the Publican.

[11170]4678 Of this spirit are even such Eulogies as these in the

ordinary morning-prayer: 'Blessed art Thou, Lord, our God, King of the

world, that Thou hast not made me a stranger (a Gentile). . . a

servant . . . a woman.'

[11171]4679 The merit of Zekhuth. On this subject we must refer, as

far too large for quotation, to the detailed account in such works as

Weber, System d. altsynag. Theol. pp. 280 &c. Indeed, there is no

limit to such extravagances. The world itself had been created on

account of the merits of Israel, and is sustained by them, even as all

nations only continue by reason of this (Shemoth R. 15, 28; Bemidb. R.

2). A most extraordinary account is given in Bemidb. R. 20 of the four

merits for the sake of which Israel was delivered out of Egypt: they

did not change their names; nor their language; nor reveal their

secrets; nor were dissolute.

[11172]4680 Not 'possess,' as in the A.V.

[11173]4681 Taan. 12 a.

[11174]4682 See Book III. ch. ii.

[11175]4683 Demai ii 2.

[11176]4684 Ber. 28 b.

[11177]4685 Erub. 21 b, lines 12 and 11 from bottom.

[11178]4686 Comp. vol. i. p. 540.

[11179]4687 Ber. R. 35 ed. Warsh. p. 64 b, end.

[11180]4688 This, and not 'lift so much as his eyes,' is the proper

position of the words.

[11181]4689 The word 'upon' should be left out.

[11182]4690 So Bengel.

[11183]4691 St. Matt. v. 20.

[11184]4692 St. Luke xviii. 15-17.

[11185]4693 St. Matt. xviii. 23-35.

[11186]4694 St. Matt. xix. 1.

[11187]4695 St. Luke xviii. 15-17.

[11188]4696 St. Matt. xviii. 15-22.

[11189]4697 St. Matt. xviii. 1-14, passim.

[11190]4698 Ex. xxii. 3; Lev. xxv. 39, 47.

[11191]4699 Accordingly, these servants could not have been

'bondservants,' as in the margin of the R.V.

[11192]4700 Mark the emphatic position of the words in the original.

[11193]4701 According to the better reading, the word 'all' in ver. 29

should be left out - and the omission is significant. The servant who

promised to pay 'all' (ver. 26) promised more than he could possibly

perform; while he who undertook what he might reasonably perform, did

not say 'all.'

[11194]4702 The Rabbinic Law was much more merciful than this

apparently harsh (Roman or Herodian) administration of it. It laid it

down that, just as when a person had owed to the Sanctuary a certain

sum or his property, his goods might be distrained, but so much was to

be deducted and left to the person, or given to him, as was needful

for his sustenance, so was it to be between creditor and debtor. If a

creditor distrained the goods of his debtor, he was bound to leave to

the latter, if he had been a rich man, a sofa [to recline at table]

and a couch and pillow; if the debtor had been a poor man, a sofa and

a couch with a reed-mat [for coverlet] (Bab. Mets. 113 a and b). Nay,

certain tools had to be returned for his use, nor was either the

Sheriff-officer nor the creditor allowed to enter the house to make

distraint. (As regards distraints for Vows, see Arach. 23 b, 24 a).

[11195]4703 St. Matt. xviii. 35.

[11196]4704 For example, Shem. R. 31.

[11197]4705 u. s.

[11198]4706 Bemidb. R. 19, ed. Warsh. p. 77 a.

[11199]4707 Comp. Shem. R. 31.

[11200]4708 St. Luke xiii. 23-30.

[11201]4709 ver. 24; comp. St. Matt. vii. 13, 14; vv. 25-27; comp. St.

Matt. viii., 21-23.

[11202]4710 vv. 28, 29; comp. St. Matt. vii. 21-23.

[11203]4711 St. Matthew and St Luke.

[11204]4712 St. Luke xiii. 23 &c.

[11205]4713 See also ver. 31.

[11206]4714 It is difficult to understand how Wünsche could have

referred to Sukk. 45 b as a parallel, since anything more thoroughly

contrary to all Christ's teaching can scarcely be imagined. Otherwise

also the parallel is inapt. The curious reader will find the passage

in detail in Schöttgen, on 1 Cor. xiii. 12 (p. 652).

[11207]4715 Sanh. 111 a.

[11208]4716 Thus, Canon Cook makes this distinction: 'They who are

said to seek, seek (i.e. desire and wish) and no more. They do not

struggle for admission.' But would any one be refused who sought, in

the sense of desiring, or wishing?

[11209]4717 The word implies a real combat to get at the narrow door,

not 'a large crowd ... struggling for admission.' The verb occurs

besides in the following passages: St. John xviii. 36; 1 Cor. ix. 25;

Col. i. 29; iv. 12; 1 Tim. vi. 12; 2 Tim. iv. 7.

[11210]4718 So according to the best reading.

[11211]4719 St. Matt. xi. 12.

[11212]4720 Comp. also St. Matt. xix. 30; xx. 16.

[11213]4721 St. Matt. vii. 21, 22.

[11214]4722 St. Matt. vii. 23.

[11215]4723 St. Luke xiii. 27.

[11216]4724 It is characteristic of 'higher' criticism when Hilgenfeld

declares that the 'lawlessness' in St. Matthew's Gospel is intended as

a covert hit at Pauline Christianity, and the 'unrighteousness' in St.

Luke's as a retort upon Petrine or Jewish Christianity!

[11217]4725 Rom. ii.

[11218]4726 St. Matt. viii. 11.

[11219]4727 St. Luke xiii. 31-35.

[11220]4728 Perhaps we should rather read 'hour.'

[11221]4729 See Book III. chap. xxviii.

[11222]4730 St. Luke ix. 9.

[11223]4731 as spoken of in St. Luke xiii. 32.

[11224]4732 St. John xi. 8.

[11225]4733 The word pore_esqai, ver. 31, is also used in ver. 32

'go,' and ver. 33 'walk.'

[11226]4734 The words 'to-day, and to-morrow, and the third day,' must

not be taken as a literal, but as a well-known figurative expression.

Thus we are told (Mechilta, Par. Bo, 18, towards end, ed. Weiss, p. 27

b), 'There is a "to-morrow" which is now [refers to the immediate

present], and a "to-morrow" of a later time,' indicating a fixed

period connected with the present, The latter, for example, in the

passage illustrated in the Rabbinic quotation just made: Ex. xiii. 14,

'It shall be when thy son shall ask thee [literally] to-morrow,' in

our A.V. 'in time to come.' So also Josh. xxii. 24. 'The third day' in

such connection would be {hebrew}.

[11227]4735 Even the death of John the Baptist may, as indicated, be

said to have been compassed in Jerusalem.

[11228]4736 vv. 34, 35.

[11229]4737 St. Matt. xxiii. 37-39.

[11230]4738 The words will be considered in connection with that

passage.

[11231]4739 St. Luke xiv. 1-11.

[11232]4740 Chapter xvi.

[11233]4741 St. Luke xiv. 4.

[11234]4742 vv. 3, 4.

[11235]4743 So - and not 'ass' - according to the best reading.

[11236]4744 ver. 21.

[11237]4745 ver. 7-11.

[11238]4746 ver. 10.

[11239]4747 Almost precisely the same sayings occur in Ab. de Rabbi

Nathan 25 and Vayyikra R. 1.

[11240]4748 vv. 12-14.

[11241]4749 Chapter xvi.

[11242]4750 Ab. i. 5.

[11243]4751 Ab. de R. Nathan 7.

[11244]4752 St. Luke xiv. 25-35.

[11245]4753 xiii. 31-35.

[11246]4754 ver. 25.

[11247]4755 St. Matt. x. 37, 38.

[11248]4756 St. Luke xiv. 26.

[11249]4757 vv. 28-30.

[11250]4758 vv. 31, 32.

[11251]4759 ver. 33.

[11252]4760 vv. 34, 35.

[11253]4761 Bekhor. 8 b, lines 14, 13 from bottom.

[11254]4762 In the Talmud: {hebrew} [has an evil odour, is spoiled]

{hebrew}.

[11255]4763 St. Luke xvii. 1-10.

[11256]4764 xvii. 1.

[11257]4765 vv. 1-4, comp. St. Matt. xviii. 6-35; ver. 6, comp. St.

Matt. xvii. 20.

[11258]4766 St. John xi.

[11259]4767 St. Luke xvii. 1, 2.

[11260]4768 vv. 3, 4.

[11261]4769 ver. 6.

[11262]4770 vv. 7-10.

[11263]4771 See Book IV. chap. iii.

[11264]4772 St. Matt. xviii. 1-6, &c., 21, 22.

[11265]4773 St. Luke xvii. 6.

[11266]4774 vv. 7-10.

[11267]4775 As quoted by Godet (ad loc.).

[11268]4776 See vol. i., p. 559.

[11269]4777 In the earlier editions of his Vie de Jésus.

[11270]4778 St. Luke x. 38 &c.; St. Matt. xxvi. 6 &c. St. Mark xiv. 3.

[11271]4779 St. John xi. 2.

[11272]4780 St. John xi. 45.

[11273]4781 I do not quite understand, whether or not Dr. Abbott

(Encycl. Brit., Art. 'Gospels,' pp. 837, 838) holds the 'historical

accuracy' of this narrative. In a foot-note he disclaims its 'complete

discussion' as foreign to the purpose of his essay. He refers us,

however, to the Parable of Dives and Lazarus, together with the

comments on it of Lightfoot in his Horæ Hebr., and of Wünsche in his

Beitr. z. Erl. d. Evangelien. I have carefully examined both, but

cannot see that either or both contribute anything to help our

understanding of the raising of Lazarus.

[11274]4782 St. Luke x. 38 &c.

[11275]4783 From the non-mention of Peter and the prominence of Thomas

it seems at least doubtful, whether all the Apostles were there.

[11276]4784 According to the best reading, the words are the same, but

the position of the personal pronoun mou 'my' brother is significantly

different (see Westcott ad loc.).

[11277]4785 As to the Jewish usus of the expression 'sleep' for death,

see Book III. chap. xxvi.

[11278]4786 Ber. 57 b.

[11279]4787 Ber. R 20.

[11280]4788 See chap. v. of this Book.

[11281]4789 Comp. St. John xi. 20.

[11282]4790 In that case Christ's inquiry would afford another

instance of His self-exinanition in His great Humiliation of 'becoming

obedient.'

[11283]4791 Moed K. 28 a; comp Sanh. 46 b.

[11284]4792 When relating the history of the raising of the widow's

son at Nain, Book III. chap. xx.

[11285]4793 An interesting account (to which I would acknowledge

obligations) is given in a brochure by Dr. Perles, reprinted from

Frankel's Monatsschrift.

[11286]4794 Shabb. 153 a; comp. also as regards Jerusalem (where the

Galilean custom prevailed), Semach. iii. 6.

[11287]4795 Baba B. 25 a.

[11288]4796 Comp. Perles, u. s. p. 25.

[11289]4797 2 Kings xxiii. 6; Jer. Xxvi. 23.

[11290]4798 St. Matt. xxvii. 7; Acts i. 19.

[11291]4799 Sanh. vi. 5.

[11292]4800 These were: a law court, provision for the poor, a

synagogue, a public bath, a secessus, a doctor, a surgeon, a scribe, a

butcher, and a schoolmaster.

[11293]4801 Targ. on Ps. cxv. 17.

[11294]4802 Moed K. 9 b.

[11295]4803 Erub. iii.1; Tohar. iii. 7.

[11296]4804 Sanh. 46.

[11297]4805 Keth. 20 b.

[11298]4806 Gitt. 61 a.

[11299]4807 Sanh. 47 a.

[11300]4808 u. s. 46 a.

[11301]4809 Ber. 8 a.

[11302]4810 Semach. 2.

[11303]4811 Semach. i. 6.

[11304]4812 Moed K. 27 b.

[11305]4813 u.s. 28 b, where also the text their laments.

[11306]4814 Jer. Moed K. i. 5.

[11307]4815 Baba B. 100 b.

[11308]4816 Meg. 28 a, b.

[11309]4817 Shabb. 153 a.

[11310]4818 Many of them in Moed K. 25.

[11311]4819 See Zunz, Zur Gesch. u. Liter. pp. 304 to 458. In Moed K.

25 b we have the miraculous portents at the death of great Rabbis:

columns weeping or statues flattening or bursting, blood flowing,

stars appearing, trees uprooted, arches bending, &c.

[11312]4820 Nicolai (De Sepulchr. Hebr., a book of no great value)

gives a pictorial illustration at p. 170.

[11313]4821 Baba B. 100 b.

[11314]4822 Ber. 53 a.

[11315]4823 Bets. 6 a.

[11316]4824 Meg. 26 b.

[11317]4825 Mearta. Babha Mets. 85 b; Baba B. 58 a.

[11318]4826 Not Kokim. On the difference, as regards the entrance into

these caves, between Jewish and Phoenician tombs, see Conder, 'Heth

and Moab,' p. 93.

[11319]4827 Baba B. vi. 8.

[11320]4828 This partly depends whether, with Rashi and Perles (p.

29), we regard {hebrew} as an ossarium, or, with Levy, regard it as =

{hebrew}, 'house of mourning,' Ber. 6 b (comp. Schwab ad loc.).

[11321]4829 Jer. Moed K. i. 5; Semach. 12 and 13.

[11322]4830 Comp. letters, (a) by Dr. Chaplin, Quart. Stat. Oct. 1873,

p. 155; (b) by M. Clermont-Ganneau, Ap. 1874, pp. 95, &c.; (c) Dr.

Chaplin, Quart. Stat. Jan. 1876, p. 9; (d) Art. by Capt. Conder ib.

pp. 18, &c.

[11323]4831 See, especially, Capt. Wilson's Report in the third Quart.

Stat. (1869), pp. 66, &c.

[11324]4832 Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 494.

[11325]4833 M. Clermont-Ganneau.

[11326]4834 The supposed ancient (pre-Christian, Israelitish)

inscriptions in the Crimea are now generally ascribed to a much later

date. Comp. Harkavy, Altjud. Denkm.

[11327]4835 See Schürer, Gemeinde Verf. d. Juden in Rom. Schürer has

collected forty-five of the most interesting of these inscriptions.

[11328]4836 Horay. 13 b.

[11329]4837 This is expressly stated in Moed. K. 8 b, lines 7-9.

[11330]4838 On account of the poverty of some of the sages, it was

declared that they needed not monuments; their deeds were their

monuments (Jer. Shequal. ii. 7, p. 47 a).

[11331]4839 1 Macc. xiii. 27-29.

[11332]4840 Ant. xvi. 7.1.

[11333]4841 The first gives an exaggerated account of the great

monument erected by Simon Maccabeus in honour of his father and

brothers; the second refers to a monument erected by Herod over the

tomb of David.

[11334]4842 On the use of the word Nephesh as meaning not only 'soul'

and 'person,' but as applied also to the , the reader will find some

very interesting remarks in the App. Not. Miscell. to Pocock's Porta

Mosis, pp. 19, 20, and 75-78, and in Pagnini, Thes. Ling. Sanct. col.

1658, &c.

[11335]4843 Erub. v.1; Sheq. ii. 5.

[11336]4844 Ezek. xliii. 7. Probably the second clause of Is. liii. 9

should read thus: 'And with the rich His sepulchre.'

[11337]4845 {hebrew}.

[11338]4846 Moed K. i. 2.

[11339]4847 St. Matt. xxiii. 27 Moed K. 6 a.

[11340]4848 On the subject of 'mourning' I must refer generally to the

corresponding chapter in 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life.'

[11341]4849 Moed K. 29 a.

[11342]4850 Baba B. 100 b.

[11343]4851 Jer. Kidd. i. 8.

[11344]4852 Ab. d. R. Nath. 25.

[11345]4853 Jer. Yebam. 4 d.

[11346]4854 Siphré, towards end.

[11347]4855 Ber. R. 49.

[11348]4856 Shabb. 152 b.

[11349]4857 Ber. 18 b; 19 a; comp. Heb. xii. 1.

[11350]4858 Yoma 38 b; Taan. 28 a.

[11351]4859 Kethub. 8 b.

[11352]4860 This is not only the literal rendering, but the

parallelism of the previous member of the sentence ('even if he die,

shall live') - where the 'life' is neither the spiritual nor the

eternal, but life in opposition to physical death - seems to demand

this, rather than the rendering of both the A.V. and the R.V.

[11353]4861 St. John xi. 4.

[11354]4862 Possibly it might be: 'He that was to come,' or should

come, like {hebrew} or {hebrew} in which case it would be another

evidence of Hebraisms in the Fourth Gospel.

[11355]4863 Semach. 8; Taan. 16.

[11356]4864 For a brief but excellent summary of the principal views

on the subject, see Westcott, ad loc.

[11357]4865 Canon Westcott.

[11358]4866 St. Luke xix. 41.

[11359]4867 St. John ix. 32.

[11360]4868 In St. John xi. 41 the words, 'from the place where the

dead was laid,' should be omitted, as not in the best MSS.

[11361]4869 Abh. Z. 20 b; Ber. R. 100; Vayyik. R. 18.

[11362]4870 St. John xi 4.

[11363]4871 On the Sanhedrin, see further, in Book V.

[11364]4872 The doubt as to their reality would, of course, come from

the Sadducees in the Sanhedrin. It will be remembered, that both

Caiaphas and the Chief Priests belonged to that party.

[11365]4873 Ber. R. 94; comp. also 91, and the Midr. on Eccl. ix. 18.

[11366]4874 The 'city' 'called Ephraim' has not been localised. Most

modern writers identify it with the Ephraim, or Ephron, of 2 Chron.

xiii. 19, in the neighbourhood of Bethel, and near the wilderness of

Bethaven. But the text seems to require a place in Peræa and close to

Galilee. Comp. p. 127.

[11367]4875 St. Matt. xix. 1, 2; St. Mark x. 1; St. Luke xvii. 11.

[11368]4876 St. Mark xv. 40, 41.

[11369]4877 Indeed, any lengthened journeying, and for an indefinite

purpose, would have been quite contrary to Jewish manners. Not so, of

course, the travelling in the festive band up to the Paschal Feast.

[11370]4878 St. Matthew.

[11371]4879 St. Mark.

[11372]4880 This will more fully appear when we study the history of

Zacchæus and the cure of the blind man in Jericho.

[11373]4881 St. Luke xvii. 12-19.

[11374]4882 vv. 20-37.

[11375]4883 St. Matt. viii. 2-4; St. Mark i. 40-45.

[11376]4884 St. Luke xvii. 20-37.

[11377]4885 St. Matt. xxiv.; St. Mark xiii.

[11378]4886 See Book III. chap. xv.

[11379]4887 As we note, in St. Luke xvii. 14, the direction to show

themselves 'to the priests' (in the plural), this forms another point

of undesigned evidence of the authenticity of the narrative.

[11380]4888 Neg. iii. 1.

[11381]4889 Some have seen in the reference by St. Luke here, and in

the Parable of the Good Samaritan, a peculiarly Pauline trait. But we

remember St. John's reference to the Samaritans (iv.), and such

sentiments in regard to the Gentiles as St. Matt. viii. 11, 12.

[11382]4890 The equivalent for this would be {hebrew}. This, as may be

shown from very many passages, means not so much a stranger as a

non-Jew. Thus, the expression Nokhri and Yisrael are constantly

contrasted as non-Jews and Jews. At the same time it must be admitted

that in Demai iii. 4, the Nokhri is also distinguished from the

Cuthean, or Samaritan. But see the explanatory note of Maimonides

referred to by Surenhusius vol. i. p. 87.

[11383]4891 St. Luke xvii. 20-37.

[11384]4892 St. Matt. xxiv.

[11385]4893 St. Luke xvii. 20.

[11386]4894 in St. Luke xvi. 14.

[11387]4895 St. Matt. xix. 3-12; St. Mark x. 2-12.

[11388]4896 St. Matt. xix. 1, 2; St. Mark x. 1.

[11389]4897 St. Luke xvi. 14.

[11390]4898 See chap. xviii. of this Book.

[11391]4899 St. Luke xvi. 17, 18.

[11392]4900 So, according to many commentators. See Meyer, ad loc.

[11393]4901 St. Matt xix. 3.

[11394]4902 On the general subject I would refer to 'Sketches of

Jewish Social Life,' pp. 142, 157, 158.

[11395]4903 Gittin.

[11396]4904 Thus, the Talmudic tractate on 'Divorce,' while insisting

on its duty in case of sin, closes with the words: 'He who divorces

his first wife, the very altar sheds tears over him' (Gitt. 90 b, last

lines; comp. Mal. ii. 13-16.)

[11397]4905 An instance of refusing to be divorced, even from a very

disagreeable and quarrelsome wife, is that of R. Chiya, mentioned in

Yebam. 63 a, towards end.

[11398]4906 Two disgusting instances of Rabbis making proclamation of

their wish to be married for a day (in a strange place, and then

divorced), are mentioned in Yoma 18 b.

[11399]4907 Jer. Kidd. 58 c; Ber.R. 18.

[11400]4908 This by a very profane application to this point of the

expression 'God of Israel,' in Mal. ii. 16.

[11401]4909 Gitt. ix. 10.

[11402]4910 Bemidb. R. 9, ed. Warsh. p. 29 b, about the middle.

[11403]4911 Gitt. 90 a; Sanh. 22 a and b.

[11404]4912 Gitt. 90 a.

[11405]4913 An extraordinary attempt has been made to explain the

expression ({hebrew}, 'burns his mess') as meaning 'brings dishonour

upon him.' But (1) in the two passages quoted as bearing out this

meaning (Ber. 17 b, Sanh. 103 a, second line from bottom), the

expression is not the precise equivalent for 'bringing dishonour,'

while in both cases the addition of the words 'in public' ({hebrew})

marks its figurative use. The real meaning of the expression in the

two passages referred to is: One who brings into disrepute (destroys)

that which has been taught and learned. But (2) in Gitt. ix. 10; 90 a;

Bemidb. R. 9 there is no indication of any figurative use of the

expression, and the commentators explain it, as burning the dish,

'either by fire or by salt;' while (3), the expression is followed by

an anti-climax giving permission of divorce if another woman more

pleasing were found.

[11406]4914 Deut. xxiv. 1.

[11407]4915 Yebam. 63 b; Gitt. 90 a, b.

[11408]4916 Gitt. iv. 7.

[11409]4917 Keth. vii. 6.

[11410]4918 Erub. 41 b.

[11411]4919 Yebam. 63 b.

[11412]4920 Gitt. iv. 7, 8.

[11413]4921 These words are omitted by St. Mark in his condensed

account. But so far from regarding, with Meyer, the briefer account of

St. Mark as the original one, we look on that of St. Matthew as more

fully reproducing what had taken place.

[11414]4922 The clause, St. Matt. xix. 4, should, I think, be thus

pointed: 'He Who made them, at the beginning made them, &c.'

[11415]4923 Used in the same sense, for example, Baba B. 8 b.

[11416]4924 Deut. xxi. 11.

[11417]4925 Kidd. 21 b.

[11418]4926 Canon Cook argues this with great ingenuity.

[11419]4927 Pes. 112 a.

[11420]4928 Sot. v. 1.

[11421]4929 St. Mark x. 10.

[11422]4930 St. Matt. xix. 10-12.

[11423]4931 This is the view commonly taken. But 'the saying' may,

without much difficulty, be also applied to that of Christ.

[11424]4932 For, it is not merely to practise outward continence, but

to become in mind and heart a eunuch.

[11425]4933 Comp. 1 Cor. vii. 1, 25-40.

[11426]4934 The mistaken literalism of application on the part of

Origen is well known. Such practice must have been not unfrequent

among Jewish Christians, for, curiously enough, the Talmud refers to

it, reporting a conversation between a Rabbi and such a Jewish

Christian eunuch ({hebrew}), Shabb. 152 a. The same story is related,

with slight alterations, in the Midrash on Eccles. x. 7, ed. Warsh. p.

102 a, last four lines. Any practice of this kind would have been

quite contrary to Jewish law (Pes. 112 b; Shabb. 110 b).

[11427]4935 St. Matt. xix. 13-15 St. Mark x. 13-16; St. Luke xviii.

15-17.

[11428]4936 The other places in which the verb occurs are: St. Matt.

xx. 24; xxi. 15; ? xxvi. 8; St. Mark x. 41; xiv. 4; St. Luke xiii. 14;

the substantive in 2 Cor. vii. 11.

[11429]4937 The 'and' before 'hinder' should be omitted according to

the best MSS.

[11430]4938 St. Matt. xviii. 3.

[11431]4939 As Mr. Brown McClellan notes, in his learned work on the

New Testament, the word is an 'intensitive compound form of blessing,

especially of dearest friends and relations at meeting and parting.'

[11432]4940 This is the exact rendering.

[11433]4941 St. Luke.

[11434]4942 Dean Plumptre needlessly supposes him to have been a

member of the Great Sanhedrin, and even identifies him with Lazarus of

Bethany.

[11435]4943 St. Mark.

[11436]4944 This is well pointed out by Canon Cook on St. Mark x. 19.

[11437]4945 St. Matt. xix. 16.

[11438]4946 Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 161 a, last lines.

[11439]4947 To really remove exegetical difficulties, the reading

should be further altered to _n _st_ t_ _gaq_n as Wünsche suggests,

who regards our present reading e_v _st_n _ _gaq_v as a mistake of the

translator in rendering the neuter of the Aramaic original by the

masculine. We need scarcely say, the suggestion, however ingenious, is

not supported. And then, what of the conversation in the other

Gospels, where we could scarcely expect a variation of the saying from

the more easy to the more difficult? On the application to God of the

term 'the Good One,' see an interesting notice in the Jud Liter.

Blatt, for Sept. 20, 1882, p. 152.

[11440]4948 Ber. 5 a, about middle; Ab Zar. 19 b.

[11441]4949 Lev. xix. 18.

[11442]4950 St. Luke x. 29.

[11443]4951 In St. Matt. xix. 20, these words should be struck out as

spurious.

[11444]4952 The words 'take up the cross,' in the textus receptus of

St. Mark x. 21, are spurious - the gloss of a clumsy interpolator.

[11445]4953 The word is only used in St. Matt. xvi. 3, of the lowering

sky.

[11446]4954 Many sayings might here be quoted. It was worse than all

the plagues of Egypt put together (Babha B. 116 a); than all other

miseries (Betsah 32 b); the worst affliction that could befall a man

(Shem. R. 31).

[11447]4955 See a story of boastfulness in that respect in Wünsche, ad

loc. To make a merit of giving up riches for Christ is, surely, the

Satanic caricature of the meaning of His teaching.

[11448]4956 Arach. viii.4.

[11449]4957 Kethub. 50 a.

[11450]4958 St. Mark x. 23.

[11451]4959 The words in St. Mark x. 24, 'for them that trust in

riches,' are most likely a spurious gloss.

[11452]4960 Ber. 55 b, last line; comp. also Babha Mets. 38 b.

[11453]4961 St. Matt. xix. 29; St. Mark x. 26, 30; St. Luke xviii. 29,

30.

[11454]4962 St. Matt. xix. 28.

[11455]4963 St. Matthew and St. Mark.

[11456]4964 St. Mark.

[11457]4965 Of course, the expression 'twelve thrones' (St. Matt. xix.

28) must not be pressed to utmost literality, or it might be asked

whether St. Paul or St. Matthias occupied the place of Judas. On the

other hand, neither must it be frittered away, as if the

'regeneration' referred only to the Christian dispensation, and to

spiritual relations under it.

[11458]4966 Sanh. 97 b.

[11459]4967 As for example Is. xxxiv. 4; li. 6; lxv. 17

[11460]4968 Book of Enoch xci. 16, 17; 4 Esd. vii. 28.

[11461]4969 Targum Onkelos on Deut. xxxii. 12; Targ. Jon. on Habak.

iii. 2; Ber, R. 12. ed. Warsh. p. 24 b, near end; Pirké de R. Eliez

51.

[11462]4970 This subject will be further treated in the sequel.

[11463]4971 St. Luke xxii. 30.

[11464]4972 Acts iii. 21; Rom. viii. 19-21; 2 Pet. iii. 13; Rev. xxi.

[11465]4973 1 Cor. vi. 2, 3; Rev. xx. 4; xxi. 14.

[11466]4974 Comp. also Acts xxvi. 7.

[11467]4975 See in Book V.

[11468]4976 St. Matt. xx. 17-19.

[11469]4977 St. Mat., xx. 16; St. Mark x. 31.

[11470]4978 The words, 'many be called, but few chosen,' seem spurious

in that place.

[11471]4979 St. Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 22, 23.

[11472]4980 St. John xi. 8, 16.

[11473]4981 This is the precise rendering of the verb.

[11474]4982 This is the precise rendering of St. Mark x. 32.

[11475]4983 St. Luke xviii. 31.

[11476]4984 St. Matt. xvi. 23.

[11477]4985 St. Matt. xxvii. 56; comp. St. Mark xv. 40.

[11478]4986 St. Mark ix. 38.

[11479]4987 St. Luke ix. 54.

[11480]4988 It is very remarkable that, in St. Matt. xx. 20, she bears

the unusual title: 'the mother of Zebedee's children' (comp. also for

the mention of Zebedee, St. Mark x. 35). This, evidently, to emphasise

that the distinction was not asked on the ground of earthly kinship,

as through Salome, who was the aunt of Jesus.

[11481]4989 by St. Mark (x. 35).

[11482]4990 St. Matt. xx. 20-28; St. Mark x. 35-45.

[11483]4991 The clause in St. Matthew: 'and to be baptized with the

baptism that I am baptised with,' is probably a spurious insertion,

taken from St. Mark's Gospel.

[11484]4992 St. Matt, xx. 24, &c.; St. Mark x. 41 &c.

[11485]4993 I have chosen these two words because the verbs in the

Greek (which are the same in the two Gospels) express not ordinary

'dominion' and 'authority,' but a forcible and tyrannical exercise of

it. The first verb occurs again in Acts xix. 16, and 1 Pet. v. 3; the

second only in this passage in the Gospels.

[11486]4994 St. Matt. xx. 28; St. Mark x. 45.

[11487]4995 We would here call attention to some exquisitely beautiful

and forcible remarks by Dean Plumptre on the passage.

[11488]4996 Comp. Dean Plumptre, u. s.

[11489]4997 St. John xiii.

[11490]4998 Rom. iii. 24: 1 Cor. vi. 20; 1 Tim. ii. 6; 1 Pet. i. 19; 1

John iv. 10.

[11491]4999 2 Kings xxv. 5.

[11492]5000 Ezra ii. 34.

[11493]5001 1 Macc. ix. 50.

[11494]5002 Jos. Ant. xvii. 6. 5; Jewish War i. 33.6 .

[11495]5003 Cant. i. 14.

[11496]5004 War iv. 8. 3.

[11497]5005 Jer. Taan. iv. 2.

[11498]5006 Jer. Sukk. v. 3.

[11499]5007 So more accurately.

[11500]5008 St. Luke xix. 1-10.

[11501]5009 The word here used is katal_w, and the hostelry at

Bethlehem (St. Luke ii. 7) was kat_luma.

[11502]5010 Ex. xxii. 1.

[11503]5011 Literally, 'if I have sycophanted any man anything.' It

should be remarked, as making this restoration by Zacchæus the more

intelligible, that to a penitent Jew this would immediately occur. In

the Talmud there is a long discussion as to restoration by penitents

in cases where the malappropriation was open to question, when the

Talmud lays down the principle, that if any one wishes to escape the

Divine punishment, he must restore even that which, according to

strict justice, he might not be obliged to give up (Baba Mez. 37 a).

[11504]5012 St. Matt. xx. 29-34; St.Mark x. 46-52; St. Luke xviii.

35-43.

[11505]5013 Comp. our remarks on this point in vol. ii. p. 49.

[11506]5014 St. Mark x. 49.

[11507]5015 The expression is the same in St. Mark and St. Luke.

[11508]5016 St. Luke.

[11509]5017 The Parable of the Ten Pieces of Money will be expounded

in connection with the last series of Parables.

[11510]5018 St. John xi. 55-57.

[11511]5019 St. John xii. 1.

[11512]5020 Canon Westcott prefers the reading: 'the common people.'

[11513]5021 St. John xii. 10,11.

[11514]5022 On the precise dates, see the Commentaries. It has been

impossible here to discuss in detail every little difficulty. Rather

has it been thought best to tell the events, as we regard them as

having taken place. See Nebe, Leidensgesch. i. pp. 23, 24.

[11515]5023 St. John xii. 1.

[11516]5024 Hengstenberg.

[11517]5025 Ewald.

[11518]5026 Those, if any, who identify this Mary with the Magdalene,

and regard the anointing of St. Luke vii. 36, &c., as identical with

that of Bethany, are referred, for full discussion and refutation, to

Nebe, Leidensgesch. vol. i. pp. 21 &c., 30 &c.

[11519]5027 Unguenta optime servantur in alabastris (Plin. H. N. xiii.

2, 3). These 'alabasters' - for the flask itself obtained that name

from the stone used - had at the top the form of a cylinder, and are

likened by Pliny to a closed rose-bud.

[11520]5028 Kerith. 6 a.

[11521]5029 Hist. Nat. xii. 12, 26.

[11522]5030 xii. 12, 26.

[11523]5031 The expression pistik_ has giver rise to much controversy.

Of the various renderings, that by 'genuine' has most in its favour.

For a full discussion see Nebe, u. s. pp. 33, 34, and Meyer on St.

Mark xiv. 3-9.

[11524]5032 On the various mixtures of precious ointments, their

adulteration, the cost of the various ingredients, and the use made of

perfumes in Palestine, see Herzfeld, u. s. pp. 99, 100, 191, 192.

[11525]5033 See Book III. chap. xxi.

[11526]5034 St. Matt. xxvi. 13.

[11527]5035 St. Mark xiv. 8.

[11528]5036 St. Matthew and St. Mark.

[11529]5037 St. John. There is manifestly neither contradiction nor

divergence here between the Evangelists. Mary first poured the nard

over the Head, and then over His Feet (Godet sees this implied in the

kat_ceen a_to_ of St. Mark). St. John notices the anointing of the

Feet, not only as the act of greatest humility and the mark of deepest

veneration, but from its unusual character, while anointing of the

head was not so uncommon. We recall the ideal picture of Aaron when

anointed to the priesthood, Ps. cxxxiii. 2, to mark here the

fulfilment of the type when the Great High-Priest was anointed for His

Sacrifice. She who had so often sat at His feet, now anoints them, and

alike for love, reverence, and fellowship of His sufferings, will not

wipe them but with her hair.

[11530]5038 St. John.

[11531]5039 St. Mark xiv. 41.

[11532]5040 So notably Keim. Of course, the theory proceeds on the

assumption that the Discourses reported by St. Luke are spurious.

[11533]5041 Dean Plumptre on St. Matt. xxi. 5.

[11534]5042 Siphré, ed. Friedm. p. 55 a, last lines; Sot. 45 a; Tos.

Pes. viii. 8.

[11535]5043 Pes. 63 b; 91 a; Menach. 78 b; Babha Mets. 90 a.

[11536]5044 See also Caspari, Chron. Geogr. Einl. p. 161. The question

as to the proposed identification (by some) of Bethany with the Beth

Hini, or Beth Hanioth, where the Sanhedrin (apparently of Sadduccees)

sat after leaving the Temple and which was destroyed three years

before the City, must be left here undiscussed.

[11537]5045 St. Mark and St. Luke.

[11538]5046 St. Augustine has it, recapitulando dixerunt.

[11539]5047 St. Matt. xxvi. 6-13; St. Mark xiv. 3-9.

[11540]5048 Comp. St. Luke xxii. 8.

[11541]5049 Num. xix. 2; Deut. xxi. 3.

[11542]5050 St. Mark; comp. also St. Matthew.

[11543]5051 St. John xii. 12.

[11544]5052 St. Luke xix. 39; St. John xii. 19.

[11545]5053 It is surely one of those instances in which the supposed

authority of MSS. should not be implicitly followed, when in St. Mark

xi. 3, the R.V. adopts what we must regard as a very jejune gloss:

'and straightway He [viz. Christ] will send him back hither' - as if

the disciples had obtained the colt by pledging the Master to its

immediate restoration. The gloss is the more inapt as it does not

occur in the parallel passages in St. Matthew and St. Luke.

[11546]5054 They may have awaited in Bethany the return of the two,

but the succession followed in the text seems to me by far the most

probable.

[11547]5055 The quotations are from the well-known and classical

passage in Dean Stanley's Sinai and Palestine, pp. 189 &c.

[11548]5056 St. John xii. 16.

[11549]5057 St. Luke xix. 37, 38.

[11550]5058 St. John xii. 18.

[11551]5059 ver. 17.

[11552]5060 St. Luke.

[11553]5061 There can be no question that hWsann_ represents {hebrew}

but probably in an abbreviated form of pronunciation {hebrew} (comp.

Siegfried in Hilgenfeld's Zeitsch. f. wissensch. Theol. for 1884, p.

385).

[11554]5062 Ps. cxviii. 25, 26.

[11555]5063 As will be remembered, it formed the last Psalm in what

was called the Hallel (Ps. cxiii.-cxviii). For the mode in which, and

the occasions on which it was chanted, see 'Temple, &c.' pp. 191-193.

The remarks of Godet on the subject (Comm. on St. John xii.) are not

accurate.

[11556]5064 ver. 29.

[11557]5065 Midr. on Ps. cxviii., ed. Warsh., pp. 85 b, last 3 lines,

and p. 86 a.

[11558]5066 A common Jewish expression, {hebrew}, Babha Mez. 85 a,

line 3 from top, or {hebrew} Ber. 58 a, about the middle.

[11559]5067 St. Luke.

[11560]5068 The expression: stones bearing witness when sin has been

committed, is not uncommon in Jewish writings. See Taan. 11 a; Chag.

16 a.

[11561]5069 Jos. War v. 6. 2; 12. 2.

[11562]5070 Zech. ix. 9.

[11563]5071 Ber. 56 b; Sanh. 98 a; Pirké de R. El. 31; Ber. R. 75; 98;

99; Deb. R. 4; Midr. on Cant. i.4; Midr. on Cant. i. 4; Midr. on

Eccles i. 9; Midr. Shemuel 14.

[11564]5072 St. Matt. xxvi. 3-6; St. Mark xiv. 2; St. Luke xxii 2.

[11565]5073 This after Lightfoot. Wünsche (Erlaut. d. Evang. p. 241)

goes so far as to put this alternative, that either the Evangelists

confounded the Passover with the Feast of the Tabernacles, or that

they purposely transferred to the Passover a ceremony of the Feast of

Tabernacles!

[11566]5074 Ps. cxiii.-cxviii.

[11567]5075 Such were, and even now are, common demonstrations in the

East, to welcome a king, a conqueror, or a deliverer. For a large

number of heathen and Jewish instances of the same time, comp.

Wetstein, ad loc. (i. pp. 460, 461).

[11568]5076 I am aware, that so great an authority as Professor

Delitzsch calls this in question (Zeitschr. für Luther. Theol. for

1855, p. 653). But the testimony of the Midrash is against him.

Delitzsch regards it as the shout of the Feast of Tabernacles. But how

should that have been raised before the Feast of Passover? Again, it

does not seem reasonable to suppose, that the multitude had with full

consciousness proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah, and intended to

celebrate there and then the fulfilment of the typical meaning of the

Feast of Tabernacles.

[11569]5077 St. Mark i. 35; St. Luke v.16; St. Matt. xiv. 23; St. Luke

vi. 12; ix. 28.

[11570]5078 prw_, used of the last night-watch in St. Mark i. 35.

[11571]5079 _d_n suk_n mi_n, a single tree.

[11572]5080 St. Mark.

[11573]5081 Tristram, Nat. Hist. of the Bible, p. 352.

[11574]5082 On the fig-tree generally, see the remarks on the Parable

of the Barren Fig-tree, Book IV. ch. xvi.

[11575]5083 Shebh. iv. 7.

[11576]5084 Jer. Shebh. 35 b, last lines.

[11577]5085 St. Luke xiii. 6-9.

[11578]5086 Comp. St. John xi. 35-44.

[11579]5087 St. Matt. xxi. 18. 22.

[11580]5088 St. Mark xi. 20.

[11581]5089 Bengel.

[11582]5090 We remind the reader, that the expression 'rooting up

mountains' is in common Rabbinic use as a hyperbole for doing the

impossible or the incredible. For the former, see Babha B. 3 b

({hebrew}); for the latter ({hebrew}) Ber. 64 a; Sanh. 24 a; Horay. 14

[11583]5091 The other words are spurious.

[11584]5092 So Meyer.

[11585]5093 St. Mark xi. 25.

[11586]5094 Ver. 26 is in all probability a spurious addition.

[11587]5095 St. Matt. xviii. 21, 22.

[11588]5096 St. Luke ix. 52-56.

[11589]5097 See the full account in Book III. ch. v.

[11590]5098 The grounds on which this second has to be distinguished

from the first cleansing of the Temple, which is recorded only by St.

John (ii. 13-23) have been explained on a previous occasion. They are

stated in most commentaries, though perhaps not always satisfactorily.

But intelligent readers can have no difficulty in gathering them for

themselves. The difficulty lies not in the two purifications, nor yet

in the silence of the Synoptists as to the first, since the early

Jerusalem Ministry lay not within the scope of their narratives, but

in the silence of the Fourth Gospel in regard to the second

purification. But here we would remark that, less than any of the

others, is the Fourth Gospel a history or successive narration; but,

if we may so say, historical dogmatics - the Logos in the historical

manifestation of His Person and Work. If so, the first included the

second purification of the Temple. Again, to have introduced it, or

the cursing of the fig-tree, would have been to break up the course,

and mar the symmetry of the narrative (St. John xii.), which presents

in successive and deepening shading the attestation of the Christ: at

the Supper of Bethany, on His Entry into Jerusalem, before the Greeks

in the Temple, by the Voice from Heaven before His gainsayers, and to

his disciples.

[11591]5099 St. Luke.

[11592]5100 St. Mark.

[11593]5101 We may here note, once for all, that the manner of

answering used by Christ, that of answering a question by putting

another in which the answer appeared with irresistible force. was very

common among the Jews ({hebrew}). Another mode was by an allegory -

whether of word or action.

[11594]5102 So in the LXX., rightly giving the sense; in the original

'strength.' It is perhaps one of the grandest of the grand contrasts

in the Psalms: God opposing and appeasing His enemies, not by a

display of power, as they understand it, but by the mouth of young

boys [such is the proper rendering] and sucklings. The Eternal of

Hosts has these for His armourbearers, and needs none other. The

ancient Synagogue, somewhat realistically, yet with a basis of higher

truth, declared (in the Haggadah), that at the Red Sea little

children, even the babes in the womb, had joined in Israel's song of

triumph, so fulfilling this saying of the Psalmist.

[11595]5103 St. Mark xi. 20.

[11596]5104 St. Matt. xxv. 46; St. Mark xiii. 37; St. Luke xxi. 36-38.

[11597]5105 St. Matt. xxvi. 1; St. Mark xiv. 1; St. Luke xxii. 1.

[11598]5106 St. Matthew.

[11599]5107 St. Luke.

[11600]5108 St. Mark.

[11601]5109 For these Levite chorister-boys, comp. 'The Temple and its

Services,' p. 143.

[11602]5110 St. Mark.

[11603]5111 There is no evidence of a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin,

nor, indeed, was there any case which, according to Jewish Law, could

have been laid before them. Still less can we admit (with Dean

Plumptre), that the Chief Priests, Scribes, and Elders represented

'the then constituent elements of the Sanhedrin.'

[11604]5112 Otherwise the greatest liberty of utterance was accorded

to all who were qualified to teach.

[11605]5113 Sanh. iv. 4.

[11606]5114 Jer. Sanh. 19 a; lines 29 &c. from bottom.

[11607]5115 Sanh. i. 3.

[11608]5116 Sanh. 7 b.

[11609]5117 These involved points of special difficulty in cannon-law.

[11610]5118 Comp. Hamburger, Real-Encycl. ii. pp. 883-886. But he adds

little to the learned labours of Selden, De Synedriis, ed. Frcf. pp.

681-713. How the notion can have arisen that in early times a key was

handed at ordination (Dean Plumptre and many others), it is difficult

to say - unless it be from a misunderstanding of St. Luke xi. 52, or

from a strange mistake of Lightfoot's meaning ad loc.

[11611]5119 St. Matt. xxi. 23-27; St. Mark xi. 27-33; St. Luke xx.

1-8.

[11612]5120 St. Luke xiii. 7.

[11613]5121 Acts. v. 37; Jos. Ant. xviii. 1. 1; xx. 5. 2.

[11614]5122 St. Luke xxiii. 2.

[11615]5123 St. Matt. xxii. 15-22; St. Mark xii. 13-17; St. Luke xx.

19-26.

[11616]5124 St. Luke.

[11617]5125 St. Matthew.

[11618]5126 Comp. for example, St. Mark iii. 6.

[11619]5127 Jos. Jew. War ii. 16. 4.

[11620]5128 Babha K. 113 a and the instance of Abigail pleading with

David that Saul's coinage was still in circulation. Jer, Sanh. 20 b.

[11621]5129 For fuller particulars on this point see Book II. ch. x.

[11622]5130 Some might have even religious scruples about handling a

coin of Cæsar. Such an instance is mentioned in Ab. Zar. 6 b, where a

Rabbi is advised to throw it into the water, and pretend it had

accidentally dropped from his hand. but probably that instance refers

to the avoidance of all possibility of being regarded as sharing in

idol-festivities.

[11623]5131 However pictorial, the sketch of this given by Keim ('Jesu

von Nazara,' iii. 1, pp. 131 &c.) is - as too often - somewhat

exaggerated.

[11624]5132 By a strange concurrence the coin, which on Christ's

demand was handed to Him, bore 'the image' of the Emperor. It must,

therefore, have been either a foreign one (Roman), or else one of the

Tetrarch Philip, who exceptionally had the image of Tiberius on his

coins (comp. Schürer, N.T. Zeitgesch. p. 231). Neither Herod nor Herod

Antipas had any 'image' on their coins, but only the usual 'devices'

of the Maccabaean period. And the coins , which the Roman emperors had

struck specially for Palestine, bore till the time of Vespasian, in

accommodation to Jewish prejudices, no image of any kind.

[11625]5133 St. Mark xii. 17.

[11626]5134 _xeqa_mazon, according to the better reading in St. Mark.

[11627]5135 St. Mark xiii. 41-44; St. Luke xxi. 1-4.

[11628]5136 Sheqal. vi. 5; v. 6.

[11629]5137 Midd. i. 1.

[11630]5138 Jos. Ant. xvi. 4. 4; 7. 1.

[11631]5139 Babha B. 10 b.

[11632]5140 Jewish tradition, though it ever had painfully thrusts

forward the reward, has some beautiful legends, allegories, and

sayings about the gifts of the poor. One quotation must here suffice

(Bemidb. R. 14). It is to the effect, that , if on who is poor, doeth

charity, god says of him: This one is preventing Me. he has kept My

commandments before they have come to him. I must recompense him. In

Vayyikra R. 3, we read of a woman, whose offering of a handful of

flour the priest despised, when God admonished him in a dream to value

the gifts as hiaghly as if she had offered herself. Yet another

quotation from the Mishnah. The tractate Menachoth closes with these

words: 'Alike as regards burnt-offerings of beasts and those of fowls

(those of the poor) and the meat-offering, we find the expression "for

a sweet savour," to teach us, that to offer much or to offer little is

tha same, provided only that a person direct mind and heart towards

God.'

[11633]5141 St. John xii. 20-50.

[11634]5142 See ch. vi.

[11635]5143 St. Matt. xxiv.

[11636]5144 We mark here also the utter absence of all legendary

embellishments as evidence of truth. So far from yielding to what,

even in a book like the present, is a temptation, the narrative of the

Evangelist is peculiarly meagre and void of details. We may note that

only 'proselytes of righteousness,' who had submitted of circumcision,

would be allowed fellowship in the regular worship.

[11637]5145 St. John xii. 23.

[11638]5146 vv. 24-26.

[11639]5147 vv. 27, 28 a.

[11640]5148 Concurrebat horror mortis et ardor obedientiæ. - Bengel.

[11641]5149 Quid dicam? non, quid eligam? - Bengel.

[11642]5150 Professor Westcott has declared himself in favour of

regarding this clause, not as a question, but as a prayer, But this

seems to me incompatible alike with the preceding and the succeeding

clause.

[11643]5151 St. John vii. 28 b-33.

[11644]5152 vv. 34-36 a.

[11645]5153 This is another evidence of the Aramaic education of the

writer of the Fourth Gospel. Yet another is the peculiar Judaic use of

the word {hebrew}, hour, in ver. 27. But the idea of 'Prince of this

world' has no analogon in the {hebrew} (or Metatron) of Rabbinism, to

whom, strangely, the designation {hebrew} (in Zech. ii. 4 A.V., Babha

B. 75 b, and in Ps. xxxvii. 25, Yebam. 16 b, about middle) is applied.

And this is, on the other hand, quite as characteristic of the Gospel

which, under Jewish forms, bears a totally contrary spirit.

[11646]5154 It is another mark of Jewish authorship, this use of the

word 'Law,' to denote the whole Scriptures.

[11647]5155 Lux ipsa manet; sed non semper in vobis.

[11648]5156 Ambulandum, non disceptandum. Fides non est deszes, sed

agilis in luce.

[11649]5157 St. John xii. 36 b.

[11650]5158 St. John vii. 37-43.

[11651]5159 Is. liii 1.

[11652]5160 Is. vi.

[11653]5161 Hence the effect which is Isa. vi. is ascribed to the

prophet, is here assigned to God. We say 'decreed' - but not decreed

beforehand, and irrespective of their conduct. The passage is neither

quoted from the Hebrew nor from the LXX., but Targumed.

[11654]5162 The paraphrase of this passage in the Targum Jonathan (for

which see Appendix II.) is, indeed, most interesting; but the Yeqara

or outstanding splendour of Jehovah, is not that to which the

Evangelist here refers.

[11655]5163 St. John xii. 44.

[11656]5164 vv. 45-48.

[11657]5165 So according to the better reading.

[11658]5166 vv. 49, 50.

[11659]5167 St. Matt. xvi. 1.

[11660]5168 There seems some reference to this question put to Christ

in what we regard as covert references to Christianity in that

mysterious passage in the Talmud (Yoma 66 b) previously referred to

(see pp. 193, 194). Comp. the interesting dissertation of Töttermann

on R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanos (pp. 16-18).

[11661]5169 In regard to the denial of the Resurrection by the

Sadducees, and to their views generally, we refer to the sketch of the

three sects in Book III. ch. ii.

[11662]5170 Hamburger (Real Encykl. vol. i. p. 125) has given the

Rabbinic argumentation, and Wünsche (ad St. Matt. xxii. 23) has

reproduced it - unfortunately, with the not unnatural exaggerations of

Hamburger.

[11663]5171 Deut. xxxi. 16.

[11664]5172 Cant. vii. 9.

[11665]5173 See Sanh. 90 b, about the middle.

[11666]5174 Ber. R. 20.

[11667]5175 Sanh. 90 b lines 9 &c. from bottom.

[11668]5176 Sanh. 91 b.

[11669]5177 It is well known that the Hebrew has no future tense in

the strict sense.

[11670]5178 Sanh, 90 b lines 10 and 9 from bottom.

[11671]5179 Sanh. 92 a.

[11672]5180 Hence called the os sacrum (see again in the sequel).

[11673]5181 Sanh. 90 b.

[11674]5182 Sanh. 90 b.

[11675]5183 Jer. Keth. 35 a.

[11676]5184 This was illustrated by a very apt Parable, see Sanh. 91 a

and b.

[11677]5185 1 Sam. xxviii. 14.

[11678]5186 Ber. R. 95, beginning.

[11679]5187 Is. xlii. 5.

[11680]5188 Ber. R. 96 towards the close.

[11681]5189 Ber. 60 b.

[11682]5190 It forms the second of the eighteen Eulogies.

[11683]5191 It is expressly stated in Ber. ix. 5, that the formula was

introduced for that purpose.

[11684]5192 Sanh. 90 a line 4 from bottom.

[11685]5193 Deut. xxv. 5 &c.

[11686]5194 The Talmud has it that the woman must have no child at all

- not merely no son.

[11687]5195 Bekhor. i. 7.

[11688]5196 Yebam. 39 b.

[11689]5197 Jer. Yebam. i.6. This seems also to have been the view of

the School of Shammai.

[11690]5198 Jer. Yebam. 6 b, relates what I regard as a legendary

story of a man who was thus induced to wed the twelve widows of his

twelve brothers, each widow promising to pay for the expenses of one

month, and the directing Rabbi for those of the 13th (intercalatory)

month. But to his horror, after three years the women returned, laden

with thirty-six children, to claim the fulfilment of the Rabbi's

promise!

On the other hand it was, however, also laid down that, if a woman had

lost two husbands, she should not marry a third - according to others,

if she had married three, not a fourth, as there might be some fate

({hebrew}) connected with her (Yeb. 64 b). On the question of the

Levirate, from the modern Jewish standpoint, see an interesting

article by Gutmann in Geiger's Wiss. Zeitschr. f. Jüd. Theol. vol. iv.

(1839), pp. 61-87.

[11691]5199 The reproach 'Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures,' occurs

in almost the same form in the discussions on the Resurrection between

the Pharisees and the Sadducees which are recorded in the Talmud.

[11692]5200 St. Matt. xxii. 29, 30, and parallels.

[11693]5201 Through the Resurrection of Christ resurrection has become

the gift of universal humanity. But, beyond this general gift to

humanity, we believe that we receive in Baptism, as becoming connected

with Christ, the inner germ of the glorious Resurrection-body. Its

nourishment (or otherwise) depends on our personal relationship to

Christ by faith, and is carried on through the Sacrament of His Body

and Blood.

[11694]5202 Ber. 17 a, towards the end.

[11695]5203 Deut. xi. 9.

[11696]5204 The similar reference to Exod. vi. 4 by a later Rabbi

seems but an adaptation of the argument of Gamaliel II. (See both in

Sanh. 90 b.)

[11697]5205 We also recall that Gamaliel II. was the brother-in-law of

that Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, who was rightly suspected of leanings

towards Christinaity (see pp. 193, 194). This might open up a most

interesting field of inquiry.

[11698]5206 _f_mwse (St. Matt. xxii. 34). The word occurs also in St.

Matt xxii. 12: St. Mark i. 25; iv. 39; St. Luke iv. 35: 1 Cor. ix. 9;

1 Tim. v. 18; 1 Peter. ii 16.

[11699]5207 Comp. the two accounts in St. Matthew xxii. 34-40 and in

St. Mark xii. 28-34.

[11700]5208 Ab. ii. 1; iv. 2.

[11701]5209 Sanh. xi. 3.

[11702]5210 Deb. R. 6.

[11703]5211 St. Mark xii. 28.

[11704]5212 Meyer rightly remarks on the use of _gap_seiv here,

implying moral high estimation and corresponding conduct, and not

file_n, which refers to love as an affection. The latter could not

have been commanded, although such fil_a of the world is forbidden

(St. James iv. 4) while the file_n of one's own yuc_ (St. John xii.

25) and the m_ file_n t_n k_rio (1 Cor. xvi. 22) are stigmatised.

[11705]5213 St. Matt. xxii 4.

[11706]5214 The Jewish view of these commands has been previously

explained.

[11707]5215 St. Mark xii. 33, 34.

[11708]5216 This also shows that the later dogma of Messiah the Son of

Joseph had not yet been invented.

[11709]5217 Comp. Appendix IX.

[11710]5218 St. Matt. xxii. 46.

[11711]5219 St. Matt. xxiii.

[11712]5220 St. Luke xi. 37-54.

[11713]5221 Rosh haSh. ii. 9.

[11714]5222 Even the literal charge of teaching and not doing is

brought in Jewish writings (see, for example, Ber. R. 34).

[11715]5223 St. Matt. xxiii. 3, 4.

[11716]5224 vv. 5-7.

[11717]5225 vv. 8-12.

[11718]5226 See especially Jer. Ber. i. 7, p. 3 b.

[11719]5227 Ab. iii. 11.

[11720]5228 B. Kama 79 b.

[11721]5229 Jer. Sanh. 30 a. at bottom

[11722]5230 Nidd. 66 a.

[11723]5231 So notably in the well-known 'eighteen points' {hebrew}

Ab. Sar. 36 a.

[11724]5232 Twenty-four such are mentioned. Jer. Bets. 60 b.

[11725]5233 Many, very many of them are so utterly trivial and absurd,

that only the hairsplitting ingenuity of theologians can account for

them: others so profane that it is difficult to understand how any

religion could co-exist with them. Conceive, for example, tow schools

in controversy whether it was lawful to kill a louse on the Sabbath.

(Schabb. 12 a; 107 b.)

[11726]5234 Sot. 21 b.

[11727]5235 vol. i. p. 101.

[11728]5236 On the Tephillin, comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Scoial Life,'

pp. 219-244.

[11729]5237 Jer. Ber. 4 c, lines 7 and 8 from top.

[11730]5238 Menach 37 b.

[11731]5239 Makk. 24 a.

[11732]5240 These titles are put in the mouth of King Jehoshaphat when

saluting the Rabbis.

[11733]5241 Horay, 13 b.

[11734]5242 Babha B. 120 a.

[11735]5243 Ber. 27 b.

[11736]5244 Jer. Ber. 9 a, about the middle. Comp. Levy. Neuheber.

Wörterb, ii. 10 a.

[11737]5245 Jer. Ber. 9 a, about the middle.

[11738]5246 u. s.

[11739]5247 Jer. Sanh x. 1.

[11740]5248 Pes. 53 b.

[11741]5249 Gitt. 62 a.

[11742]5250 Horay. 13 a.

[11743]5251 Sanh.90 b line 3 from top.

[11744]5252 See for example Bahba Mets 85 b and 86 a.

[11745]5253 Ber. R. 96. towards close

[11746]5254 Babha Mets 86 a.

[11747]5255 See the quotations to that effect in Schöttgen, Wetstein,

and Wünsche ad loc.

[11748]5256 Hac clausula (ver. 11) ostendit, senon sophistice

litigasse de vocibus, serem points spectasse (Calvin).

[11749]5257 St. Mark ix. 35; St. Luke xiv. 11; xviii. 14.

[11750]5258 Keim argues at length, but very inconclusively, that this

is a different Discourse, addressed to a different audience and at a

different time.

[11751]5259 St. Matt. xxiii. 13-33.

[11752]5260 Although St. Matt. xxiii. 14 is in all probability

spurious, this 'woe' occurs in St. Mark xii. 40, and in St. Luke xx.

47.

[11753]5261 Ber. 32 b; Yoma 29 a.

[11754]5262 Sot. 21 b; comp. Jer. Sot. 19 a.

[11755]5263 Horay, 13 a.

[11756]5264 Yeb. 47 a. b; Nidd. 13 b.

[11757]5265 Tacit. Hist. v. 5; Seneca in August. De Civit. Dei vi.

11(2).

[11758]5266 For passages in proof see Wetsein ad loc.

[11759]5267 Ant. xviii. 3. 5; xx. 2, 4; Jewish War ii.17. 10 &c.; 20,

2; Life 23.

[11760]5268 Gen. xii. 5.

[11761]5269 Ber. R. 39, ed. Warsh. p. 72 a, and Vayy. R. 1.

[11762]5270 Anyone who would see how Jewish ingenutiy can, for the

purpose of misrepresenting the words of Christ, put a meaning even on

Jewish documents which they can never bear, is advised to read the

remarks of the learned Jellinek on St. Matt. xxiii, 15, in the Beth

ha-Midr. vol. v. pp. xlvi. xlvii., and his rendering of the quotation

from Ber. R. 28.

[11763]5271 2 Sam. xxi. 1 &c.; Yebam, 79 a.

[11764]5272 Ab. Zar. 24 a.

[11765]5273 The learned Danzius has collected all that can be said on

that subject in Meuschan, Nov. Test. exTalm. illustr., pp. 649-666.

But in my opinion he exaggerates his case.

[11766]5274 Midr. on Eccl. v. 11.

[11767]5275 Shebh. iv. 13 and 35 b, 36 a.

[11768]5276 Maaser, i. 1.

[11769]5277 Maaser. iv. 5.

[11770]5278 Jer. Dem. 21d.

[11771]5279 Keim, with keen insight, characterises the Woes which

contrasts their proselytising with their resistance to the progress of

the Kingdom; then, the third and fourth which denounce their false

teaching, the fifth, and sixth their false attempts at purity, while

the last sets forth their relations to those forerunners of Christ,

whose graves they built.

[11772]5280 vv. 34-36.

[11773]5281 We need scarcely remind the reader that this Zechariah was

the son of Jehoiada. The difference in the text of St. Matthew may

either be due to family circumstances, unknown to us, which might

admit of his designation as 'the son of Barachias' (the reading is

undoubtedly correct), or an error may have crept into the text - how,

we know not, and it is of little moment. There can be no question that

the reference is to this Zecharias. It seems scarcely necessary to

refer to the strange notion that the notice in St. matt. xxiii, 35 has

been derived from the account of the murder of Zacharias, the son of

Baruch, in the Temple during the last seige (Jos. War. iv. 5. 4). To

this there are the following foru objections: (1) Baruch (as in Jos.)

and Barachias (as in St. Matt.) are quite different names, in Greek as

in Hebrew - {hebrew}, 'blessed,' Baro_c, and {hebrew} 'Jehovah will

bless,' Barac_av. Comp. for ex. LXX., Neh. iii. 20 with iii. 30. (2)

Because the place of their slaughter was different, that of the one

'between the porch and the altar,' that of the other 'in the midst (_n

m_p_) of the Temple' - either the court of the women, or that of the

Israelites. (3) Because the murder of the Zacharias referred to by St.

Matt. stood out as the crowning national crime, and as such is

repeatedly referred to in Jewish legend (see references in margin),

and dwelt upon with many miraculous embellishments (4) Because the

clumsiest forger would scarcely have put into the mouth of Jesus an

event connected with the last siege of Jerusalem and derived from

Josephus. In general, we take this opportunity strongly to assert that

only unacquaintance with the whole subject could lead anyone to look

to Josephus for the source of any part of the evangelic narrative. To

these remarks we have to add that precisely the same error (if such it

be) as in our text of St. Matthew occurs in the Targum on Lament. ii.

20, where this Zechariah is designated 'the son (= grandson) of Iddo,'

comp. Ezr. v. 1, and Zech. i. 1, 7. For the correct reading ('son of

Jehoiada') in the 'Gospel of the Hebrews,' comp. Nicholson, p. 59.

[11774]5282 2 Chron. xxiv. 20-22.

[11775]5283 Sanh. 96 b; Gitt, 57 b; also in the Midr. on Eccl. iii. 16

and x. 4. and on Lament. ii. 2, and iv. 14.

[11776]5284 vv. 37-39.

[11777]5285 Vayyik. R. 25.

[11778]5286 St. Matt. xxiv. 1. St. Luke xxi. 37.

[11779]5287 St. Matt. xix. 30-xx. 16.

[11780]5288 St. Matt. xix. 23, 24.

[11781]5289 St. Matt. xx. 15.

[11782]5290 Instead of discussing the explanations of others, I prefer

simply to expound that which I have to propose. The difficulties of

the usual interpretations are so great that a fresh study seemed

requisite. Our interpretation turns on this, that the Parable is only

an illustration of what is said in St. Matt. xix. 30.

[11783]5291 St. Matt. xx. 1.

[11784]5292 In Rome, at the time of Cicero, a day-labourer received 12

as =about 6d. - that is, rather less than in Judæa (comp. Marquardt,

Röm. Alterth. vol. v. p. 52).

[11785]5293 St. Luke xiii. 30.

[11786]5294 The word 'idle' in the second clause of ver. 6 is

spurious, though it may, of course, be supplied from the fourth

clause.

[11787]5295 The last clause in our T. R. and A. V. is spurious, though

perhaps such a promise was understood.

[11788]5296 I prefer not rendering with Meyer and the R.V. _po_jsan,

viz., _ran, by 'spent,' but taking the verb as the Hebrew {hebrew} =

'wrought.' And the first labourers could not have meant, that the last

had 'spent,' not 'wrought,' an hour. This were a gratuitous imputation

to them of malevolence and calumny.

[11789]5297 Rom. iv. 4-6; xi. 6.

[11790]5298 Rom. xi.

[11791]5299 Rom. ii.; iii. 28-31; ix. 18-24.

[11792]5300 Rom. xi. 11-18.

[11793]5301 The clause which follows in our A.V. is spurious.

[11794]5302 St. Matt. xix. 30.

[11795]5303 Badha Mets. 87 a, towards the end.

[11796]5304 Some interesting illustrations of secondary importance,

and therefore not here introduced, may be found at the close of Badha

Mets. 83 a and the beginning of b.

[11797]5305 Eccl. v. 12.

[11798]5306 Midr. on Eccl. v. 11; Jer. Ber. ii. 8.

[11799]5307 Ex. xx. 12.

[11800]5308 Deut. xxii. 7.

[11801]5309 Debar. R. 6 on Deut. xxii. 6.

[11802]5310 See, for example, Ber. 5 a and b, but especially 7 a.

[11803]5311 St. Matt. xxi. 28-32.

[11804]5312 The word is not the same as that for 'repent' in St. Matt.

iii. 2. The latter referes to a change of heart, and means something

spiritual. The word used in the text means only a change of mind and

purpose. It occurs besides in St. Matt. xxvii. 3; 2 Cor. vii. 8; Heb.

vii. 21.

[11805]5313 Looking away from the very profane use made of the saying

in the Talmud, we may quote as a literary curiosity the following as

the origin of the proverb: He that will not when he may, when he will

he shall have nay, {hebrew} Ber. 7 a, line 8 from bottom.

[11806]5314 St. Matt. xxi. 33 &c. and parallels.

[11807]5315 ver. 36.

[11808]5316 ver. 43.

[11809]5317 ver. 44.

[11810]5318 'An hedge' against animals or marauders, 'a winepress,'

or, more specifically (St. Mark), a 'winefat' (_pol_nion), into which

the juice of the grapes flowed, and 'a tower' for the watchmen and

labourers generally. We may here remark that the differences in the

narration of this Parable in the three Gospels are too minute for

discussion here. The principal one, in St. Matt. xxi. 40, 41, comp.

with the parallels, will be briefly referred to in the text.

[11811]5319 Is. v. 7

[11812]5320 St. Luke xx. 9.

[11813]5321 St. Matt. xxi. 45.

[11814]5322 Jer. Bikk. 64 b

[11815]5323 Shem. R. 41, ed. Warsh, p. 54 b last line.

[11816]5324 Tos. Demai vi.

[11817]5325 Babha Mets. 104 a.

[11818]5326 Jer. Bikk. 64 b.

[11819]5327 as in the A. and R. V.

[11820]5328 St. Luke vii. 26.

[11821]5329 St. Matt. xxiii. 34-36.

[11822]5330 St. Matt. xxi. 41.

[11823]5331 The only Jewish parallel, even in point of form, so far as

I know, is in Vayy. R. 11 (ed. Warsh., p. 18 a, near beginning), where

we read of a king who sent his treasurer to collect tribute, when the

people of the land killed and plundered him.

[11824]5332 St. Matt. xxii. 1-14.

[11825]5333 Shabb. 153 a, and 152 b.

[11826]5334 Midr. on Eccles. ix. 8; Midr. on Prov. xvi. 11.

[11827]5335 St. Matt. xxii. 1-9 and 10-14.

[11828]5336 Shabb. 153 a.

[11829]5337 This Parable is only in the Talmud in this connection, not

in the Midrashim.

[11830]5338 Shabb. 152 b.

[11831]5339 The reader will find both these Parables translated in

'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' p. 179.

[11832]5340 In the Talmud he invites his servants; in the Midrash,

others.

[11833]5341 Shabb.. 152 b.

[11834]5342 This rather than 'marriage-feast.'

[11835]5343 St. Luke xiv. 16, 17.

[11836]5344 ed. Warsh. p. 73 b.

[11837]5345 Reference is only made to that part who were murderers.

Not that the others escaped suffering or loss, but, in accordance with

the plan of the Parable, this is not mentioned. When we read of 'their

city,' may there not here be also a reference to a commonwealth or

nation?

[11838]5346 St. Matt. xxii. 8.

[11839]5347 St. Luke xiv. 21-24.

[11840]5348 as in St. Matt. xxii. 34; see the note on it.

[11841]5349 St. Matt. xxii. 14.

[11842]5350 Baba B 4 a; Sukk 51 b.

[11843]5351 St. Matt. xxiii. 37-39.

[11844]5352 St. Matt. xxiv. 1.

[11845]5353 St. Matt. xxiv. 3.

[11846]5354 St. Mark xiii. 1.

[11847]5355 According to Josephus (War vii. 1. 1) the city was so

upheaved and dug up, that it was difficult to believe it had ever been

inhabited. At a later period Turnus Rufus had the ploughshare drawn

over it. And in regard to the Temple walls, notwithstanding the

massiveness of the stones, with the exception of some corner or

portion of wall - left almost to show how great had been the ruin and

desolation - 'there is, certainly, nothing now in situ.' (Capt. Wilson

in the 'Ordnance Survey').

[11848]5356 St. Mark xiii.3.

[11849]5357 t_v suntele_av to_ a_wnov. Godet argues that the account

in the Gospel of St. Matthew contains, as in other parts of that

gospel, the combined reports of addresses, delivered at different

times. That may be so, but inference of Godet is certainly incorrect -

that neither the question of the disciples, nor the discourse of our

Lord on that occasion primarily referred to the Second Advent (the

parous_a). When that writer remarks, that only St. Matthew, but

neither St. Mark nor St. Luke refer to such a question by the

disciples, he must have overlooked that it is not only implied in the

'all these things' of St. Mark, and the 'these things' of St. Luke -

which, surely, refer to more than one thing - but that the question of

the disciples about the Advent takes up a distinctive part of what

Christ had said on quitting the Temple, as reported in St. Matt.

xxiii. 39.

[11850]5358 St. Luke xxi. 24 &c.

[11851]5359 Shabb. 118 a.

[11852]5360 If these are computed to last nine months, it must have

been from a kind of fanciful analogy with the 'sorrows' of a woman.

[11853]5361 End of the Mishnic Tractte Sotah.

[11854]5362 Comp. Sanh. 98 a and b.

[11855]5363 When using the expression 'Advent' in this connection, we

refer to the Advent of Mesiah to reign. His Messianic manifestation -

not His birth.

[11856]5364 Comp. Jos. War ii. 13, 4; and especially vi. 5. 2.

[11857]5365 Sukk. 52 a and b.

[11858]5366 Zech. xii. 12.

[11859]5367 Another Rabbinic authority, however, refers it to the

'evil impulse,' which was, in the future, to be annihilated.

[11860]5368 See especially Yalkut on Is. ix. vol. ii. par 359, quoted

at length in Appendix IX.

[11861]5369 Comp. J. M. Gloesener, De Gemino Jud. Mess. pp. 145 &c.;

Schöttgen, Horæ Heb. ii. pp. 360-366.

[11862]5370 132-135 A.D.

[11863]5371 Numb. xxiv. 17.

[11864]5372 So also both Levy (Neuhebr. Wörterb. vol. iii. p. 271 a)

and Hamburger (Real. Encykl. f. Bib. u. Talm., Abtheil.ii.p.768). I

must here express surprise that a writer so learned and independent as

Castelli (II Messia, pp. 224-236) should have argued that the theory

of a Messiah, son of Joseph, belonged to the oldest Jewish tradtions,

and did not arise as explained in the text. The only reason which

Castelli urges against a view, which he admits to be otherwise

porbable, is that certain Rabbinic statements speak also of the Son of

David as suffering. Even if this ere so, such inconsistencies would

prove nothing, since there are so many instances of them in Rabbinic

writtings. But, really, the only passage which from its age here

deserves serious attention in Sanh. 98 a and b. In Yalkut the

suffering Messiah is expressly designated as the Son of Ephraim.

[11865]5373 In Bemidb. R. 15 (ed. Warsh. p. 63 a, lines 9 and 8 from

bottom), the 'days of the Messiah' are specially distinguished from

the 'Athid labho,' soeculum futurum. In Tanchuma (Eqebh, ed. Warsh.

ii. p. 105 a about the middle) it is said, 'And after the days of the

Messiah comes the "Olam habba"' - so that the Messianic time is there

made to include the soeculum futurum. Again, in Pes. 68 a and Sanh. 91

b, 'the days of the Messiah' are distinguished from the 'Olam habba,'

and, lastly (not to multiply instances), in Shabb. 113 b from the

Athid labho.

[11866]5374 Siphré, ed Friedmann, p. 134 a, about the middle.

[11867]5375 Tanchuma, as in Note 3.

[11868]5376 40 years = "the" wilderness wanderings: 1000 years = one

day, Ps. xc. 4; 2000 years of salvation = 'the day of vengeance and

the year of salvation' (Is. lxiii. 4); 7000 years = the marriage-week

(Is. lxii. 5), a day being = 1000 years.

[11869]5377 This confirms St. John vii. 26, and affords another

evidence that it cannot have been of Ephesian authorship, but that its

writer must have been a Jew, intimately conversant with Jewish belief.

[11870]5378 But here opinions are divided, some holding that they will

never be restored. See both opinions in Sanh. 110 b.

[11871]5379 Yalkut on Is. vol. ii. p. 42 c; Siphra, ed. Weiss. 112 b.

[11872]5380 Sanh. 113 a.

[11873]5381 Kethub. 111 a.

[11874]5382 iv. Esd. vi. 23 &c.

[11875]5383 On the Resurrection-body, the bone Luz, the dress worn,

and the reappearance of the former bodily defects, see previous

remarks, pp. 398, 399.

[11876]5384 In this extremely condensed abstract, I have thought it

better not to cumber the page with Rabbinic references. They would

have been too numerous, and the learned reader can easily find

sufficient to bear on each clause in books treating on the subject..

[11877]5385 See Book III. ch. iii. and Appendix XIV.

[11878]5386 Such as even the wearing of the phylacteries (comp. Ber.

R. 98; Midr. on Ps. xxi.)

[11879]5387 Midr. on Cant. ii. 13 (ex rec. R. Martini, Pugio Fidei,

pp. 782, 793); Yalkut ii. par. 296.

[11880]5388 Vayyik. R. 9, 27; Midr on Ps. lvi.; c.

[11881]5389 Midr. on Ps. cxlvi.; Vavy. R. 13; Tanch., Shemini 7 and 8.

[11882]5390 Yalkut on Is. xxvi.; Sanh. 97 a; Ab. Z. 9 a.

[11883]5391 Babha B 75 a.

[11884]5392 Yalkut ii. p. 57 b, par. 363, line 3.

[11885]5393 Babh B. 75 b.

[11886]5394 Gen. xviii. 4, 5.

[11887]5395 Ber. R. 48.

[11888]5396 Shabb. 30 b.

[11889]5397 Kethub. 111 b.

[11890]5398 Shabb. 30 a, b.

[11891]5399 Midr. on Ps. xiv.

[11892]5400 Is. xxv. 8.

[11893]5401 Is. lxv. 20.

[11894]5402 Ber. R. 12.

[11895]5403 Bemidb. R. 13.

[11896]5404 They are the following six: His splendour, the continuance

of life, his original more than gigantic stature, the fruits of the

ground, and of trees, and the brightness of the heavenly lights.

[11897]5405 Vayyik. R. 13, end.

[11898]5406 Ber. R. 65.

[11899]5407 Kethub. 111 a.

[11900]5408 On that day Gabriel had descended, cut a reed from the

ocean, and planted it in mud from the sea, and on this the city of

Rome was founded (Siphré 86 a).

[11901]5409 Ab. A. 24 a.

[11902]5410 Ab. Z. 3 b; Yeb. 24 b.

[11903]5411 Tanch. ed. Warsh ii. p. 115 a, top.

[11904]5412 Taan. 7a.

[11905]5413 Kethub. 111 b.

[11906]5414 Pirké d. R. Eliez. 34.

[11907]5415 It is, of course, not denied, that individual voices would

have assigned part in the world to come to the pious from among the

Gentiles. But even so, what is the precise import of this admission?

[11908]5416 Erub. 19 a.

[11909]5417 As to the latter, a solitary opinion in Moed K. 27 a.

[11910]5418 See Appendix XIX.

[11911]5419 Pes. 54 a.

[11912]5420 Rosh haSh. 17 a.

[11913]5421 Sanh. x. 3; 106 b.

[11914]5422 Tanch. u. s. i. p. 71 a, b.

[11915]5423 Ab. Z. 2 a to 3.

[11916]5424 Ber. R. 91.

[11917]5425 Yalkut i. p. 45 c.

[11918]5426 But it does not seem clear to me, whether this conjunction

of the cessation of darkness, together with that of the Yetser haRa,

is not intended to be taken figuratively and spiritually.

[11919]5427 Babha B. 74 a.

[11920]5428 At the same time, many quotations by Christian writers

intended to show the materialism of Jewish views are grossly unfair.

Thus, for example, Ber. 57 b, quoted by Weber (Altsynag. Theol. p.

384), certainly does not express the grossly carnal expectancy imputed

to it. On the other hand, it is certainly grossly materialistic, when

we read how the skin of slaughtered Leviathan is to be made into

tents, girdles, necklets, or armlets for the blessed, according to

their varying merits (Babha B. 75 a). Altogether the account of the

nature and hunt of this Leviathan, of the feast held, the various

dishes served (Babha B. 74 b to 75 b), and the wine drunk on the

occasion (Targ. Pseudo-Jon. on Gen. xxvii. 25; Targ. on Cant. viii. 2;

on Eccles. ix. 7), are too coarsely materialistic for quotation. But

what a contrast to the description of the 'Last Things' by our Lord

and His Apostles! This alone would furnish sufficient presumptive

evidence in favour of the New Testament. I have tried to touch this

very painful matter as delicately as I could, rather by allusions than

by descriptions, which could only raise prejudices.

[11921]5429 Yalkut, vol. i. p. 32 d. and especially Ber. 17 a.

[11922]5430 This is the Jerusalem built of sapphire, which is to

descend from heaven, and in the central sanctuary of which (unlike the

worship of the Book of Revelation) Aaron is to officiate and to

receive the priestly gifts (Taan. 5 a; Baba B. 75 b).

[11923]5431 See Appendix.

[11924]5432 Comp. generally Schürer, Neutest. Zeitgesch. pp. 579, &c.

[11925]5433 2 Macc. v. 2, 3.

[11926]5434 Or, Sibyll. iii. 795-806.

[11927]5435 IV. Esdr. v. 1-12.

[11928]5436 vi. 18-28.

[11929]5437 Book of Jubilees xxiii.

[11930]5438 Orac. Sibyll. iii. 633-652.

[11931]5439 u. s. 653-697; comp. the figurative acc't in the Book of

Enoch xc. 16, and following.

[11932]5440 Assumpt. Mos. x. 2-10.

[11933]5441 Book of Enoch xc. 37.

[11934]5442 In the Assumptio Mosis there is no reference at all to the

Messiah.

[11935]5443 Or. Sibyll. iii. 652-656; Book of Enoch, u. s.: comp. ch.

xlv. 3-6; xlvi.; lv. 4; lxi. 8, 9, 11, 12; lxii.; lxix. 27-29; Apoc.

of Bar. xxxix. 7, 8; xl.; lxx. 9; lxxii. 2, end; IV. (II.) Esdras xii.

32-34; xiii. 25-30, 34-38.

[11936]5444 Psalter of Sol. xvii. 25, 33.

[11937]5445 The words do not convey to me, as apparently to Dr.

Schürer, that the New Jerusalem actually stood in Eden, and, indeed,

existed otherwise than ideally.

[11938]5446 Apoc. of Baruch iv. 3-6.

[11939]5447 IV. Esdr. x. 44 &c.

[11940]5448 Tob. xiii. 16-18; xiv. 5; Book of Enoch liii. 6, 7; xc.

28; Apoc. of Baruch xxxii. 4.

[11941]5449 But I do not see, with Schürer, a reference to its coming

down from heaven, not even in the passage in Baruch to which he

refers, which is as follows: 'Et postea oportet renovari in gloria, et

coronabitur in perpetuum.'

[11942]5450 Orac. Sibyll. iii. 47-50; and especially Psalter of

Solomon xvii., particularly vv. 23 &c., 32, 35, 38, 47.

[11943]5451 I cannot understand how Schürer can throw doubt upon this,

in view of such plain statements as in Ps. of Sol. xvii., such as (in

regard to the Messiah): ka_ a_t_v basile_v d_kaiov didakt_v _p_ Qeo_

_p@ a_to_v.

[11944]5452 Bk. of Jub. xxxii.

[11945]5453 Or. Sibyll. x. 8.

[11946]5454 'Et ascendes supra cervices et alas aquilæ.'

[11947]5455 Comp. ver. 9.

[11948]5456 Ass. Mos. iii. 715-726.

[11949]5457 u. s. 766-783.

[11950]5458 De Præm. et Poen. ed. Mang. ii. 422-424; ed. Fref.

923-925.

[11951]5459 Book of Enoch xlviii. 4, 5; xc. 37; Ps. of Sol. xvii. 34,

35, 38-40.

[11952]5460 This is expressed in the clearest language in every one of

these books. In view of this, to maintain the opposite on the ground

of these isolated words in Baruch (xl. 3): 'Et erit principatus ejus

stans in saeculum, donec finiatur mundus corruptionis,' seems, to say

the least, a strange contention, especially when we read in lxxiii.

1.: 'Sederit in pace in aeternum super throno regni sui.' We can quite

understand that Gfrörer should propound this view in order to prove

that the teaching of the New Testament is only a reflection of that of

later Judaism; but should an argument so untenable be repeated? IV.

Esdras must not here be quoted, as admittedly containing New Testament

elements.

[11953]5461 Book of Enoch xlv. 4, 5.

[11954]5462 Dr. Schürer, following in this also Gfrörer, holds that

one party placed the renewal of the earth after the close of the

Messianic reign. He quotes in support only Bar. lxxiv. 2, 3; but the

words do not convey to me that inference. For the reason stated in the

preceding Note, IV. Esdras cannot here serve as authority.

[11955]5463 Ap. Bar. 1, 2, 3.

[11956]5464 Sanh, 91 a and b.

[11957]5465 u. s. li. 1-6.

[11958]5466 Ant. xviii. 1, 3; War ii. 8, 14.

[11959]5467 In support of it Schürer quotes Ps. of Sol. iii. 16, xiv.

2, &c. But these passages convey to me, and will, I think, to others,

the very opposite. Ps. iii. 16 says nothing of the wicked, only of the

righteous. But in ver. 13 b we have it: _ _p_leia to_ _martwlo_ e_v

t_n a__na, and in ver. 15, a_tj mer_v t_n _martwl_n e_v t_n a__na. Ps.

xiv. 2 has again only reference to the righteous, but in ver. 6 we

have this plain statement, which renders any doubt impossible, di_

to_to _ kljronom_a a_twn _djv ka_ sk_tov ka_ _p_leia.

[11960]5468 Comp. Book of Enoch and Apoc. of Bar.

[11961]5469 St. Matt. xxiv. 4-35, and parallels.

[11962]5470 St. Matt. xxiv. 36 to end, and parallels.

[11963]5471 vv. 4-35.

[11964]5472 vv. 4-8; 9-14; 15-28; 29-35.

[11965]5473 St. Matt. xxiv. 8; St. Mark xiii. 8.

[11966]5474 _rc_ _d_nwn, St. Matt. xxiv. 8, and so according to the

better reading also in St. Mark.

[11967]5475 St. Matt. xxiv. 6.

[11968]5476 Generally, indeed, these are regarded as 'the birth-woes'

of 'the end.' But this not only implies a logical impossibility (the

birth-woes of the end), but it must be remembered that these

'travail-pains' are the judgments on Jerusalem, or else on the world,

which are to usher in the new - to precede its birth.

[11969]5477 ver 4.

[11970]5478 Acts v. 36; viii. 9; xxi. 38.

[11971]5479 War ii. 13, 4, 5; Ant. xx. 5, 1; 8,10.

[11972]5480 Of such wars and rumours of wars not only Josephus, but

the Roman historians,. have much to say about that time. See the

Commentaries.

[11973]5481 St. Matt. xxiv. 6-8.

[11974]5482 We know how persistently Nero has been identified with

Anti-Christ, and how the Church then expected the immediate return of

Christ; nay, in all ages, 'the End' has been associated with troubles

in 'the Roman Empire.'

[11975]5483 A. D. 132-135.

[11976]5484 St. Matt. xxiv. 9-14, and parallels.

[11977]5485 St. Luke xxi. 12.

[11978]5486 St. Mark xii. 9.

[11979]5487 St. Matt. xxiv. 9-14, and parallels.

[11980]5488 St. Matt. xxiv. 10-13.

[11981]5489 St. Matt. xxiv. 14.

[11982]5490 St. Matt. xxiv. 15-28, and parallels; note especially the

language of St. Luke.

[11983]5491 St. Matt. xxiv. 3.

[11984]5492 vv. 4, 5.

[11985]5493 So Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. iii. 5) relates that the

Christians of Judæa fled to Pella, on the northern boundary of Peræa

in 68 A.D. Comp. also Jos. War iv. 9. 1, v. 10. 1.

[11986]5494 2 Macc. vi. 1-9.

[11987]5495 The quotation from Dan. ix, 27 is neither a literal

translation of the original, nor a reproduction of the LXX. The former

would be: 'And upon the wing [or corner] of the abominations the

destroyer.' Our Lord takes the well known Biblical expression in the

general sense in which the Jews took it, that the heathen power (Rome,

the abominable) would bring desolation - lay the city and Temple

waste.

[11988]5496 St. Matt. xxiv. 22.

[11989]5497 Ver. 28.

[11990]5498 vv. 29-31.

[11991]5499 St. Matt. xxiv. 3.

[11992]5500 xxiii. 38, 39.

[11993]5501 xxiv. 14.

[11994]5502 ver. 34.

[11995]5503 St. Matt. xxiv. 30.

[11996]5504 ver. 14.

[11997]5505 ver. 30.

[11998]5506 ver. 31.

[11999]5507 vv. 32, 33.

[12000]5508 Not as in the R. V. 'He.' It can scarcely be supposed that

Christ would. speak of Himself in the third person. The subject is

evidently 'the summer' (not as Meyer would render q_rov='harvest'). In

St. Luke xxi. 31 it is paraphrased 'the Kingdom of God.'

[12001]5509 vv. 29-31.

[12002]5510 St. Matt xxiv. 36 to end.

[12003]5511 St. Matt. xxiv.36.

[12004]5512 The expression does not, of course, refer to Christ in His

Divinity, but to the Christ, such as they saw Him, in His Messianic

capacity and office.

[12005]5513 vv. 37-40.

[12006]5514 vv. 40,41.

[12007]5515 vv. 42-51.

[12008]5516 St Matt xxiv. 43, 44.

[12009]5517 ver. 45, end.

[12010]5518 ver. 42.

[12011]5519 ver. 44.

[12012]5520 The Parable in St. Luke xii. 35-48 is so closely parallel

to this, that it seems unnecessary to enter in detail upon its

consideration.

[12013]5521 St. Matt. xxiv. 36-51.

[12014]5522 St Matt. xxv. 6.

[12015]5523 Jer. Yoma 41 a, line 24 from top.

[12016]5524 Kel. ii. 8.

[12017]5525 See the Arukh, ad voc.

[12018]5526 The better reading in ver. 1. and again in ver. 7, is not

a_t_n 'their,' but _aut_n.

[12019]5527 The word a_t_n in ver. 4, 'their vessels,' is probably

spurious. In both cases, as so often, the 'improving' copyists have

missed the deeper meaning.

[12020]5528 In ver.2, according to the better reading, the clauses

should be inverted, and, as in ver. 3, 'the foolish' first mentioned.

[12021]5529 St. Matt. v. 16.

[12022]5530 quæcunque, eæ omnes quæ.

[12023]5531 So especially Goebel, to whom, in general, we would

acknowledge our obligations.

[12024]5532 M_pote. See Grimm, ad voc. But it is impossible to give

the full force of the word.

[12025]5533 The better reading is o_ m_, which double negation I have

rendered, for want of better, by 'never.'

[12026]5534 The clause 'in which the Son of Man cometh' is spurious -

an early gloss crept into the text.

[12027]5535 St. Matt. xxv. 14-30.

[12028]5536 kat_ t_n _d_an d_namin.

[12029]5537 Some critics and the R.V. have drawn the word

'straightway' to the next verse, as referring to the activity of the

first servant. The reasons urged by Goebel against this seem to me

quite convincing, besides the fact that there is no cause for thus

distinguishing the first from the second faithful servant.

[12030]5538 _k_rdjsen - in the case of the first it was _po_jsen,

although even there _k_rdjsen is probably the better reading.

[12031]5539 suna_rei l_gon, confert, vel componit, rem seu causam.

[12032]5540 _pH a_to_v should, I think, be retained in the text. It

must at any rate be supplied.

[12033]5541 diaskorp_zein here in the same sense in which the LXX.

render the Hebrew {hebrew} in Ezek. v. 2, comp. Trommius Concord., and

Grimm ad verb.

[12034]5542 Goebel exaggerates in supposing that the servant had done

so, because any possible returns for the money would not be his own,

but the Master's.

[12035]5543 Babha Mez. iv. and v., especially v. 6, and the Gemara,

especially Babha M. 70 b &c.

[12036]5544 Comp. Marquardt, Handb. d. Röm. Alterth. vol. v. 2, pp.

56-68.

[12037]5545 Jos. Antiq. xviii. 6. 3.

[12038]5546 perisseuq_setai.

[12039]5547 So the better reading, to_ d_ m_ _contov.

[12040]5548 St. Luke xix. 11-28.

[12041]5549 I take leave to introduce a term which has become

naturalised in German theological literature. There is no other single

word which so expresses the ideas.

[12042]5550 An attempt has been lately made, with great ingenuity, by

the Rev. B. S. Clarke of Boxted, to show that only the weekly Sabbath

and the Day of Atonement, but not the other festive, nor yet the

natural days, began with the evening. The admission in regard to

Sabbaths and the Day of Atonement is, in the absence of any qualifying

remark in regard to them, a primâ facie argument against the theory.

But there is more than this. In Chull. 83 a it is noted, in connection

with offerings, that as in the history of the Creation the day always

belonged to the previous night ('one day'), it was always to be

reckoned in the same manner. Again, in Pes. 2 a it is stated that the

day lasted till three stars became visible. Lastly, and most important

in regard to the Passover, it is distinctly stated (Jer. Pes. 27 c,

below), that it began with the darkness on the 14th Nisan.

[12043]5551 St. John ii. 19.

[12044]5552 iii. 14.

[12045]5553 St. Matt. ix. 15.

[12046]5554 x. 38.

[12047]5555 St. Matt. xii. 40.

[12048]5556 St. John vi. 51.

[12049]5557 St. John x. 11, 15.

[12050]5558 St. Matt. xxi. 38.

[12051]5559 St. Matt. xvi. 21.

[12052]5560 St. Matt. xvii. 22.

[12053]5561 St. Matt. xx. 17-19.

[12054]5562 On the evidential force of the narrative of the

Crucifixion, I must refer to the singularly lucid and powerful

reasoning of Dr. Wace, in his work on 'The Gospel and its Witnesses'

(London, 1883, Lecture VI.). He first refers to the circumstance, that

in the narratives of the Crucifixion, written by Apostle, or by

friends of Apostles, 'the writers do not shrink from describing their

own conduct, or that of their Master,' with a truthfulness which

terribly reflects on their constancy, courage, and even manliness. Dr.

Wace's second argument is so clearly put, that I must take leave to

transfer his language to these pages. 'Christ crucified was, we are

told by St. Paul, "unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the

Greeks foolishness." It was a constant reproach to Christians, that

they worshipped a man who had been crucified as a malefactor. The main

fact, of course, could not be disguised. But that the Evangelical

writers should have so diligently preserved what might otherwise have

been forgotten - all the minute circumstances of their Master's

humiliation, the very weakness of His flesh, and His shrinking, in the

garden, from the cup He had to drink - all those marks, in fact, of

His human weakness which were obliterated by His Resurrection - this

is an instance of truthfulness which seems at least incompatible with

any legendary origin of the narratives, at a time when our Lord was

contemplated in the glory of His Ascension, and of His session at the

right hand of God. But whatsoever impression of truthfulness, and of

intense reality in detail, is thus created by the history of the

Passion, must in justice be allowed to reflect back over the whole

preceding history.' The argument is then further carried out as to the

truthfulness of writers who could so speak of themselves, and

concerning the fate of the Christ. But the whole subject should be

studied in the connection in which Dr. Wace has presented it.

[12055]5563 St. Luke xxii. 3.

[12056]5564 St. John xiii. 2 and 27.

[12057]5565 This apart from the question of the exceptional sin

against the Holy Ghost.

[12058]5566 St. John xii. 5, 6.

[12059]5567 1 Cor. xii. 28.

[12060]5568 On the relation between ambition and covetousness,

generally, and in the case of Judas, see p. 77.

[12061]5569 Ab. Zar. 8 b, line before last.

[12062]5570 St. Luke xxii. 4.

[12063]5571 St. John xi. 47, 48.

[12064]5572 St. John xi. 57.

[12065]5573 About Caiaphas, see Book II. ch. xi.

[12066]5574 The evidence is collected, although not well arranged, by

Wieseler, Beitr. pp. 205-230.

[12067]5575 Zech. xi. 12.

[12068]5576 Probably such was the practice in public payments.

[12069]5577 The shekel of the Sanctuary = 4 dinars. The Jerusalem

shekel is found, on an average, to be worth about 2s. 6d.

[12070]5578 Phil. ii. 7.

[12071]5579 Exod. xxi 32.

[12072]5580 St. John xiii. 27.

[12073]5581 Jer. Pes. 27 d, line before last.

[12074]5582 The question is put in connection with Pes. i. 8.

[12075]5583 Ant. ii. 15. 1.

[12076]5584 See the Jerusalem Gemara (Jer. Pes. 27 b, towards the

end). But the detailed quotations would here be so numerous that it

seems wiser to omit them.

[12077]5585 Comp. St. Matt. xxvi. 30, 36; St. Mark xiv. 26, 32; St.

Luke xxii. 39; St. John xviii. 1.

[12078]5586 The Jerusalem Talmud gives the most minute details of the

places in which search is to be made. One Rabbi proposed that the

search should be repeated at three different times! If it had been

omitted on the evening of the 13th, it would be made on the forenoon

of the 14th Nisan.

[12079]5587 These phrases occur frequently in Jewish writings for

dying: 'the hour has come' 'to depart out of this world.' Thus, in

Targum on Cant. i. 7, 'when the hour had come that Moses should depart

out of the world;' Shem. R. 33, 'what hour the time came for our

father Jacob that he should depart out of the world.'

[12080]5588 The words may also be rendered 'to the uttermost.' But it

seems more natural to understand the 'having loved' as referring to

all Christ's previous sayings and doings, as it were, the summing up

of the whole past, like St. Matt. xxvi. 1: 'when Jesus had finished

all these sayings,' and the other clause ('He loved them to the end')

as referring to the final and greatest manifestation of His love; the

one being the terminus a quo, the other the terminus ad quem.

[12081]5589 St. Luke xxii. 7.

[12082]5590 ver. 13.

[12083]5591 ver. 14.

[12084]5592 ver. 15.

[12085]5593 It deserves notice that the latest Jewish writer on the

subject (Joël, Blicke in d. Relig. Gesch. Part II. pp. 62 & c.) -

however we may otherwise differ from him - has by an ingenious process

of combination shown, that the original view expressed in Jewish

writings was, that Jesus was crucified on the first Paschal day, and

that this was only at a later period modified to 'the eve of the

Pascha,' Sanh. 43 a, 67 a (the latter in Chasr. haSh., p. 23 b).

[12086]5594 It has of late, however, found an advocate even in the

learned Bishop Haneberg.

[12087]5595 St. John xvii. 28.

[12088]5596 St. John xviii. 28.

[12089]5597 So Archdeacon Watkins (in Excursus F, in Bp. Ellicot's

'Commentary on the N.T.,' Gospel of St. John).

[12090]5598 Sebbach. v. 8.

[12091]5599 St. Luke xxii. 8.

[12092]5600 St. Matthew calls him 'such an one' (t_n de_na). The

details are furnished by St. Mark and St. Luke, and must be gathered

from those Gospels.

[12093]5601 1 Sam. x. 3.

[12094]5602 We combine the words from the three Synoptists.

[12095]5603 Literally, I do.

[12096]5604 St. Matthew.

[12097]5605 So in St Luke and also according to the better reading in

St. Mark.

[12098]5606 St. Mark and St Luke.

[12099]5607 St. Mark xiv. 14: St. Luke xxii. 11.

[12100]5608 The word occurs seven times in the LXX. and twice in the

Apocrypha (Ecclus. xiv. 25; 1 Macc. iii 45). But out of these nine

passages only in one, 1 Sam. ix. 22, does it stand for 'apartment.'

[12101]5609 St. Luke ii. 7.

[12102]5610 Pes. vii. 13.

[12103]5611 The Mishnah explains certain regulations for such cases.

According to the Targum Pseudo-Jon., each company was not to consist

of less than ten persons; according to Josephus (War vi. 9. 3), of not

more than twenty.

[12104]5612 Pes. viii. 1.

[12105]5613 Pes. viii. 2.

[12106]5614 1 Cor. xi. 23.

[12107]5615 Yoma 12 a; Megill, 26 a.

[12108]5616 Comp. similarly, for example, St Mark v. 41; x. 18.

[12109]5617 St. Mark.

[12110]5618 Babha B vi. 4.

[12111]5619 The Talmud puts it that slaves were wont to take their

meals standing, and that this reclining best indicated how Israel had

passed from bondage into liberty.

[12112]5620 Pes. x. 1.

[12113]5621 St. John xviii. 1, 2.

[12114]5622 Pes. ii. 3

[12115]5623 As it was symbolic of the clay on which the children of

Israel worked in Egypt, the rubric has it that it must be thick (Pes.

116 a).

[12116]5624 The contention that it was unfermented wine is not worth

serious discussion, although in modern practice (for reasons needless

to mention) its use is allowed.

[12117]5625 The whole rubric is found in Jer. Pes. 37 c. The log = to

the contents of six eggs. Herzfeld (Handelsgesch. p. 184) makes 1/32

of a log = a dessert spoon. 12 log = 1 hin.

[12118]5626 Chag. i. 2.

[12119]5627 Menach. xiii. 8.

[12120]5628 Sheqal. ii. 4.

[12121]5629 But it may have been otherwise; perhaps the lamb was even

procured by the owner of the 'Upper Chamber,' since it might be

offered for another. At the same time the account in the text seems to

accord best with the Gospel-narrative.

[12122]5630 If it had been the evening from Friday to Saturday,

instead of from Thursday to Friday, it would have been two hours

earlier. See the rubric in Pes. v. 1.

[12123]5631 Although, so far as we know, not of practical importance

here, we should perhaps bear in mind that John was a priest.

[12124]5632 If we may suppose that there was a double row of priests

to hand up the blood, and several to sprinkle it, or else that the

blood from one row of sacrifices was handed to the priests in the

opposite row, there could be no difficulty in the offering of lambs

sufficient for all the 'companies,' which consisted of from ten to

twenty persons.

[12125]5633 Ps. cxiii. to cxviii.

[12126]5634 'The Temple and its Services,' pp. 194-195.

[12127]5635 Ex. xii. 6; Lev. xxiii.5; Numb. ix. 3, 5.

[12128]5636 Acts xii. 12, 25.

[12129]5637 St. John ii. 13.

[12130]5638 St. Matt. xv. 21, &c.

[12131]5639 We prefer retaining this in the text.

[12132]5640 Such would still be the meaning, even if the accusative

'it' were regarded as the better reading.

[12133]5641 Wünsche (on St. John xiii. 2) refers to Pes. 108 a, and

states in a somewhat general way that no order of rank was preserved

at the Paschal Table. But the passage he quotes does not imply this -

only, that without distinction of rank all sat down at the same table,

but not that the well-established order of sitting was infringed. The

Jerusalem Talmud says nothing on the subject. The Gospel-narrative, of

course, expressly states that there was a contention about rank among

the disciples. In general, there are a number of inaccuracies in the

part of Wünsche's Notes referring to the Last Supper.

[12134]5642 St. John xiii. 2

[12135]5643 B Bathr 57 b.

[12136]5644 Ber. 46 b; Tos. Ber. v.; Jer. Taan, 68 a, towards the

bottom.

[12137]5645 St. John xiii. 26.

[12138]5646 St. Matt. xxvi. 25.

[12139]5647 It seems almost incomprehensible, that Commentators, who

have not thought this narrative misplaced by St. Luke, should have

attributed the strife to Peter and John, the former being jealous of

the place of honour which 'the beloved Disciple' had obtained. (So

Nebe, Leidensgesch.; the former even Calvin.)

[12140]5648 St. John xiii. 24.

[12141]5649 St. Luke xxii. 25, 28.

[12142]5650 Not 'temptation' - i.e. not assaults from within, but

assults from without.

[12143]5651 The 'sitting down with Him' at the feast is evidently a

promise of joy, reward, and fellowship. The sitting on thrones and

judging Israel must be taken as in contrast to the 'temptation' of the

contradiction of Christ and of their Apostolic message - as their

vindication against Israel's present gainsaying.

[12144]5652 Pes. x. 2.

[12145]5653 The whole formula is given in 'The Temple and its

Services,' pp. 204, 205.

[12146]5654 St. Luke xxii. 17-18

[12147]5655 I have often expressed my conviction that in the ancient

Services there was considerable elasticity and liberty left to the

individual. At present a cup is filled for each individual, but Christ

seems to have passed the one cup round among the Disciples. Whether

such was sometimes done, or the alteration was designedly, and as we

readily see, significantly, made by Christ, cannot now be determined.

[12148]5656 Babha B. 97 b, lines 11 and 12 from top.

[12149]5657 St. John xiii.

[12150]5658 Pes. x. 4.

[12151]5659 St. John xiii. 12-16.

[12152]5660 St. John xiii.

[12153]5661 Godet, who regards ver. 1 as a general, and ver. 2 as a

special, introduction to the foot-washing, calls attention to the

circumstance that such introductions not unfrequently occur in the

Fourth Gospel.

[12154]5662 ver. 2.

[12155]5663 The contrast is the more marked as the same verb (b_llein)

is used both of Satan 'casting' it into the heart of Judas, and of

Christ throwing into the basin the water for the footwashing.

[12156]5664 St. John xiii.1

[12157]5665 St. John xi.

[12158]5666 Bengel: magna vis.

[12159]5667 St. Chrysostom and others unduly urge the words (ver. 6),

'He cometh to Peter.' He came to him, not after the others, but from

the place where the basin and water for the purification had stood.

[12160]5668 St. Matt. xv. 22.

[12161]5669 So the expression in St. John xiii. 11, more accurately

rendered.

[12162]5670 St. John xiii. 12-17.

[12163]5671 _podeigma. The distinctive meaning of the word is best

gathered from the other passages in the N.T. in which it occurs, viz.

Heb. iv. 11; viii. 5; ix. 23; St. James v. 10; 2 Pet. ii. 6. For the

literal outward imitation of this deed of Christ in the ceremony of

footwashing, still common in the Roman Catholic Church, see Bingham,

Antiq. xii. 4, 10.

[12164]5672 _fe_lete.

[12165]5673 The word is that employed in the 'Beatitudes,' mak_rioi.

[12166]5674 Shem. R. 20.

[12167]5675 Ezek. xvi. 9.

[12168]5676 Comp. Ezek. xvi. 10; Ex. xix. 4; xiii. 21.

[12169]5677 {hebrew} or {hebrew}.

[12170]5678 Comp. St. John xiii. 17.

[12171]5679 Kidd, 42 a.

[12172]5680 Ber. R. 78.

[12173]5681 Yalkut on Is. ix. vol. ii. p. 56 d, lines 12, 13 from top.

[12174]5682 St. John xiii. 18, 19.

[12175]5683 Ps. xli. 9.

[12176]5684 At the same time there is also a terrible literality about

this prophetic reference to one who ate his bread, when we remember

that Judas, like the rest, lived of what was supplied to Christ, and

at that very moment sat at His Table. On Ps. xli. see the

Commentaries.

[12177]5685 '_na frequenter _kbatik_v, i.e. de eventu usurpari

dicitur, ut sit eo eventu, ut; eo successu, ut, ita ut' [Grimm, ad

verb.] - Angl. 'so that.' And Grimm rightly points out that _na is

always used in that sense, marking the internal connection in the

succession of events - _kbatik_v not telik_v - where the phrase occurs

'that it might be fulfilled.' This canon is most important, and of

very wide application wherever the _na is connected with the Divine

Agency, in which, from our human view-point, we have to distinguish

between the decree and the counsel of God.

[12178]5686 Phil. ii. 5-7.

[12179]5687 St. John xiii. 20.

[12180]5688 St. Matt. xxvi. 21.

[12181]5689 St. Mark xiv. 18.

[12182]5690 Pes. x. 4.

[12183]5691 Pes. 115 b.

[12184]5692 Ps. cxiii to cxviii.

[12185]5693 St. John xiii. 21.

[12186]5694 St. John xiii. 22.

[12187]5695 The reading adopted in the R.V. of St. John xiii. 24

represents the better accredited text, though it involves some

difficulties.

[12188]5696 On the circumstance that John does not name himself in

ver. 23, Bengel beautifully remarks: 'Optabilius est, amari ab Jesu,

quam nomine proprio celebrari.'

[12189]5697 The statement is in regard to Hillel, while the Temple

stood.

[12190]5698 Mark the definite article - not 'a sop.'

[12191]5699 Jer.Chall. 57 b.

[12192]5700 St. John xiii. 28.

[12193]5701 St. Matt. xxvi. 24; St. Mark xiv. 21.

[12194]5702 St. John xiii. 30 should be rendered,'having taken,' not

'received.'

[12195]5703 To a Jew it might seem that with the 'sop,' containing as

it did a piece of the Paschal Lamb, the chief part in the Paschal

Supper was over.

[12196]5704 The Mishnah expressly allows the procuring even on the

Sabbath of that which is required for the Passover, and the Law of the

Sabbath-rest was much more strict than that of feast-days. See this in

Appendix XVII., p. 783.

[12197]5705 St. John.

[12198]5706 The first in ver. 32 of our T.R. seems spurious, though it

indicates the logical nexus of facts.

[12199]5707 Probably the word 'reward' is wrongly chosen, for I look

on Christ's exaltation after the victory of His Obedience as rather

the necessary sequence than the reward of His Work.

[12200]5708 St. John xiii. 31-35.

[12201]5709 Could there possibly be a hiatus in our present Gospel?

There is not the least external evidence to that effect, and yet the

impression deepens on consideration. I have ventured to throw out some

hints on this subject in 'The Temple and its Services,' Appendix at

close.

[12202]5710 The most important of these, perhaps, is the rendering of

'covenant' for 'testament.' In St. Matthew the word 'new' before

'covenant,' should be left out; this also in St. Mark, as well as the

word 'eat' after 'take.'

[12203]5711 St. Matt. xxvi. 26; St. Mark xiv. 22.

[12204]5712 1 Cor. x. 10.

[12205]5713 Though, of course, most widely differing from what is an

attempt to trace an analogy between the Ritual of the Romish Mass and

the Paschal Liturgy of the Jews, the article on it by the learned

Professor Bickell, of Innsbruck, possesses a curious interest. See

Zeitsch. fur Kathol. Theol. for 1880, pp. 90-112.

[12206]5714 I would here refer to the admirable critical notes on 1

Cor. x. and xi. by Professor Evans in 'The Speaker's Commentary.'

[12207]5715 The words area hitherto unprinted utterance on this

subject by the late Professor J. Duncan, of Edinburgh.

[12208]5716 As this chapter is really in the nature of a commentation

on St. John xiv., xv., xvi., xvii., the reader is requested to peruse

it with the Bible-text beside him. Without this it could scarcely be

intelligently followed.

[12209]5717 Ps. cxv.- cxviii.

[12210]5718 St. Matt. xxvi. 30; St. Mark xiv. 26.

[12211]5719 St. John xvii.

[12212]5720 St. John xviii. 1.

[12213]5721 Recorded in St. John xiv.

[12214]5722 St. John xiii. 33.

[12215]5723 vv. 1-4.

[12216]5724 vv. 5-14.

[12217]5725 vv. 15-24.

[12218]5726 vv. 24-31.

[12219]5727 Babha Mets. 83 b, line 13 from top, and other passages.

[12220]5728 I prefer retaining the rendering of the A.V., as more

congruous to the whole context.

[12221]5729 St. John xiv. 1-4.

[12222]5730 ver. 5.

[12223]5731 St. John xiv. 7.

[12224]5732 ver. 8.

[12225]5733 ver 12.

[12226]5734 vv. 13, 14.

[12227]5735 St. John xiv. 15.

[12228]5736 ver. 16.

[12229]5737 Without entering on the discussion of what has engaged so

much attention, I must content myself here with indicating the result

at which I have arrived. This is simply to abide by the real and

natural meaning of the word, alike in the Greek and in Rabbinic usage.

This is: not Comforter but Advocate, or, it may be, according to

circumstances, Defender, Representative, Counsellor, and Pleader.

[12230]5738 1 John ii 1.

[12231]5739 ver. 17.

[12232]5740 Ver. 19 should, I think, be rendered: 'But you behold Me,

because [for] I live, and ye shall live.'

[12233]5741 St. John xiv. 20, 21.

[12234]5742 ka_ mon_n par@ a_t_ poijs_meqa. Of course only 'a

station,' as the reference is only to the state of believers while on

earth.

[12235]5743 vv. 22-24.

[12236]5744 St. John xiv. 27.

[12237]5745 The word 'again' before 'come unto you' is spurious, as

also are the words 'I said' before 'I go to the Father.'

[12238]5746 The great difficulty in understanding the last part of

ver. 28 lies not in any one of the clauses nor in the combination of

two, but in that of three of them. We could understand that if they

loved Him, they would rejoice that He went to the Father, as marking

the completion of His work; and again, that they should rejoice in His

going to the Father, Who was greater, and would send the Holy Ghost,

as implying benefit to themselves. But the difficulty of combining all

these, so that love to Christ should induce a wish that He should go

to the Father, because He was greater, seems one, of which I can only

see the natural solution in the interpretation which I have ventured

to suggest.

[12239]5747 ver. 29.

[12240]5748 St. John xiv. 30.

[12241]5749 ver. 31.

[12242]5750 xv. 1-8.

[12243]5751 vv. 9-17.

[12244]5752 vv. 18-27.

[12245]5753 There the two could with difficulty be separated. Hence

the vine the symbol of Israel, the sages being the ripe grapes, Chull.

92 a.

[12246]5754 a_rei - kaqa_rei: Suavis rhythmus (Bengel).

[12247]5755 Canon Westcott beautifully observes: 'Their prayer is only

some fragment of His teaching transformed into a supplication, and so

it will necessarily be heard.'

[12248]5756 Every unprejudiced reader will feel that St. Matt. xviii.

19, 20, so far as it does not belong to an entirely different sphere,

is subject to similar conditions.

[12249]5757 Some, to me at least, horrible instances of this supposed

absolute licence of prayer have appeared in a certain class of

American religious literature which of late has found too wide

circulation among us.

[12250]5758 St. John xv. 7, 8.

[12251]5759 Preces ipsæ sunt fructus, et fructum augent (Bengel).

[12252]5760 We would fain here correct another modern religious

extravagance.

[12253]5761 St. John xv. 11.

[12254]5762 So according to the better reading.

[12255]5763 'The heathen are wont to exclaim with wonder, See how

these Christians love one another!' (Tertullian, apud Westcott.)

[12256]5764 vv. 12-14

[12257]5765 St. John xv. 16.

[12258]5766 ver. 17.

[12259]5767 ver. 18.

[12260]5768 vv. 19-21.

[12261]5769 vv. 22-24.

[12262]5770 Canon Westcott writes: 'The works are characterised (which

none other did); the words are undefined (come and spoken). The works

of Christ might be compared with other works: His words had an

absolute power.'

[12263]5771 Ps. xxxv. 19; 1xix. 4.

[12264]5772 On this meaning of the words see the Note of Canon

Westcott.

[12265]5773 For the fulfilment of this predicted twofold testimony,

see Acts v. 32.

[12266]5774 St. John xvi.

[12267]5775 Sanh. 81 b; Bemid. R. 21.

[12268]5776 St. John xvi. 1-4.

[12269]5777 ver. 5.

[12270]5778 The question of Thomas (St. John xiv. 5) bore as to the

way, rather than the goal; that of Peter (xiii. 36) seemed founded

either on the Jewish idea that the Messiah was to disappear, or else

referred to Christ's going among enemies and into danger, whither

Peter thought he would follow Him. But none of the questions

contemplated the Messianic Return of the Son to the Father with a view

to the Mission of the Holy Ghost.

[12271]5779 St. John xvi. 7.

[12272]5780 It occurs besides this place in St. Matt. xviii. 15; St.

Luke iii. 19; St. John iii. 20; viii. (9) 46.

[12273]5781 Closely similar to the above is the use of the verb _l_gcw

in St. James ii. 9, and in Rev. iii. 19. This may be called the

Hebraic usus of the word. In the Epistles of St. Paul it is more

general; in that to the Hebrews (xii. 5) it seems to stand for

punishing.

[12274]5782 This meaning of the word is not only most important but

well marked. Canon Westcott calls attention to its use also in the

following passages: v. 19; vii. 18; xi. 51; xv. 4.

[12275]5783 St. John xvi. 8-15.

[12276]5784 ver. 16.

[12277]5785 The words, 'because I go to the Father,' are spurious in

ver. 16.

[12278]5786 vv. 5-7.

[12279]5787 St. John xvi. 23 comp. ver 19.

[12280]5788 According to the better reading of ver. 23: 'He will give

it you in My Name.'

[12281]5789 The same word (pa__js_a) is used of Christ's 'plainly'

declaring the Father (ver. 25), and of our liberty in prayer in Heb.

iv. 16; comp. also x. 19. For the Johannine use of the word, comp. St.

John vii. 4, 13, 26; x. 24; xi. 14, 54; xvi. 25, 29; xviii. 20; 1 John

ii. 28; iii. 21; iv. 17; v. 14.

[12282]5790 According to the better reading: _k to_ patr_v. Surely, if

words have any meaning, these teach the unity of Essence of the Son

and the Father.

[12283]5791 St. John xvi. 30.

[12284]5792 Very significantly, however, they use neither par_, nor

_k, but _p_.

[12285]5793 St. John xvi. 32.

[12286]5794 xiv.1.

[12287]5795 xvi. 33.

[12288]5796 St. John xvii.

[12289]5797 That in St. Matt. xi. 25-27 is a brief thanksgiving.

[12290]5798 vv. 1-5; 6-19; 20-26.

[12291]5799 Comp. each chapter with the corresponding section of

verses in ch. xvii.

[12292]5800 I cannot agree with Canon Westcott that these last

Discourses and this Prayer were spoken in the Temple. It is, indeed,

true, that on that night the Temple was thrown open at midnight, and

speedily thronged. But if our Lord had come before that time, He would

have found its gates closed; if after that time, He could not have

found a place of retirement and quiet, where it is conceivable that

could have been said and prayed which is recorded in St. John xiv.,

xv., xvi., xvii.

[12293]5801 vv. 1-5.

[12294]5802 The word 'also' should be struck out.

[12295]5803 We mark this Hebraism in the Fourth Gospel.

[12296]5804 in St. John xvii. 3.

[12297]5805 vv. 4, 5.

[12298]5806 Phil. ii. 8, 11.

[12299]5807 St. John xvii. 6-10.

[12300]5808 St. John xvii. 9-12.

[12301]5809 Comp. here St. John xv.11.

[12302]5810 ver. 13.

[12303]5811 This meaning is ruled by a reference to 1 John v. 18, 19,

and, if so, it seems in turn to rule the meaning of the petition:

'Deliver us from the Evil One.'

[12304]5812 St. John xvii. 12.

[12305]5813 Not, 'by Thy truth.'

[12306]5814 vv. 12-17.

[12307]5815 Not, as in the A.V. (ver. 19), 'through the truth' (_n

_ljqe_a).

[12308]5816 It need scarcely be said that by the term 'unity' we refer

not to unity of Person, but of Nature, Character, and Work.

[12309]5817 vv. 24-26.

[12310]5818 Ps. cxv. to cxviii.

[12311]5819 Zech. xiii. 7.

[12312]5820 St. Matt. xxvi. 32; St. Mark. xiv. 28.

[12313]5821 St. John xxi. 2.

[12314]5822 St. Matt. xxviii. 16.

[12315]5823 u. s. vv.18-20.

[12316]5824 St. Luke xxii. 31.

[12317]5825 It is very probable that the basis of the figure is Amos

ix. 9.

[12318]5826 St. John vi. 68.

[12319]5827 St. Matt. xvi. 16.

[12320]5828 St. John xxi. 15-17.

[12321]5829 This even philologically, and in all the passages in which

the word is used. Except in St. Matt. ix. 38, it occurs only in the

writings of St. Luke and St. Paul.

[12322]5830 Curiously enough, Roman Catholic writers see in the

prediction of his fall by implication an assertion of Peter's

supremacy. This, because they regard Peter as the representative and

head of the others.

[12323]5831 St. John xvii. 15.

[12324]5832 This crowing of the cock has given rise to a curious

controversy, since, according to Rabbinic law, it was forbidden to

keep fowls in Jerusalem, on account of possible Levitical defilements

through them (Baba K. vii. 7). Reland has written a special

dissertation on the subject, of which Schöttgen has given a brief

abstract. We need not reproduce the arguments, but Reland urges that,

even if that ordinance was really in force at the time of Christ (of

which there is grave doubt), Peter might have heard the cock crow from

Fort Antonia, occupied by the Romans, or else that it might have

reached thus far in the still night air from outside the walls of

Jerusalem. But there is more than doubt as to the existence of this

ordinance at the time. There is repeated mention of 'cock-crow' in

connection with the Temple-watches, and if the expression be regarded

as not literal, but simple a designation of time, we have in Jer.

Erub. x. 1 (p. 26 a, about middle) a story in which a cock caused the

death of a child at Jerusalem, proving that fowls must have been kept

there.

[12325]5833 St. Matthew speaks of 'this night,' St. Mark and St. Luke

of 'this day,' proving, if such were needed, that the day was reckoned

from evening to evening.

[12326]5834 St. Luke xxii. 35-38.

[12327]5835 Omit the article.

[12328]5836 Jos. War iii. 3, 2.

[12329]5837 The objection has been raised, that, according to the

Mishnah (Shabb. vi. 4), it was not lawful to carry swords on the

Sabbath. But even this Mishnah seems to indicate that there was

divergence of opinion on the subject, even as regarded the Sabbath,

much more a feast-day.

[12330]5838 St. Matt. xxvi. 36.

[12331]5839 St. Mark v. 37.

[12332]5840 St. Matt. xvii. 1.

[12333]5841 We mark a climax. The last word (_djmone_n) used both by

St. Matthew and St. Mark seems to indicate utter loneliness,

desertion, and desolateness.

[12334]5842 Heb. v. 7.

[12335]5843 St. Luke xxii. 41.

[12336]5844 Comp. Acts. xxi.

[12337]5845 The Vulgate renders: 'avulsus est.' Bengel notes: 'serio

affectu.'

[12338]5846 St. Matt. xxvi. 39, 42.

[12339]5847 St. Jerome notes: 'dicitque blandiens: Mi Pater.'

[12340]5848 St. Mark xiv. 36.

[12341]5849 This explains the _p_ t_v e_labe_av of Hebr. v. 7.

[12342]5850 St. Matt. xxvi. 40.

[12343]5851 Bengel: 'Signum bibendi calicis.'

[12344]5852 The pathological phenomenon of blood being forced out of

the vessels in bloody sweat, as the consequence of agony, has been

medically sufficiently attested. See the Commentaries.

[12345]5853 No one who has seen it, can forget the impression of Carlo

Dolce's picture, in which the drops as they fall kindle into heavenly

light.

[12346]5854 They probably knew of the Bloody Sweat by seeing its marks

on His Brow, though those who did not follow Him on His capture may

have afterwards gone, and in the moonlight seen the drops on the place

where He had knelt.

[12347]5855 It will be noticed that we place an interval of time,

however brief, between St. Matt. xxvi. 45 (and similarly St. Mark xiv.

41) and the following verse. So already St. Augustine.

[12348]5856 Sanh. 41.

[12349]5857 St. John xviii. 31; St. John xix. 7.

[12350]5858 Jos. War iv. 4. 6.

[12351]5859 Jos. War v. 5, 8.

[12352]5860 The number varied. See Marquardt, Röm. Alterthumsk. vol.

v. 2, pp. 359, 386, 441. Canon Westcott suggests that it might have

been, not a cohort, but a 'manipulus' (of about 200 men); but, as

himself points out, the expression as used in the N.T. seems always to

indicate a cohort.

[12353]5861 Jos. Ant. xxv. 5. 3.

[12354]5862 St. John xviii. 12.

[12355]5863 Jos. War ii. 9. 4.

[12356]5864 St. John xviii. 3.

[12357]5865 St. Luke.

[12358]5866 St. Matt xxvi. 49; comp. St. Mark xiv. 45.

[12359]5867 We cannot, as many interpreters, take the words in an

interrogative sense. I presume that Christ spoke both what St. Matthew

and what St. Luke record. Both bear internal marks of genuineness.

[12360]5868 St. Luke xxii. 48.

[12361]5869 St. John xviii. 5.

[12362]5870 xviii. 4-9.

[12363]5871 St. John xvii. 12.

[12364]5872 St. Matt. xxvi. 50 b.

[12365]5873 St. Mark xiv. 46.

[12366]5874 St. John xviii. 11, 26.

[12367]5875 The name Malchus, which occurs also in Josephus (Ant. i.

15. 1.; xiv. 5.2; 11. 4; War i. 8. 3), must not be derived, as is

generally done, from {hebrew} a king. Its Hebrew equivalent,

apparently, is Malluch, 'Counsellor,' a name which occurs both in the

Old Testament and in the LXX. (1 Chron. vi. 44; Neh. x. 4, &c.), and

as a later Jewish name in the Talmud. But both Frankel (Einl. in d.

Jer. Talm. p. 114) and Freudenthal (Hell. Stud. p. 131) maintain that

it was not a Jewish name, while it was common among Syrians,

Phoenicians, Arabians, and Samaritans. The suggestion therefore lies

near, that Malchus was either a Syrian or a Phoenician by birth.

[12368]5876 The definite article here marks that he was, in a special

sense, the servant of the High-Priest - his body-servant.

[12369]5877 St. Matthew.

[12370]5878 A legion had ten cohorts.

[12371]5879 St. John.

[12372]5880 This reference to the 'cup which the Father had given Him

to drink' by St. John, implies the whole history of the Agony in

Gethsemane, which is not recorded in the Fourth Gospel. And this is,

on many grounds, very instructive.

[12373]5881 St. Luke.

[12374]5882 St. John.

[12375]5883 sind_n. This, no doubt, corresponds to the Sadin or Sedina

which, in Rabbinic writings, means a linen cloth, or a loose linen

wrapper, though, possibly, it may also mean a night-dress (see Levy,

ad voc.).

[12376]5884 The designation 'young men' (St. Mark xiv. 51) is

spurious.

[12377]5885 St. John xviii. 14.

[12378]5886 xi. 50.

[12379]5887 Pes. 57 a.

[12380]5888 No further reference whatever is made to the Roman guard.

[12381]5889 We read (St. John xviii. 13):'For he was father-in-law to

Caiaphas.'

[12382]5890 St. John xviii. 15-18.

[12383]5891 And hence also that of the two disciples following Christ.

[12384]5892 ver. 24.

[12385]5893 St. John xviii. 19-23.

[12386]5894 In this argument we lay little stress on the designation,

'High-Priest,' which St. John (ver. 19) gives to the examiner of

Christ, although it is noteworthy that he carefully distinguishes

between Annas and Caiaphas, marking the latter as 'the High-Priest'

(vv. 13, 24).

[12387]5895 According to our argument, St. John xviii. 24 is an

intercalated notice, referring to what had previously been recorded in

vv. 15-23. To this two critical objections have been raised. It is

argued, that as _p_steilen is in the aorist, not plu-perfect, the

rendering must be, 'Annas sent,' not 'had sent Him.' But then it is

admitted, that the aorist is occasionally used for the pluperfect.

Secondly, it is insisted that, according to the better reading, o_n

should be inserted after _p_steilen which Canon Westcott renders:

'Annas therefore sent Him.' But notwithstanding Canon Westcott's high

authority, we must repeat the critical remark of Meyer, that there are

'important witnesses' against as well as for the insertion of o_n,

while the insertion of other particles in other Codd. seems to imply

that the insertion here of any particle was a later addition.

On the other hand, what seem to me two irrefragable arguments are in

favour of the retrospective application of ver. 24. First, the

preceding reference to Peter's denial must be located in the house of

Caiaphas. Secondly, if vv. 19-23 refer to an examination by Annas,

then St. John has left us absolutely no account of anything that had

passed before Caiaphas - which, in view of the narrative of the

Synoptists, would seem incredible.

[12388]5896 St. John xviii. 19-23.

[12389]5897 Canon Westcott supposes that the Apostle himself was

present in the audience chamber. But, although we readily admit that

John went into the house, and was as near as possible to Christ, many

reasons suggest themselves why we can scarcely imagine John to have

been present, when Caiaphas inquired about the disciples and teaching

of Jesus.

[12390]5898 St. Luke xxii. 66.

[12391]5899 St. John xviii. 20.

[12392]5900 I cannot think that the expression t_ k_smw 'to the

world,' in ver. 20 can have any implied reference to the great world

in opposition to the Jews (as so many interpreters hold). The

expression 'the world' in the sense of 'everybody' is common in every

language. And its Rabbinic use has been shown on p. 368, Note 3.

Christ proves that He had had no 'secret' doctrine, about which He

might be questioned, by three facts: 1. He had spoken parrjs_a

'without reserve;' 2. He had spoken t_ k_smw to everybody, without

confining Himself to a select audience; 3. He had taught in the most

public places - in Synagogue and in the Temple, whither all Jews

resorted.

[12393]5901 So according to the better reading and literally.

[12394]5902 St. Matt. xxvi. 58; St. Mark xiv. 54; St. Luke xxii, 54,

55.

[12395]5903 St. John xviii. 15-18.

[12396]5904 St. John xviii. 15.

[12397]5905 The circumstance that Josephus (Ant. vii. 2. 1) on the

ground of 2 Sam. iv 6 (LXX.) speaks of a female 'porter,' and that

Rhoda opened the door in the house of the widowed mother of John Mark

(Acts xii. 13), does not convince me, that in the Palace of the

High-Priest a female servant regularly discharged that office.

[12398]5906 St. Mark xiv. 66.

[12399]5907 St. Matt. xxvi. 69.

[12400]5908 The Synoptists.

[12401]5909 St. John.

[12402]5910 St. John.

[12403]5911 St. Matthew.

[12404]5912 St. Mark.

[12405]5913 St. Matthew.

[12406]5914 The expression 'all the council' must evidently be taken

in a general, not literal sense. No one would believe, for example,

that either Nicodemus or Gamaliel was present. I would not, however,

attach any great importance to this. The reference to the 'Elders' (in

St. Matt.) is spurious.

[12407]5915 This is also the conclusion of the calmest and most

impartial Jewish historian, my lamented friend, the late Dr. Jost

(Gesch. d. Judenth. i. pp. 402-409). He designates it 'a private

murder (Privat-Mord), committed by burning enemies, not the sentence

of a regularly constituted Sanhedrin. The most prominent men who

represented the Law, such as Gamaliel, Jochanan b. Zakkai, and others,

were not present.' The defence of the proceedings as a right and legal

procedure by the Sanhedrin, as made by Salvador (Gesch. d. Mos.

Instit. [German Transl.] vol. ii. pp. 67-79) is, from the critical

point of view, so unsatisfactory, that I can only wonder the learned

Saalschütz should, even under the influence of Jewish prejudice, have

extended to it his protection (Mos. Recht, pp. 623-626). At the same

time, the refutation of Salvador by M. Dupin (reproduced as App. to

vol. iii. of the German translation of Salvador) is as superficial as

the original attack. Cohen's 'Les Déicides' is a mere party-book which

deserves not serious consideration. Grätz (Gesch. d. Juden, iii. p.

244) evades the question.

[12408]5916 In Sanh. i. 6, the reasons for the various numbers are

given; but we can scarcely regard them as historical.

[12409]5917 Various modern writers have of late denied the existence

of tribunals of three. But the whole weight of evidence is against

them. A number of passages might here be quoted, but the reader may be

generally referred to the treatment of the subject in Selden, de

Synedriis, ii. c. 5, and especially to Maimonides, Hilkh. Sanh.

[12410]5918 In the case of a Mumcheh or admitted authority, even one

Judge could in certain civil cases pronounce sentence (Sanh. 2 b; 3

a).

[12411]5919 In Jerusalem there were said to have been two such

tribunals; one whose locale was at the entrance to the Temple-Court,

the other at that to the inner or Priest-Court.

[12412]5920 It is a mistake to identify these with the four shops on

the Mount of Olives. They were the Temple-shops previously described.

[12413]5921 Sanh. 2 a; Maim. Sanh. iv. 1-3.

[12414]5922 Sanh. 2 a; 15 b.

[12415]5923 Sanh. 88 b; Maim. u. s. ch. ii. 7, 8.

[12416]5924 1 Tim. iii.; Tit. i.

[12417]5925 Tit. i. 5.

[12418]5926 Kuene, and after him Schürer (Neutest. Zeitgesch.) have

denied the existence of this arrangement, but, as I think, on quite

insufficient grounds. They have been answered by D. Hoffmann (see the

very able ed. of the Pirqé Abhoth, by that learned and accurate

scholar, Prof. Strack of Berlin, p. 9, notes). Comp. also Levy,

Neuhebr. Worterb., s. v. Schürer has to account for other passages

besides those which he quotes (p. 413) - notably for the very clear

statement in Chag. ii. 2.

[12419]5927 Bemidb. R. 1.

[12420]5928 Kidd, 40 a.

[12421]5929 Ab Zar. 8 b.

[12422]5930 There is truly not a tittle of evidence for the assumption

of commentators, that Christ was led from the Palace of Caiaphas into

the Council-Chamber. The whole proceedings took place in the former,

and from it Christ was brought to Pilate (St. John xviii. 28).

[12423]5931 Shabb. 9 b

[12424]5932 The ordinary Court-hours were from after morning-service

till the time of the meal (Sabb. 10 a).

[12425]5933 Sanh. 32 a.

[12426]5934 Bets. 36.

[12427]5935 Baba K. 113 a.

[12428]5936 In civil cases at least no process was carried on in the

months of Nisan and Tishri (comp. Bloch, Civil Process-Ordnung).

[12429]5937 Sanh. xi. 4; Tos. Sanh. xi. 6.

[12430]5938 The details on these points are given in most

commentaries. (Comp. the Tractate Sanhedrin and the Gemara on it.) In

a capital cause not only would the formal and very solemn warning

charge against false testimony have been addressed to the witnesses,

but the latter would be tested by the threefold process known as

Chaqiroth, Derishoth, and Bediqoth; the former two referring to

questions on the main points, the third or secondary points in the

evidence.

[12431]5939 St. Matt. xxvi. 66.

[12432]5940 St. Mark xiv. 64: 'condemned Him to be worthy of death.'

[12433]5941 St. John xviii.29, 30.

[12434]5942 St. Luke xxiii. 2; St. Matt. xxvii. 12.

[12435]5943 St. John xviii. 31.

[12436]5944 The Pharisaic Law of witness was very peculiar. Witnesses

who contradicted each other were not considered in Rabbinic Law as

false witnesses, in the sense of being punishable. Nor would they be

so, even if an alibi of the accused were proved - only if the alibi of

the witnesses themselves were proved (comp. Bähr, Gesetz u. Falsche

Zeug., pp. 29, &c.). Thus the 'Story of Susanna' is bad in Jewish Law,

unless, as Geiger supposes, it embodies an earlier mode of procedure

in Jewish criminal jurisprudence.

[12437]5945 St. John ii. 18, 19.

[12438]5946 Critically also this is of interest. The first Purgation

of the Temple is not related by the Synoptists, but they here confirm

St. John's account of it. On the other hand, St. John's account of the

Temple purgation confirms that of the Temple-purgation which St. John

does not relate. And the evidence is the stronger, that the two sets

of accounts are manifestly independent of each other, and that of the

Fourth Gospel younger than that of the Synoptists.

[12439]5947 St. Mark.

[12440]5948 St. Matt.

[12441]5949 At the same time neither this, nor even the later charge

of 'blasphemy,' would have made Jesus what was technically called

either a Massith, or a Maddiach. The former is described as an

individual who privately seduces private individuals into idolatry

(Sanh. vii. 10; Jer. Yeb. 15 d), it being added that he speaks with a

loud voice (in praise of some false god) and uses the Holy (Hebr.)

language (Jer. Sanh. 25 d). On the other hand, the Maddiach is one who

publicly seduces the people to idolatry, using, as it is added, the

language spoken commonly by the people. The two Talmudic stories, that

witnesses had lain in wait to hear and report the utterances of Christ

(Sanh. 67 a), and that forty days before His execution heralds had

summoned any exculpatory evidence in His favour (Sanh. 43 a), may be

dismissed without comment.

[12442]5950 Besides other movements, we refer here specially to that

under Theudas, who led out some 400 persons under promise of dividing

Jordan, when both he and his adherents were cut down by the Romans

(Jos. Ant. xx. 5. 1). At a later time an Egyptian Jew gathered 3,000

or 4,000 on the Mount of Olives, promising to cast down the walls of

Jerusalem by the breath of his mouth (u. s. xx. 8, 6). Another

impostor of that kind was Simon of Cyprus (u. s. xx. 7. 2), and, of

course, Bar Kokhabh.

[12443]5951 Deut. xvii. 6.

[12444]5952 Rosh haSh. ii. 6.

[12445]5953 It seems, to say the least, strange to explain the

expression 'led Him into their sun_drion' as referring to the regular

Council-chamber (St. Luke xxii. 66).

[12446]5954 At the same time I confess myself in no way anxious about

an accord of details and circumstances. When, admittedly the facts

entirely agree - nay, in such case, the accord of facts would be only

the more striking.

[12447]5955 St. Matt. xxii. 41-46.

[12448]5956 St. Luke xxii. 67, 68; the clause 'nor let Me go' is

spurious.

[12449]5957 Sanh. vii. 5 Moed K. 26 a.

[12450]5958 Other designations for it are Chillul haShem, and,

euphemistically, Birkhath haShem.

[12451]5959 But this does not seem to me to have been the actual

sentence. In regard to the latter, see the formalities detailed in

Sanh. iii. 7.

[12452]5960 {hebrew}

[12453]5961 Tanchuma Piqqudey, ed. Warsh. i. p. 132 b.

[12454]5962 Sanch. iii. 7.

[12455]5963 'The President of the Judges said: "Such an one, thou ...

art guilty"' (Sanh. iii. 7).

[12456]5964 Jer. Yoma 44 c.

[12457]5965 Have we advanced much beyond this, when the Parisian

democracy can inscribe on its banners such words as 'Ecrasez l'Infâme'

- and, horrible to relate it, teach its little children to bring to

this its floral offerings?

[12458]5966 Keth 37 b, top.

[12459]5967 St. Luke.

[12460]5968 There is not any indication in the text that, as

Commentators suppose, Christ was at that moment led bound across the

Court; nor, indeed, that till the morning He was at all removed from

near the place where He had been examined.

[12461]5969 This is so expressly stated in St. John xviii. 28, that it

is difficult to understand whence the notion has been derived that the

Council assembled in their ordinary council-chamber.

[12462]5970 St. John xviii. 29, 30.

[12463]5971 St. Luke xxiii. 2.

[12464]5972 Comp. St. Matt. xxvii. 1 with. xxvi. 59, where the words

'and elders' must be struck out; and St. Mark xv. 1 with xiv. 55.

[12465]5973 These are the Urim and Thummim of the 'anima naturaliter

Christiana.'

[12466]5974 This is, of course, not the traditional site, nor yet that

which was formerly in favour. But as the Palace of Herod undoubtedly

became (as all royal residences) the property of the State, and as we

have distinct evidence that Roman Procurators resided there, and took

their seat in front of that Palace on a raised pavement to pronounce

judgment (Jos. War ii. 14. 8; comp. Philo, ad Caj. § 38), the

inference is obvious, that Pilate, especially as he was accompanied by

his wife, resided there also.

[12467]5975 The various reasons for this need not here be discussed.

As these pages are passing through the press (for a second edition) my

attention has been called to Dr. Schürer's brochure ('Ueber fage_n t_

p_sca,' Giessen, 1883), intended to controvert the interpretation of

St. John xviii. 28, given in the text. This is not the place to enter

on the subject at length. But I venture to think that, with all his

learning, Dr. Schürer has not quite met the case, nor fully answered

the argument as put by Kirchner and Wieseler. Putting aside any

argument from the supposed later date of the 'Priest-Codex,' as

compared with Deuter., and indeed the purely Biblical argument, since

the question is as to the views entertained in the time of Christ,

Schürer argues: 1. That the Chagigah was not designated by the term

Pesach. 2. That the defilement from entering a heathen house would not

have ceased in the evening (so as to allow them to eat the Passover),

but have lasted for seven days, as being connected with the suspicion

that an abortus - i.e. a dead body - might be buried in the house. On

the first point we refer to Note 1 on the next page, only adding that,

with all his ingenuity, Schürer has not met all the passages adduced

on the other side, and that the view advocated in the text is that

adopted by many Jewish scholars.

The argument on the second point is even more unsatisfactory. The

defilement from entering the Prætorium, which the Sanhedrists dreaded,

might be - or rather, in this case must have been - due to other

causes than that the house might contain an abortus or a dead body.

And of such many may be conceived, connected either with the suspected

presence of an idol in the house or with contact with an idolator. It

is, indeed, true that Ohol. xviii. 7 refers to the suspicion of a

buried abortus as the cause of regarding the houses of Gentiles as

defiled; but even so, it would be too much to suppose that a bare

suspicion of this kind would make a man unclean for seven days. For

this it would have been necessary that the dead body was actually

within the house entered, or that what contained it had been touched.

But there is another and weightier consideration. Ohol. xviii. 7 is

not so indefinite as Dr. Schürer implies. It contains a most important

limitation. In order to make a house thus defiled (from suspicion of

an abortus buried in it), it states that the house must have been

inhabited by the heathen for forty days, and even so the custody of a

Jewish servant or maid would have rendered needless a bediqah, or

investigation (to clear the house of suspicion). Evidently, the

Prætorium would not have fallen under the category contemplated in

Ohol. xviii. 7, even if (which we are not prepared to admit) such a

case would have involved a defilement of seven days. Thus Schürer's

argument falls to the ground. Lastly, although the Chagigah could only

be brought by the offerer in person, the Paschal Lamb might be brought

for another person, and then the tebhul yom partake of it. Thus, if

the Sanhedrists had been defiled in the morning they might have eaten

the Pascha at night. Dr. Schürer in his brochure repeatedly appeals to

Delitzsch (Zeitschr. f. Luther. Theol. 1874, pp. 1-4); but there is

nothing in the article of that eminent scholar to bear out the special

contention of Schürer, except that he traces the defilement of heathen

houses to the cause in Ohal.xviii.7. Delitzsch concludes his paper by

pointing to this very case in evidence that the N.T. documents date

from the first, and not the second century of our era.

[12468]5976 Acts x 28.

[12469]5977 Ohol. xviii. 7; Tohar. vii. 3.

[12470]5978 Pes. 92 a.

[12471]5979 Jer. Pes. 36 b, lines 14 and 15 from bottom.

[12472]5980 Deut. xvi. 1-3; 2 Chron. xxxv. 1, 2, 6, 18.

[12473]5981 The subject has been so fully discussed in Wieseler,

Beitr., and in Kirchner, Jüd. Passahfeier, not to speak of many

others, that it seems needless to enter further on the question. No

competent Jewish archæologist would care to deny that 'Pesach' may

refer to the 'Chagigah,' while the motive assigned to the Sanhedrists

by St. John implies, that in this instance it must refer to this, and

not to the Paschal Lamb.

[12474]5982 {hebrew}. But concession was made to those who had

neglected it on the first day to bring it during the festive week,

which in the Feast of Tabernacles was extended to the Octave, and in

that of Weeks (which lasted only one day) over a whole week (see Chag.

9 a; Jer. Chag. 76 c). The Chagigah could not, but the Paschal Lamb

might be offered by a person on behalf of another.

[12475]5983 Most commentators suppose it to have been much earlier. I

have followed the view of Keim.

[12476]5984 Nocens, nisi accusatus fuerit, condemnari non potest. In

regard to the publicity of Roman procedure, comp. Acts xvi. 19; xvii.

6; xviii. 12; xxv. 6; Jos. War ii. 9. 3; 14. 8; 'maxima frequentia

amplissimorum ac sapientissimorum civium adstante' (Cicero).

[12477]5985 Significantly the word is the same as that in reference to

the betrayal of Judas.

[12478]5986 St. Matt. xxvii. 18.

[12479]5987 Acts xxii. 30; xxii. 28, 29; xxiv. 9, 18-20.

[12480]5988 Nicephorus, H. E. i. 30.

[12481]5989 Gospel according to Nicod. ch. ii.

[12482]5990 Staturnius (Jos. Ant. xviii. 3, 5).

[12483]5991 The apparently strange statement, St. John xviii. 32,

affords another undesigned confirmation of the Jewish authorship of

the Fourth Gospel. It seems to imply, that the Sanhedrin might have

found a mode of putting Jesus to death in the same informal manner in

which Stephen was killed and they sought to destroy Paul. The Jewish

law recognised a form of procedure, or rather a want of procedure,

when a person caught in flagrante delicto of blasphemy might be done

to death without further inquiry.

[12484]5992 St. Luke xxii. 2, 3.

[12485]5993 St. John xviii. 37.

[12486]5994 St. Luke xxiii. 6-12.

[12487]5995 _n_pemyen. Meyer marks this as the technical term in

handing over a criminal to the proper judicial authority.

[12488]5996 It is worse than idle - it is trifling to ask, whence the

Evangelists derived their accounts. As if those things had been done

in a corner, or none of those who now were guilty had afterwards

become disciples!

[12489]5997 St. Luke ix. 7-9.

[12490]5998 It is impossible to say, whether 'the gorgeous apparel' in

which Herod arrayed Christ was purple, or white. Certainly it was not,

as Bishop Haneberg suggests (Relig. Alterth. p. 554), an old

high-priestly garment of the Maccabees.

[12491]5999 St. Matt. xxvii. 3-10.

[12492]6000 St Luke xxiii. 13; comp. St. Matt. xxvii. 17.

[12493]6001 The verb designating Scriptural repentance is metano_w;

that here used is metam_lomai, as in St. Matt. xxi. 29, as in St.

Matt. xxi. 29, 32; 2 Cor. vii. 8; Heb. vii. 21.

[12494]6002 The expression na_v is always used in the N.T. of the

Sanctuary itself, and not of the outer courts; but it would include

the Court of the Priests, where the sacrifices were offered.

[12495]6003 I so understand the __yav of St. Matt. xxvii. 5.

[12496]6004 _nec_rjse.

[12497]6005 The topographical notice is based on Bädeker-Socin's

Palästina, pp. 114-116.

[12498]6006 This, not with any idea that his death would expiate for

his sin. No such idea attached to suicide among the Jews.

[12499]6007 Acts i. 18. 19.

[12500]6008 As presented in the text, there is no real divergence

between the accounts of St. Matthew and the Book of Acts. Keim has

formulated the supposed differences under five particulars, which are

discussed seriatim by Nebe, Leidensgesch. vol. ii. pp. 12 &c.

[12501]6009 Acts. i. 18.

[12502]6010 St. Matt. xxvii, 7.

[12503]6011 Jer. xix.

[12504]6012 The alterations in the words quoted are, as previously

explained, a 'targuming' of them.

[12505]6013 Most Commentators, however, regard the word 'Jeremy' as a

lapse of memory, or an oversight by the Evangelist, or else as a very

early error of transcription. Other explanations (more or less

unsatisfactory) may be seen in the commentaries. Böhl (Alttest. Cit.

p. 78), following Valckenar, thinks the mistake arose from confounding

Zriou (written abbreviated) with Iriou. But the whole question is of

no real importance.

[12506]6014 According to the better reading of St. Mark xv. 8 'the

multitude was going up.'

[12507]6015 How can they who regard the Johannine account as implying

that Christ was crucified on the morning before the Passover, explain

the words of St. John, 'Ye have a custom, that I should release unto

you one at the Passover?'

[12508]6016 The ancient reading 'Jesus Bar-Abbas' is not sufficiently

attested to be adopted.

[12509]6017 St. Mark xi. 11.

[12510]6018 St. Matt. xxvii. 24, 25.

[12511]6019 See the quotations in Wetstein, ad loc., and Nebe, u. s.

p. 104.

[12512]6020 _q_ov _p_ to_ a_matov is a Hebraism = {hebrew}.

[12513]6021 In the LXX. version.

[12514]6022 Sot. ix. 6.

[12515]6023 The Evangelist put what he said into the well-remembered

Old Testament words.

[12516]6024 Jos. War 14. 8. 9.

[12517]6025 St. John xix. 1, following.

[12518]6026 St. John xix.4, following.

[12519]6027 The Sagum, or short woollen military cloak, scarlet or

purple (the two colours are often confounded, comp. Wetstein ad loc.),

fastened by a clasp on the right shoulder. It was also worn by Roman

generals, and sometimes (in more costly form and material) presented

to foreign kings.

[12520]6028 Origen already marks in this a notable breach of military

discipline. Keim (Jesu von Naz. iii. 2, pp. 393, &c.) gives a terribly

graphic and realistic account of the whole scene. The soldiers were,

as mostly in the provinces, chiefly provincials - in this case,

probably Syrians. They were all the more bitterly hostile to the Jews

(Jos. Ant. xix. 9. 1; War ii. 12, 1. 2; v. 11, 1 - there also derision

at execution). A strange illustration of the scene is afforded by what

happened only a few years afterwards at Alexandria, when the people in

derision of King Agrippa I., arrayed a well-known maniac (Karabas) in

a common door-mat, put a papyrus crown on his head, and a reed in his

hand, and saluted him 'Maris,' lord (Philo, In Flacc. ed. Mang. ii.

522; Wetstein, N.T, i. p. 535). On all the classical illustrations and

corroborations of the whole proceedings in every detail, the reader

should consult Wetstein, ad loc.

[12521]6029 This is the proper order of the words. To 'release' is put

first to induce Christ to speak.

[12522]6030 The derivation of Wünsche ({hebrew}) 'back of the Temple,'

is on every ground to be rejected. Gabbath ({hebrew}) or Gabbetha

means 'a rounded height.' It occurs also as the name of a town (Jer.

Taan. 69 b).

[12523]6031 I have simply rendered the paraskeu_ to_ p_sca by Friday

in Passover-week. The evidence for regarding paraskeu_, in the

Gospels, as the terminus technicus for Friday, has been often set

forth. See Kirchner, D. jud. Passahf. pp. 47, &c.

[12524]6032 The hour ('about the sixth') could only refer to when the

process was taken in hand.

[12525]6033 I ought to mention that the verb _k_qisen in St. John xix.

13, has been taken by some critics in the transitive sense: 'Pilate .

. . brought Jesus forth and seated Him in the judgment-seat,' implying

an act of mock-homage on the part of Pilate when, in presenting to the

Jews their King, he placed Him on the judgment-seat. Ingenious as the

suggestion is, and in some measure supported, it does not accord with

the whole tenour of the narrative.

[12526]6034 St. John xix. 16.

[12527]6035 ver. 6.

[12528]6036 St. Mark xv. 95.

[12529]6037 St. John xix. 25.

[12530]6038 The evidence is collected by Nebe, u. s. vol. ii. p. 166,

167.

[12531]6039 Keim seems to imagine that, not indeed the whole 'cohort,'

but a manipulus of about 120, or a centuria of about 60 men,

accompanied the procession. But of this there is not evidence, and all

indications lead to a contrary inference.

[12532]6040 Tradition calls him Longinus.

[12533]6041 This was the Jewish practice also (Sanh. vi. 2). At the

same time it must be remembered, that this was chiefly to elicit

testimony in favour of the criminal, when the execution would be

immediately arrested; and also that, as the Sanhedrin had, for

centuries before the redaction of the Mishnah, been deprived of the

power of life and death, such descriptions read very like ideal

arrangements. But the practice seems also to have been Roman ('per

præconem pronunciati').

[12534]6042 Such as concerning Veronica and the bearing of the

Virgin-Mother (Acta Pilati, vii. x.; Mors Pilati [Tischendorf] 433).

[12535]6043 Jos. Ant. xiii. 14, 2; War i, 4, 6.

[12536]6044 With application of Lev. xix. 26, Sanh. 63 a.

[12537]6045 Sanh. vi. 4.

[12538]6046 This explains how 'the witnesses' at the stoning of St.

Stephen laid down their garments at the feet of Paul.

[12539]6047 Sanh. vi. 3, 4.

[12540]6048 This opinion, however, was not shared by the majority of

Rabbis. But, as already stated, all those notices are rather ideal

than real.

[12541]6049 According to the Rabbis, when we read in Scripture

generally of the punishment of death, this refers to the lighest, or

strangulation (Sanh. 52 b). Another mode of execution reads like

something between immuring alive and starvation (Sanh. 81 b) -

something like the manner in which in the Middle Ages people were

starved to death.

[12542]6050 Heb. xiii 12.

[12543]6051 St. John xix. 20.

[12544]6052 This view was first propounded by Thenius, and afterwards

advocated by Furrer (Wander. d. Paläst, pp. 70, &c.), but afterwards

given up by him. As to the locality, comp. 'Quart. Statement of Pal.

Explor. Fund,' Oct. 1881, pp.317-319; Conder's 'Handbook to the

Bible,' pp. 355, 356, and for the description of Jeremiah's Grotto,

Bäedeker-Socin, u. s. p. 126. Of course, proof is in the nature of

things impossible; yet to me this seems the most sacred and precious

locality in Jerusalem.

[12545]6053 St. Luke.

[12546]6054 I cannot conceive any sufficient ground, why Keim should

deny the historical character of this trait. Surely, on Keim's own

principles, the circumstance, that only St. Luke records it, would not

warrant this inference. On the other hand, it may be characterised as

perhaps one of the most natural incidents in the narrative.

[12547]6055 I can only account for it by the prejudices of party

feeling, that one of such fine and sympathetic tact as Keim should so

strangely have missed this, and imputed, especially to St. John, a

desire of obscuring the element of weakness and forsakenness (u. s. p.

401).

[12548]6056 See vol. i. pp. 62, 63, 119.

[12549]6057 Certainly not 'from the field.' The original, it is now

generally admitted, does not mean this, and, as Wieseler aptly remarks

(Beitr. p. 267) a person would scarcely return from labour in the

field at nine o'clock in the morning (St. Mark xv. 25).

[12550]6058 This is shown in Tosaph. to Chag. 17 b, and admitted by

all Rabbinic writers. (See Hoffmann, Abh. u.d. Pentat. Ges. p. 66.)

[12551]6059 St. Mark xv. 21.

[12552]6060 Acts xiii. 1; Rom. xvi. 13.

[12553]6061 xv. 22.

[12554]6062 f_rousin.

[12555]6063 St. Luke xxiii. 27-31.

[12556]6064 _k_ptonto ka_ _qr_noun a_t_n. Gerhard remarks: 'ut

k_ptesqai sive plangere est manuum (Bengel: pertinet ad gestus), ita

qrjne_n est oris et oculorum (Bengel: ad, fletum et vocem flebilem).'

[12557]6065 as St. Luke also records.

[12558]6066 Hos. ix. 14.

[12559]6067 War vi. 3. 4.

[12560]6068 Hos. x. 8.

[12561]6069 Rev. vi. 10.

[12562]6070 But Nebe denies the use of ladders, and, in general, tries

to prove by numerous quotations that the whole Cross was first

erected, and then the Sufferer lifted up to it, and, only after that,

the nails fastened into His Arms and Feet. Strange though it may seem,

the question cannot be absolutely decided.

[12563]6071 Mass Sem. ii. 9; Bemid. R. 10.

[12564]6072 Sanh. 43 a.

[12565]6073 The two alleged discrepancies, between St. Matthew and St.

Mark, though, even if they did exist, scarcely worth mention, may be

thus explained: 1. If St. Matthew wrote 'vinegar' (although the best

MSS. read 'wine'), he, no doubt, so translated literally the word

Chomets ({hebrew}) which, though literally, 'vinegar,' refers to an

inferior kind of wine which was often mixed (comp. Pes. 42 b). 2. If

our Greek text of St. Matthew speaks of 'wormwood' (as in the LXX.) -

not 'gall' - and St. Mark of myrrh, we must remember, that both may

have been regarded as stupefying, perhaps both used, and that possibly

the mistake may have arisen from the similarity of words and their

writing - Lebhonah, 'myrrh,' Laanah, 'wormwood' - when {hebrew} may

have passed into {hebrew} - the {hebrew} into {hebrew}.

[12566]6074 Sepp, vol. vi. p. 336, recalls the execution of Savonarola

between Fra Silvestro and Fra Domenico, and the taunt of his enemies:

'Now, brother!'

[12567]6075 Professor Westcott beautifully remarks: These three

languages gathered up the result of the religious, the social, the

intellectual preparation for Christ, and in each witness was given to

His office.

[12568]6076 See next page, note 1.

[12569]6077 The better reading there is, _ basile_v t_n HIouda_wn

o_tov.

[12570]6078 H.E. v. 1.

[12571]6079 Probably it would read Jeshu han-Notsri malka dihudaey

({hebrew} - or else {hebrew} - {hebrew}). Both have four words and, in

all, twenty letters. The Latin inscription (St. Matthew) would be, Hic

est Jesus Rex Judæorum - five words and twenty-two letters. It will be

seen how each would fill a line of about the same length. The notice

of the three languages in St. Luke is spurious. We retain the textus

receptus of St. John xix. 19, as in any case it seems most unlikely

that Pilate would have placed the Latin in the middle and not at the

top. The Aramæan would stand last.

[12572]6080 St. John xix. 21, 22.

[12573]6081 Comp. here the account of St. Matt. (xxvii. 39-43) and of

the other Synoptists.

[12574]6082 Thus, the notice in St. John xix. 21, 22, would be

parenthetic, chronologically belonging to an earlier part, and

inserted here for the sake of historical connection.

[12575]6083 It is generally stated, that this was the common Roman

custom. But of this there is no evidence, and in later times it was

expressly forbidden (Ulpianus, Digest. xiviii. 20, 6). I cannot see

how Keim, and, after him, Nebe, should infer from this as certain,

that the law had formerly been the opposite.

[12576]6084 Strangely, I confess, to my thinking, they seem to have

been a source of anxiety and distress to St. Augustine, that he might

find their true conciliation.

[12577]6085 It is deeply significant that the dress of the priests was

not sewed but woven (Zehbach. 88 a), and especially so that of the

High-Priest (Yoma 72 b). According to tradition, during the seven days

of consecration, Moses ministered in a seamless white dress, woven

throughout. (Taan. 11 b.)

[12578]6086 It is impossible to determine in what manner this was

done. The various modes of casting the lot are described by Adam,

Roman Antiq. pp. 397-399. Possibly, however, it was much more simple

and rough than any of these.

[12579]6087 Ps. xxii. 18.

[12580]6088 Strauss calls Ps. xxii. 'the programme of the Passion of

Christ.' We may accept the description, though not in his sense.

[12581]6089 The Scripture quotation in the t. r. of St. Matthew, and,

in all probability, that also in St. Mark, is spurious.

[12582]6090 Altogether there are fifteen such quotations in the Fourth

Gospel. Of these at most only two (St. John vi. 31 and vii. 38) could

be described as Alexandrian in character, the rest are truly Judaic.

[12583]6091 The genuineness of these words has been called in

question. But alike external and internal evidence demands their

retention.

[12584]6092 Comp. Acts iii. 17, 1 Cor. ii. 8.

[12585]6093 It would be presumptuous to seek to determine how far that

prayer extended. Generally - I agree with Nebe - to all (Gentiles and

Jews) who, in their participation in the sufferings inflicted on

Jesus, acted in ignorance.

[12586]6094 In reference to this St. Augustine writes: 'Sanguinem

Christi, quem sævientes fuderunt, credentes biberunt.' The question

why Christ did not Himself forgive, but appeal for it to the Father,

is best answered by the consideration, that it was really a crimen

læsæ majestatis against the Father, and that the vindication of the

Son lay with God the Father.

[12587]6095 St. Matthew.

[12588]6096 St. Luke.

[12589]6097 The two Evangelists designate by this very word the

bearing of the passersby, rendered in the A.V. 'reviled' and 'railed.'

[12590]6098 The peculiarities in it are (besides the titulus): what

passed on the procession to Golgotha (St. Luke xxiii. 27-31); the

prayer, when affixed to the Cross (ver. 34 a); the bearing of the

soldiers (vv. 36, 37); the conversion of the penitent thief; and the

last words on the Cross (ver. 46).

[12591]6099 There is no evidence, that the Centurion was still present

when the soldier 'came' to pierce the Saviour's side (St. John xix.

31-37).

[12592]6100 So from the peculiar details and O.T. quotations.

[12593]6101 St. Matt. xxvii. 42.

[12594]6102 The word 'if' (if He) in our A.V. is spurious.

[12595]6103 This is the literal rendering. The 'will have Him' = has

pleasure in Him, like the German: 'Wenn Er Ihn will.'

[12596]6104 Ps. xxii.

[12597]6105 See Appendix IX.

[12598]6106 Ps. xxii. 7.

[12599]6107 Yalkut on Is. lx. vol. ii. p. 56 d, lines 12 &c, from

bottom.

[12600]6108 Meyer actually commits himself to the statement, that Ps.

xxii. was not Messianically applied by the Jews. Other writers follow

his lead. The objection, that the Sanhedrists could not have quoted

this verse, as it would have branded them as the wicked persions

described in the Psalm, has no force when we remember the loose way in

which the Jews were in the habit of quoting the Old Testament.

[12601]6109 The words, 'with them,' in St. Luke xxiii. 35, are

spurious.

[12602]6110 St. Mark introduces the mocking speeches (xv. 29) by the

particle o__ ('Ah') which occurs only here in the N.T. It is evidently

the Latin 'Vah,' an exclamation of ironical admiration. (See Bengel

and Nebe, ad loc.) The words literally were: 'Ha! the downbreaker of

the sanctuary and upbuilding it in three days, save Thyself.' Except

the introductory particle and the order of the words, the words are

the same in St. Matthew. The _ katal_wn is used in the sense of a

substantive (comp. Winer, Gram. p. 122, and especially p. 316).

[12603]6111 The language of St. Matthew and St. Mark is quite general,

and refers to 'the thieves;' that of St. Luke is precise and detailed.

But I cannot agree with those who, for the sake of 'harmony,'

represent the penitent thief as joining in his comrade's blasphemy

before turning to Christ. I do not deny, that such a sudden change

might have taken place; but there is no evidence for it in the text,

and the supposition of the penitent thief first blaspheming gives rise

to many incongruities, and does not seem to fit into the text.

[12604]6112 Tradition names the impenitent thief Gestas, which Keim

identifies with stegan_v, silenced, hardened - although the derivation

seems to me forced. The penitent thief is called Dysmas, which I would

propose to derive from dusm_ in the sense of 'the setting,' viz, of

the sun: he who turns to the setting sun. Sepp very fancifully regards

the penitent thief as a Greek (Japhetisch), the impenitent as a negro.

[12605]6113 So according to the right reading.

[12606]6114 See the quotations in Nebe, ii. 258.

[12607]6115 'Dost not thou even fear God, seeing thou art in the same

condemnation?' Condemnation here means that to which one is condemned:

the sufferings of the cross; and the expostulation is: Suffering as

thou art like Him and me, canst thou join in the jeers of the crowd?

Dost thou not even fear God - should not fear of Him now creep over

thy soul, or at least prevent thee from insulting the dying Sufferer?

And this all the more, since the circumstances are as immediately

afterwards described.

[12608]6116 Fully to understand it, we ought to realise what would be

the Jewish ideas of the 'penitent thief,' and what his understanding

of the words of Christ. Broadly, one would say, that as a Jew he would

expect that his 'death would be expiation of his sins.' Thoughts of

need of forgiveness through the Messiah would not therefore come to

him. But the words of Christ must have supplied all this. Again when

Christ spoke of 'Paradise,' His hearer would naturally understand that

part of Hades in which the spirits of the righteous dwelt till the

Ressurection. On both these points there are so many passages in

Rabbinic writings tht it is needless to quote (see for ex. Westein, ad

loc., and our remarks on the Parable of Lazarus and Dives). Indeed,

the prayer: let my death be the expiation of my sins, is still in the

Jewish office for the dying, and the underlying dogma is firmly rooted

in Rabbinic belief. The words of our Lord, so far from encouraging

this belief, would teach him that admission to Paradise was to be

granted by Christ. It is scarcely necessary to add, that Christ's

words in no way encouraged the realistic conceptions which Judaism

attached to Paradise ({hebrew}). In Biblical Hebrew the word is used

for a choice garden: in Eccl. ii. 5; Cant. iv. 13; Nehem. ii. 8. But

in the LXX. and the Apocr. the word is already used in our sense of

Paradise. Lastly, nothing which our Lord had said to the 'penitent

thief' about being 'to-day' with Him in Paradise, is in any way

inconsistent with, rather confirms, the doctrine of the Descent into

Hades.

[12609]6117 St. John xix. 2-16.

[12610]6118 vv. 17-24.

[12611]6119 The first impression left is, of course, that the

'brothers' of Jesus were not yet, at least in the full sense,

believers. But this does not by any means necessarily follow, since

both the presence of John under the Cross, and even his outward

circumstances, might point him out as the most fit custodian of the

Virgin-Mother. At the same time it seems the more likely supposition,

that the brothers of Jesus were converted by the appearance to James

of the Risen One (1 Cor. xv. 7).

[12612]6120 St. John xix. 25-27.

[12613]6121 This view is now generally adopted.

[12614]6122 St. Matt. xxvii. 55.

[12615]6123 St. Mark xv. 40, 41.

[12616]6124 There is, of course, the difficulty that Judas (Lebbæus)

and Simon Zelotes are not here mentioned as her sons. But they may

have been her stepheons, or there may have other reasons for the

omission. 'Judas of James' could scarcely have been the son of James,

and Simon is expressly mentioned by Hegesippus as the son of Clopas.

[12617]6125 St. Mark.

[12618]6126 St. Matthew.

[12619]6127 Hegesippus in Euseb. H.E. iii. 11 and iv. 22.

[12620]6128 Alphæus and Clopas are the same name. The first occurs in

the Babylon Talmud as Ilphai, or Ilpha ({hebrew}), as in R. haSh. 17

b, and often; the other in the Jerusalem Talmud as Chilphai

({hebrew}), as for ex. in Jer. B. Kama 7 a.

[12621]6129 I regard the Simon Zelotes of the list of Apostles as the

Simon son of Clopas, or Alphæus, of Hegesippus - first, because of his

position in the lists of the Apostles along with the two other sons of

Alphæus; secondly, because, as there were only two prominent Simons in

the N.T. (the brother of the Lord, and Zelotes), and Hegesippus

mentions him as the son of Clopas, it follows that the Simon son of

Clopas was Simon Zelotes. Levi Matthew was, indeed, also a son of

Alphæus, but we regard this as another Clopas than the husband of

Mary.

[12622]6130 Incongruous though the interruption be, we cannot help

noticing that the introduction of such a scene seems inconsistent with

the whole theory of an Ephesian authorship of the Fourth Gospel. On

the other hand, it displays evidence of the true human interest of an

actor in the scene.

[12623]6131 Nothing is really known of the later history of the

Blessed Virgin.

[12624]6132 St. John xix. 28.

[12625]6133 I do not think the testimony of Phlegon, as quoted by

Eusebius, is available (see the discussion in Wieseler's Synopse, p.

387, note 1). Still, if the astronomical calculations of Ideler and

Wurm are correct, 'the eclipse' recorded by Phlegon [whether 'eclipse'

in the scientific sense, or 'darkness,'] would have taken place in the

very year of our Lord's death, A.D. 29, but, as they reckon, on

November 24. I do not posses the special knowledge requisite to verify

these calculations; but that it is described by Phlegon as an

'eclipse' - which this could not have been - does not necessarily

invalidate the argument, since he might have used the term

inaccurately. It is in this sense that St. Luke (xxiii. 45) uses the

verb - that is, if we adopt the amended reading. What Nebe writes on

this subject (vol. ii. p. 301), and the illustrations of the popular

use of the word from Pliny and Plutarch, deserve the most serious

consideration. But, I repeat, I cannot attach weight in this argument

to such testimonies, nor yet to the sayings of Origen, Tertullian,

&c., nor to the Acta Pilati (the ecclesiastical testimonies are

discussed by Nebe, u. s. p. 299).

[12626]6134 St. Matt. xxvii. 51.

[12627]6135 There are frequent notices in classical writers of

eclipses preceding disastrous events or the death of great men, such

as of Cæsar (Nebe, u. s. p. 300). But these were, if correctly

related, eclipses in the true sense, and, as such, natural events,

having in no way a supernatural bearing, and hence in no sense

analogous to this 'darkness' at the Crucifixion.

[12628]6136 So Strauss (after Wetstein) and even Keim. Painful as

controversy is in connection with the last hours of Jesus, I would not

have shrunk from contesting the positions of Keim, if I had not felt

that every unprejudiced person must see, that most of them are mere

assertions, without an attempt at anything like historical evidence.

[12629]6137 Strauss (ii. p. 556), and more fully Keim (iii. p. 438,

Note 3), quote Joel ii. 10, 31; Amos viii. 9; Is. xiii. 10; 1. 3; Job

ix. 7; Jer. xv. 9. Of these passages some have no bearing, however

remote, on the subject, while the others refer not to the Messiah but

to the final judgement.

[12630]6138 To be quite fair, I will refer to all the passages quoted

in connection with the darkening of the sun as a token of mourning.

The first (quoted by Wetstein) is from the Midrash on Lament. iii. 28

(ed. Warsh. p. 72 a). But the passage, evidently a highly figurative

one, refers to the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of

Israel, and, besides the darkening of the sun, moon, and stars (not

the sun only), refers to a realistic fulfilment of Nah. i. 3 and

Lament. iii. 28 in God's walking in dust and keeping silence. The

second quotation of Wetstein, that when a great Rabbi dies it is as

portentous as if the sun went down at midday - has manifestly no

bearing whatever on the matter in hand (though Strauss adduces it).

The last and only quotation really worth mention is from Sukk. 29 a.

In a somewhat lengthened statement there, the meaning of an

obscuration of the sun or moon is discussed. I have here to remark (1)

that these phenomena are regarded as 'signs' in the sense of

betokening coming judgments, such as war, famine, &c., and that these

are supposed to affect various nations according as the eclipse is

towards the rising or setting of the sun. The passage therefore can

have no possible connection with such a phenomenon as the death of

Messiah. (2) This is further confirmed by the enumeration of certain

sins for which heavenly luminaries are eclipsed. Some are not fit for

mention, while others are such as false witness-bearing, the needless

cutting down of fruit-trees, &c. (3) But the unfairness, as well as

the inaptitude, of the quotation appears from this, that only the

beginning of the passage is quoted (Strauss and Keim): 'At a time when

the sun is obscured, it is an evil sign to all the world,' while what

follows is omitted: 'When the sun is obscured, it is an evil sign to

the nations of the world; when the moon is obscured, it is an evil

sign to Israel, because Israel reckons according to the moon, the

nations of the world according to the sun.' And yet Wünsche (Erlauter.

pp. 355, 356) quotes both that which precedes and that which follows

this passage, but leaves out this passage itself. (Comp. Mechilta, p.

3 b.)

[12631]6139 These are described with terrible realism by Keim.

[12632]6140 a_wn_an l_trwsin, Hebr. ix. 12.

[12633]6141 l_tron, St. Matt. xx. 28.

[12634]6142 1 Pet. i. 19.

[12635]6143 Tit. ii. 14.

[12636]6144 _nt_lutron _p_r p_ntwn 1 Tim. ii. 6.

[12637]6145 _p_r p_ntwn, 2 Cor. v. 15.

[12638]6146 Gal. iii. 13.

[12639]6147 So in St. Matthew, according to the best reading. In St.

Mark, Eloi, Eloi [apparently the Syriac form], lema sabachthanei?

Might it be that St. Matthew represents the current Judæan or Galilean

dialect, and St. Mark the Syrian, and that this casts light alike on

the dialects in Palestine at the time of Christ, and even, to some

extent, on the composition of the Gospels, and the land in which they

were written? The Targum renders Ps. xxii. 2: Eli, Eli, metul mah

shebhaqtani? ('On account of what hast Thou forsaken me?').

[12640]6148 This in the extreme agony of soul, not to mark His

Divinity.

[12641]6149 'About the ninth hour.' I cannot bring myself here to

discuss the supposed analogous quotations of Ps. xxii. 1 in Rabbinic

writings. The comparison is equally inapt and irreverent.

[12642]6150 St. John xix. 28.

[12643]6151 The words last quoted can, of course, and have by most

writers been connected with the thirst of Christ, as the fulfilment of

Ps. lxix. 21. But the structure of the sentence leads rather to the

punctuation adopted in the text, while I have the greatest difficulty

in applying Ps. lxix. 21 in the manner proposed, and still more grave

objection to the idea that Christ uttered the words in order to fulfil

the Psalm, although the word 'that' must, as previously shown (p.

503), not be taken in the sense of 'in order that.' There is, of

course, a tertium quid, and the Evangelist may be supposed to have

expressed only his own sense that the Scripture was fulfilled, when he

saw the thirst of the Saviour quenched in the 'vinegar' of the

soldiers. But in that case we should expect the words 'that the

Scripture might be fulfilled,' placed after the 'I thirst.'

[12644]6152 St. Luke xxiii. 49.

[12645]6153 Whether or not he heard the words of the cry.

[12646]6154 Comp. Tristram Nat. Hist. of the Bible, p. 457.

[12647]6155 St. Matt. xxvii. 48, 49; St. Mark xv. 36.

[12648]6156 St. John.

[12649]6157 St. Luke.

[12650]6158 St. Mark xv. 39.

[12651]6159 En pessima,

non tu Pervenis ad Christum,

sed Christus pervenit ad te,

Cui licuit sine morte mori.

Sedulius.

[12652]6160 So according to the better reading.

[12653]6161 Comp. the use of the verb parat_qjmi in such passages as

St. Luke xii. 48; Acts xiv. 23; xx. 32; 1 Tim. i. 18; 2 Tim. ii. 2.

[12654]6162 1 Pet. iii. 18, 19.

[12655]6163 Hist. v. 13.

[12656]6164 Jew. War vi. 5. 3.

[12657]6165 Jer. Yoma 43 c; Yoma 39 b.

[12658]6166 So in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, from which St.

Jerome quotes (in Matt. xxvii. 51, and in a letter to Hedibia) to the

effect, that the huge lintel of the Temple was broken and splintered,

and fell. St. Jerome connects the rending of the Veil with this, and

it would seem an obvious inference to connect again this breaking of

the lintel with an earthquake.

[12659]6167 A story is told in Jewish tradition (Gitt, 56 b, about the

middle; Ber. R. 10; Vayyik. R. 22, and in other places) to the effect

that, among other vilenesses, 'Titus the wicked' had penetrated into

the Sanctuary, and cut through the Veil of the Most Holy Place with

his sword, when blood dropped down. I mention the legend to express my

emphatic protest against the manner in which Dr. Joel (Blicke in d.

Religionsgesch. i. pp. 7, 8, treating of the passage in the Midr. on

Lam. ii. 17) has made use of it. He represents it, as if the Veil had

been rent (Zerreissen des Vorhanges bei d. Tempelzerstörung) - not cut

through by Titus, and on the basis of this misrepresentation has the

boldness to set a legend about Titus side by side with the Evangelic

account of the rending of the Temple-Veil! I write thus strongly

because I am sorry to say that this is by no means the only instance

in which Jewish writers adapt their quotations to controversial

purposes. Joel refers to Dr. Sachs, Beitr. i. p. 29, but that learned

writer draws no such inference from the passage in question.

[12660]6168 Yoma v. 1.

[12661]6169 Yoma 51 b.

[12662]6170 Hilkh. Beth ha-Bech, iv. 2, ed. Amst. vol. iii. p. 149 b.

[12663]6171 Yoma 54 a Kethub. 106 a; Sheqal. viii. 5.

[12664]6172 May this phenomenon account for the early conversion of so

many priests recorded in Acts vi. 7?

[12665]6173 I dare express myself dogmatically on the precise import

of St. Matt. xxvii. 52, 53. Does it mean that they were actually

clothed with the Resurrection-body, or with the body which they had

formerly borne, or that many saints from out Hades appeared to those

who loved them, and with them had waited for the Kingdom, in the forms

which they had known? We know too little of the connection between the

other world and this, and the mode in which the departed may

communicate with those here, to venture on any decided statement,

especially as we take into account the unique circumstances of the

occasion.

[12666]6174 Deut. xxi. 23; comp. Jos. War iv. 5. 2.

[12667]6175 _r_tjsan, they 'asked,' St. John xix. 31.

[12668]6176 Comp. Friedlieb, Archæol. d. Leidensgesch. pp.163-168; but

especially Nebe, u. s. ii. pp. 394, 395.

[12669]6177 Ex. xii. 46; Numb. ix. 12.

[12670]6178 Ps. xxxiv. 20.

[12671]6179 Zech. xii. 10

[12672]6180 Sukk. 52 a.

[12673]6181 Rev. i. 7.

[12674]6182 St. John xx. 27.

[12675]6183 So, with various modifications, which need not here be

detailed, first, Dr. Gruner (Comment. Antiq. Med. de Jesu Christ

Morte, Hal. 1805), who, however, regarded Jesus as not quite dead when

the lance pierced the heart, and, of late, Dr. Stroud (The Physical

Cause of the Death of Christ, 1871), and many interpreters (see Nebe,

u.s. pp. 400, 401).

[12676]6184 But certainly not through a separation of the serum and

the cruor, which is the mark of beginning putrefaction.

[12677]6185 The fullest and most satisfactory physical explanation is

that given by the Rev. S. Haughton, M.D., and reprinted in the

Speaker's Commentary on 1 John, pp. 349, 350. It demonstrates, that

this phenomenon would take place, but only if a person who was also

being crucified died of rupture of the heart.

[12678]6186 Ps. lxix. 20.

[12679]6187 Ps. xvi. 10.

[12680]6188 1 John v. 6.

[12681]6189 St. Matthew.

[12682]6190 This seems implied in the expression e_sc_mwn (A.V.

'honourable'), St. Mark xv. 43.

[12683]6191 St. Luke.

[12684]6192 Taken in connection with St. Luke xxiii. 51, this is

probably the meaning of bouleut_v. Otherwise we would have regarded

him rather as a member of 'the Council of Priests' (Beth Din shel

Kohanim, Kethub. i. 5) which met in what anciently was called the

Lishkath Bulvatin (Chamber of Councillors) in the Temple (Jer. Yoma 38

c; Yoma 8 b). The Greek work itself has passed into Rabbinic language

as Bulyutos, and in other modifications of the word.

[12685]6193 St. John.

[12686]6194 tolm_sav.

[12687]6195 At the same time I feel, that this might have been

represented by the Jews as not quite importing what it really was - as

rather an act of pietas towards the Rabbi of Nazareth than of homage

to the Messiahship of Jesus.

[12688]6196 The _m_ra paraskeu_v in connection with 'the Sabbath' (St.

Luke xxiii. 54) shows, that the former expression refers to 'the

preparation' for the Sabbath, or the Friday.

[12689]6197 See the proof in Wetstein, ad loc.

[12690]6198 St. Mark.

[12691]6199 The Arimathæa of Joseph is probably the modern Er-Ram, two

hours north of Jerusalem, on a conical hill, somewhat east of the road

that leads from Jerusalem to Nablus (Jos. Ant. viii. 12. 3) - the

Armathaim of the LXX. The objection of Keim (which it would take too

long to discuss in a note) are of no force (comp. his Jesu von Naz.

iii. p. 516). It is one of the undesigned evidences of the accuracy of

St. Luke, that he described it as belonging to Judæa. For, whereas

Ramah in Mount Ephraim originally belonged to Samaria, it was

afterwards seprated from the latter and joined to the province of

Judæa (comp. 1 Macc. x. 38; xi. 28, 34).

[12692]6200 Meyer regards the s statement of St. Matthew to the effect

(xxvii. 60) as inconsistent with the notice in St. John xix. 42. I

really cannot see any inconsistency, nor does his omission of the fact

that the tomb was Joseph's seem to me fatal. The narrative of St. John

is concentrated on the burying rather than its accessories. Professor

Westcott thinks that St. John xix. 41, implies 'that the sepulcher in

which the Lord was laid was not chosen as His final resting-place.'

But of this also I do not perceive evidence.

[12693]6201 St. Luke.

[12694]6202 See Book IV. ch. xxi.

[12695]6203 St. John vii. 50.

[12696]6204 St. Luke.

[12697]6205 St. Luke.

[12698]6206 St. John computes it at about 100 litras. As in all

likelihood this would refer to Roman pounds, of about twelve ounces

each, the amount is large, but not such as to warran any reasonable

objection. a servant could easily carry it, and it is not said that it

was all used in the burying. If it were possible to find any similar

use of the expression (l_trav), one might be tempted to regard the

litras as indicating not the weight, but a coin. In that sense the

word litra is used, sometimes as = 100 denars, in which case 100

litras would be = about 250 l., but more frequently as = 4 drachms, in

which case 100 litras would be=about 12l. (comp. Herzfeld.

Handelsgesch. p. 181). But the linguistic difficulty seems very great,

while any posible objection to the weight of the spices is really

inconsiderable. For the kind of spices used in the burying, see Book

IV. ch. xxi. (as the burying of Lazarus). In later times there was a

regular rubric and prayers with Kabbalistic symbolism (see Perles,

Leichenfeierlichk. p. 11, Note 12). No doubt, the wounds in theSacred

Body of our Lord had been washed from their gore.

[12699]6207 The Synopists record, that the Body of Jesus was 'wrapped'

in a 'linen cloth;' St. John tells us that it was 'bound' with the

aloes and myrrh of Nicodemus into 'swathes' or 'cloths,' even as they

were found afterwards in the empty tomb, and by their side 'the

napkin,' or soudarion, for the head. I have tried to combine the

account of the Synoptists and that of St. John into a continuous

narrative.

[12700]6208 Sanh. 47 b.

[12701]6209 Ohai. ii. 4.

[12702]6210 But it must be admitted, that there are difficulties on

this particular. See the remarks on this point at pp. 623 and 631, but

especially pp, 636, 637.

[12703]6211 See 'The Temple and its Services,' pp. 221-224.

[12704]6212 So Canon Westcott.

[12705]6213 Acts. i. 3.

[12706]6214 The reader who is desirous of further studying this point

is referred to the admirable analysis by Canon Westcott in his notes

prefatory to St. John xx. At the same time I must respectfully express

dissent from his arrangement of some of the events connected with the

Resurrection (u.s., p. 288 a).

[12707]6215 I may here state that I accept the genuineness of the

concluding portion of St. Mark (xvi. 9-20). If, on internal grounds,

it must be admitted that it reads like a postscript; on the other

hand, without it the section would read like a mutilated document.

This is not the place to discuss the grounds on which I have finally

accepted the genuineness of these verses. The reader may here be

referred to Canon Cook's 'Revised Version of the first three Gospels,'

pp. 120-125, but especially to the masterly and exhaustive work by

Dean Burgon on 'The last twelve verses of the Gospel according to St.

Mark.' At the same time I would venture to say, that Dean Burgon has

not attached sufficient importance to the adverse impression made by

the verses in question on the ground of internal evidence (see his

chapter on the subject, pp. 136-190). And it must be confessed, that,

whichever view we may ultimately adopt, the subject is beset with

considerable difficulties.

[12708]6216 Acts xii. 12.

[12709]6217 1 Cor. xv. 4-8.

[12710]6218 I have purposely omitted detailed references to, and

refutation of the arguments of opponents.

[12711]6219 St. John xx. 9.

[12712]6220 St. Matt. xxvii. 62-66.

[12713]6221 But it must be truthfully admitted that there is force in

some, though not in all, the objections urged against this incident by

Meyer and others. It need scarcely be said that this would in no way

invalidate the truth of the narrative. Further than this, which we

unhesitatingly state, we cannot at present enter on the question. See

pp. 636, 637.

[12714]6222 The statement of the two on the way to Emmaus (St. Luke

xxiv. 21): 'But we trusted that it was He Which should redeem Israel,'

refers only to the disappointment of their Jewish hopes of a present

Messianic Kingdom.

[12715]6223 It can scarcely be supposed, that their whole ideas of his

Messiahship had in those few hours undergone a complete change, and

that in a philosophico-rationalistic direction, such as would have

been absolutely and wholly foreign to minds and training like theirs.

[12716]6224 St. Mark xvi. 10.

[12717]6225 But even if a belief in His Resurrection had been a

requirement in their faith, as Keim rightly remarks, such realistic

demonstration of it would not have been looked for. Herod Antipas did

not search the tomb of the Baptist when he believed him risen from the

dead - how much more should the disciples of Christ have been

satisfied with evidence far less realistic and frequent than that

described in the Gospels. This consideration shows that there was no

motive for inventing the details connected with the history of the

Resurrection.

[12718]6226 So Josephus (Ant. xi. 1. 2), and, to show that this was

not a rationalistic view, Baba Mets. 65 b, Ber. R. 48. Later

traddition (Tos. to b. Mets.; Bemidb. R. 10), indeed, seems to admit

the literal eating, but as representing travellers, and in

acknowledgment of Abraham's hospitality. Onkelos simply renders

literally, but the Targum Pseudo-Jon. seems purposely to leave the

point undetermined.

[12719]6227 This is well argued by Weiss, Leben Jesu, vol ii. p. 608.

[12720]6228 Gal. i. 18.

[12721]6229 This is conveyed by the verb _stor_w.

[12722]6230 Acts xvii. 32.

[12723]6231 1 Cor. xv. 14, 15, 17.

[12724]6232 The whole subject of miracles requires fuller and clearer

treatment than it has yet received.

[12725]6233 Such as this, how with pierced Feet He could have gone to

Emmaus.

[12726]6234 This argument might, of course, be variously elaborated,

and the account in the Gospels represents as the form which it

afterwards took in the belief of the Church. But (a) the whole

'Vision-hypothesis' is shadowy and unreal, and the sacred writers

themselves show that they knew the distinction between visions and

real appearances; (b) it is impossible to reconcile it with such

occurrences as that in St. Luke xxiv. 38-43 and St. John xxi. 13, and,

if possible, even more so, to set aside all these details as the

outcome of later tradition, for which there was no other basis than

the desire of vindicating a vision; (c) it is incompatible with the

careful inquiry of St. Paul, who, as on so many other occasion, is

here a most important witness. (d) The theory involves the most

arbitrary handling of the Gospel-narratives, such as that the Apostles

had at once returned to Galilee, where the sight of the familiar

scenes had kindled in them this enthusiasm; that all the notices about

the 'third day' are to be rejected, &c. (e). What was so fundamental a

belief as that of the Resurrection could not have had its origin in a

delusive vision. This, as Keim has shown, would be incompatible with

the calm clearness of conviction and strong purpose of action which

were its outcome. Besides, are we to believe that the enthusiasm had

first seized the women, then the Apostle, and so on? But how, in that

case, about the 500 of whom St. Paul speaks? They could scarcely all

have been seized with the same mania. (f) A mere vision is unthinkable

under such circumstances as the walk to Emmaus, the conversation with

Thomas, with peter, &c. Besides, it is incompatible with the giving of

such definite promises by the Risen Christ as that of the Holy Spirit,

and of such detailed directions as that of Evangelising the world. (g)

Lastly, as Keim points out, it is incompatible with the fact that

these manifestations ceased with the Ascension. We have eight or at

most nine such manifestations in the course of six weeks, and then

they suddenly and permanently cease! This would not accord with the

theory of visions on the part of excited enthusiasts. But were the

Apostles such? Does not the perusal of the Gospel-narratives leave on

the impartial reader exactly the opposite impression?

[12727]6235 These two modes of accounting for the narrative of the

Resurrection: by fraud, and that Christ's was not real death, were

already attempted by Celsus, 1700 years ago, and the first, by the

Jews long before that. Keim has subjected them, as modified by

different advocates, to a searching criticism, and, with keen irony,

exhibited their utter absurdity. In regard to the supposition of fraud

he says: it shows that not even the faintest idea of the holy

conviction of the Apostles and first Christians has penetrated

hardened spirits. The objection that the Risen One had only manifested

Himself to friends, not before enemies, is also as old as Celsus. It

ignores that, throughout, the revelation of Christ does not supersede,

but imply faith; that there is no such thing in Christianity as

forcing conviction, instead of eliciting faith; and that the purpose

of the manifestations of the Risen Christ was to confirm, to comfort,

and to teach His disciples. As for His enemies, the Lord had expressly

declared that they would not see Him again till the judgment.

[12728]6236 Exaggeration would, of course, be here out of the

question.

[12729]6237 St. Luke xxiv. 38-43.

[12730]6238 The most deeply painful, but also interesting study is

that of the conclusion at which Keim ultimately arrives (Gesch. Jesu

v. Naz. iii. pp. 600-605). It has already been stated with what

merciless irony he exposes the fraud and the non-death theory, as well

as the arguments of Strauss. The 'Vision-hypothesis' he seems at first

to advocate with considerable ingenuity and rhetorical power. And he

succeeds in this the more easily, that, alas, he surrenders - although

most arbitrarily - almost every historical detail in the narrative of

the Resurrection! And yet what is the result at which he ultimately

arrives? He shows, perhaps more conclusively than any one else, that

the 'vision-hypothesis' is also impossible! having done so, he

virtually admits that he cannot offer any explanation as to 'the

mysterious exit' of the life of Jesus. Probably the visions of the

Risen Christ were granted directly by God Himself and by the glorified

Christ (p. 602). 'Nay, even the bodily appearance itself may be

conceded to those who without it fear to lose all' (p. 603). But from

this there is but a very small step to the teaching of the Church. At

any rate, the greatest of negative critics has, by the admission of

his inability to explain the Resurrection in a natural manner, given

the fullest confirmation to the fundamental article of our Christian

faith.

[12731]6239 Reuss (Hist. Evang. p. 698) well remarks, that if this

fundamental dogma of the Church had been the outcome of invention,

care would have been taken that the accounts of it should be in the

strictest and most literal agreement.

[12732]6240 Godet aptly concludes his able discussion of the subject

by observing that, if Strauss admits that the Church would have never

arisen if the Apostles had not had unshaken faith in the reality of

Christ's Resurrection, we may add, that this faith of the Apostles

would have never arisen unless the Resurrection had been a true

historical fact.

[12733]6241 I must remain uncertain, however important, whether the

_y_ sabb_twn refers to Saturday evening or early Sunday Morning.

[12734]6242 The reader who is desirous of comparing the different

views about these seeming or real small discrepancies is referred to

the various Commentaries. On the strictly orthodox side the most

elaborate and learned attempt at concilliation is that by Mr.

McClellan (New Test., Harmony of the Four Gospels, pp. 508-538),

although his ultimate scheme of arrangement seems to me too composite.

[12735]6243 St. Luke xxiv. 10.

[12736]6244 St. John xx. 1.

[12737]6245 m_asabb_twn, an expression which exactly answers to the

Rabbinic {hebrew}.

[12738]6246 Friday, Saturday, Sunday.

[12739]6247 Mass. Semach. viii. p. 29 d.

[12740]6248 Gen. xxii. 4.

[12741]6249 Ber. R. 56, ed, Warsh. p. 102 b, top of page.

[12742]6250 Ber. R. 91.

[12743]6251 Moed K. 28 b; Ber. R. 100.

[12744]6252 I cannot believe that St. Matthew xxvii. 1 refers to a

visit of the two Marys on the Saturday evening, nor St. Mark xvi. 1 to

a purchasing at that time of spices.

[12745]6253 The accounts imply, that the women knew nothing of the

sealing of the stone and of the guard set over the Tomb. This nay be

held as evidence, that St. Matthew could have not meant that the two

Marys had visited the grave on the previous evening (xxviii. 1). In

such case they must have seen the guard. Nor could the women in that

case have wondered who roll away the stone for them.

[12746]6254 I cannot believe that St. Matthew xxvii. 1 refers to a

visit of the two Marys on the Saturday evening, nor St. Mark xvi. 1 to

a purchasing at that time of spices.

[12747]6255 See this Book, ch. xii.

[12748]6256 St. John xxi. 2.

[12749]6257 St. Matt. xxviii. 16.

[12750]6258 It may, however, have been that the appearance of the one

Angel was to one company of women, that of two Angels to another.

[12751]6259 While I would speak very diffidently on the subject, it

seems to me as if the Evangelist had compresses the whole of that

morning's event into one narrative: 'The Women at the Sepulchre.' It

is this compression which gives the appearance of more events than

really took place, owing to the appearance of being divided into

scenes, and the circumstance that the different writers give

prominence to different persons or else to different details in what

is really one scene. Nay, I am disposed - though again with great

diffidence - to regard the appearance of Jesus 'to the women' (St.

Matt. xxviii. 9) as the same with that to Mary Magdalene, recorded in

St. John xx. 11-17, and referred to in St. Mark xvi. 9 - the more so

as the words in St. Matt. xxviii. 9 'as they went to tell His

disciples' are spurious, being probably intended for harmonious

purposes. But, while suggesting this view, I would by no means

maintain it as one certain to my own ming, although it would simplify

details otherwise very intricate.

[12752]6260 So already Bengel.

[12753]6261 It may be regarded as a specimen of what one might

designate as the imputation of sinister motives to the Evangelists,

when the most 'advanced' negative criticism describes this 'legend' as

implying the contest between Jewish and Gentile Christianity (Peter

and John) in which the younger gains the race! Similarly, we are

informed that the penitent on the Cross is intended to indicate the

Gentiles, the impenitent the Jews! But no language can be to strong to

repudiate the imputation, that so many parts of the Gospels were

intended as covert attacks by certain tendencies in the early Church

against others - the Petrine and Jacobine against the Johannine and

Pauline directions.

[12754]6262 When Meyer contends that the plural in St. John xx. 2, 'We

know not where they have laid Him,' does not refer to the presence of

other women with the Magdalene, but is a general expression for: We,

all His followers, have no knowledge of it - he must have overlooked

that, when alone, she repeats the same words in ver. 13, but markedly

uses the singular number: 'I know not.'

[12755]6263 St. Mark xvi. 12.

[12756]6264 This may represent the Galilean form of the expression,

and, if so, would be all the more evidential.

[12757]6265 Dial. c. Tryph. xvii.; cviii.

[12758]6266 In its coarsest form it is told in the so-called Toldoth

Jeshu, which may be seen at the end of Wagenseil's Tela Ignea Satanæ.

[12759]6267 So Grätz, and most of the modern writers.

[12760]6268 St. Mark xvi. 11.

[12761]6269 This may be either a form of Alphæus, or of Cleopatros.

[12762]6270 By Godet.

[12763]6271 Not less than four localities have been identified with

Emmaus. But some preliminary difficulties must be cleared. The name

Emmaus is spelt in different ways in the Tulmud (comp. Neubauer,

Geogr. d. Talm. p. 100, Note 3). Josephus (War iv. 1. 3; Ant. xviii.

2. 3) explains the meaning of the name as 'warm baths,' or thermal

springs. We will not complicate the question by discussing the

derivation of Emmaus. In another place (War vii. 6. 6) Josephus speaks

of Vespasian having settled in an Emmaus, sixty furlongs from

Jerusalem, a colony of soldiers. There can be little doubt that the

Emmaus of St. Luke and that of Josephus are identical. Lastly, we read

in Mishnah (Sukk. iv. 5) of a Motsa whence they fetched the willow

branches with which the altar was decorated at the Feast of

Tabernacles, and the Talmud explains this Moza as Kolonieh, which

again is identified by Christian writers with Vespasian's colony of

Roman soldiers (Caspari, Chronol Geogr. Einl. p. 207; Quart. Rep. of

the Pal Explor. Fund, July 1881, p. 237 [not without some slight

inaccuracies]). But an examination of the passage in the Mishanah must

lead us to dismiss this part of the theory. No one could imagine that

the worshippers would walk sixty stadia (seven or eight miles) for

willow branches to decorate the altar, while the Mishah, besides,

describes this Moza as below, or south of Jerusalem, whereas the

modern Kolonieh (which is identified with the Colonia of Josephus) is

northwest of Jerusalem. No doubt, the Talmud, knowing that there was

an Emmaus which was 'Colonia,' blunderingly identified with it the

Moza of the willow branches. This, however, it seems lawful to infer

from it, that the Emmaus of Josephus bore popularly the name of

Kolonieh. We can now examine the four proposed identifications of

Emmaus. The oldest and the youngest of these may be briefly dismissed.

The most common, perhaps the earliest identification, was with the

ancient Nicopolis, the modern Amwâs, which in Rabbinic writings also

bears the name of Emmaus (Neubauer, u.s.). But this is impossible, as

Nicopolis is twenty miles from Jerusalem. The latest proposed

identification is that with Urtas, to the south of Bethlehem (Mrs.

Finn, Quart. Rep. of Pal. Exlor. Fund, Jan. 1883, p. 53). It is

impossible here to enter into the various reasons urged by the

talented and accomplished proposer of this identification. Suffice it,

in refutation, to note, that, admittedly, there were 'no natural

hot-baths,'or thermal springs, here, only 'artificial Roman baths,'

such as, no doubt, in many other places, and that 'this Emmaus was

Emmaus only at the particular period when they (St. Luke and Josephus)

were writing' (u.s. p. 62). There now only remain two localities, the

modern Kolonieh and Kubeibeh - for the strange proposed identification

by Lieut. Conder in the Quarterly Rep. of the Pal. Explor. Fund, Oct.

1876 (pp. 172-175) seems now abandoned even by its author. Kolonieh

would, of course, represent the Colonia of Josephus, according to the

Talmud = Emmaus. But this is only 45 furlongs from Jerusalem. But at

the head of the same valley, in the Wady Buwai, and at a distance of

about three miles north, is Kubeibeh, the Emmaus of the Crusaders,

just sixty furlongs from Jerusalem. Between these places is Beit

Mizza, or Hammoza, which I regard as the real Emmaus. It would be

nearly 55 or 'about 60 furlongs' (St. Luke) - sufficiently near to

Kolonieh (Colonia) to account for the name, since the 'colony' would

extend up the valley, and suffciently near to Kubeibeh to account for

the tradition. The Palestine Exploration Fund has now apparently fixed

on Kubeibeh as the site (see Q. Report, July, 1881, p. 237, and their

N. T. map.

[12764]6272 Josh. xv.

[12765]6273 Even to this day seems a favourite resort of the

inhabitants of Jerusalem for an afternoon (comp. Conder's Tent-Work in

Palestine, i. pp. 25-27).

[12766]6274 60 furlongs about = "7" ½ miles.

[12767]6275 I cannot persuade myself that the right reading of the

close of ver. 17 (St. Luke xxiv.) can be 'And they stood still,

looking sad.' Every reader will mark this as an incongruous, jejune

break-up in the vivid narrative, quite unlike the rest. We can

understand the question as in our A.V., but scarcely the

standing-still and looking sad on the question as in the R. V.

[12768]6276 Without this last clause we could hardly understand how a

stranger would accost them, ask the subject of their conversation.

[12769]6277 Meyer's rendering of _v _g_neto in ver. 19 as implying: se

præstitit, se præbuit, is more correct than the 'which was' of both

the A.V. and R.V.

[12770]6278 1 Cor. xv. 5.

[12771]6279 St. Luke xxiv. 33.

[12772]6280 St. Mark xvi. 14.

[12773]6281 I cannot understand why Canon Cook ('Speaker's Commentary'

ad loc.) regards St. Luke xxiv. 39 as belonging 'to the appearance on

the octave of the Resurrection.' It appears to me, on the contrary, to

be strictly parallel to St. John xx. 20.

[12774]6282 The words 'and honeycomb' seem spurious.

[12775]6283 Such seems to me the meaning of His eating; any attempt at

explaining, we willingly forego in our ignorance of the conditions of

a glorified body, just as we refuse to discuss the manner in which He

suddenly appeared in the room while the doors were shut. But I at

least cannot believe, that His body was then in a 'transition state,'

not perfected not quite glorified till His Ascension.

[12776]6284 Wescott.

[12777]6285 The words in the two clauses are different in regard to

the sending of Christ (_p_stalk_n me) and in regard to the Church

(p_mpw _m_v). No doubt, there must be deeper meaning in this

distinction, yet both are used alike of Christ and of the disciples.

It may be as Cremer seems to hint (Bibl. Theol. Lex. of the N.T. p.

529) that _post_llw, from which 'apostle' and 'apostolate' are

derived, refers to a mission with a definite commission, or rather for

a definite purpose, while p_mpw is sending in a general sense. See the

learned and ingenious Note of Canon Westcott (Comm. on St. John, p.

298).]

[12778]6286 In the original the definite article is omitted. But this,

though significant, can surely not be supposed to prove that the

expression is equivalent to 'a gift of the Holy Ghost.' For, as Meyer

has pointed out, the word is used in other passages without the

article, where the Holy Ghost is referred to (comp. St. John i. 33;

vii. 39; Acts i. 2, 5).

[12779]6287 This alone would suffice to show what misinterpretation is

sometimes made, by friend and foe, of the use of these words in the

English Ordinal.

[12780]6288 Book iii. ch. xxxvii.

[12781]6289 St. Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 18.

[12782]6290 Acts xv. 22, 23.

[12783]6291 1 Cor. v. 4, 5, 12, 13; 2 Cor. ii. 6, 10.

[12784]6292 The decrees of the first Councils should be regarded not

as legislative, but either as disciplinary, or else as explanatory of

Apostolic teaching and legislation.

[12785]6293 It must, however, be remembered that Thomas did not deny

that Christ was risen - except as in the peculiar sense of the

Resurrection. Had he denied the other, he would scarcely have

continued in the company of the Apostles.

[12786]6294 Significantly, the expression 'for fear of the Jews' no

longer occurs. That apprehension had for the present passed away.

[12787]6295 St. John i. 45-51.

[12788]6296 Canon Westcott.

[12789]6297 St. John xx. 30, 31.

[12790]6298 St. Matt. xxviii. 16.

[12791]6299 The account of St. Luke (xxiv. 44-48) is a condensed

narrative - without distinction of time or place - of what occurred

during all the forty days.

[12792]6300 St. Matt. xxviii. 17.

[12793]6301 1 Cor. xv. 6.

[12794]6302 The word 'immediately' in St. John xxi. 3 is spurious.

[12795]6303 St. Luke v. 1, 11.

[12796]6304 Yet St John must have been acquainted with this narrative,

recorded as it is by all three Synoptists.

[12797]6305 This notice also seems specially indicative that the

narrator is himself from the Lake of Galilee.

[12798]6306 About 200 cubits.

[12799]6307 Canon Westcott gives, from St. Augustine, the points of

difference between this and the miraculous draught of fishes on the

former occasion (St. Luke v.). These are very interesting. Not so the

fanciful speculations of the Fathers about the symbolic meaning of the

number 153.

[12800]6308 This seems implied in the absence of the article in St.

John xxi. 9.

[12801]6309 St. John could not have meant His third appearance in

general, since himself had recorded three previous manifestations.

[12802]6310 St. Matt. xxvi. 33; St. John xiii. 37.

[12803]6311 Christ asks: _gap_v me, and Peter answers: s_ o_dav _ti

fl_ se.

[12804]6312 gin_skeiv.

[12805]6313 So Canon Westcott renders the meaning. The 'coming' might

refer to the second Coming, to the destruction of Jerusalem, or even

to the firm establishment of the Church. The tradition that St. John

only slept in the grave at Ephesus is mentioned even by St. Augustine.

[12806]6314 We have in the main accepted the learned criticism of

Professor Friedlieb (Oracula Sibyllina, 1852.)

[12807]6315 Comp. for example, ix. 7, 9.

[12808]6316 This view which, so far as I know, has not been suggested

by critics, will be confirmed by an attentive perusal of almost every

'Psalm' in the collection (comp. the first three with the three

opening Psalms in the Davidic Psalter). Is our 'Psalter of Solomon,'

as it were, an historical commentary by the typical 'sage?' And is our

collection only a fragment?

[12809]6317 The reader who will take our outline of Philo's views to

pieces, and compare it with the 'XXV. Theses de modis et formulis

quibus pr. Hebr. doctores SS. interpertari ect. soliti fuerunt' (in

Surenhusius' B_lov Katallag_v pp. 57 to 88), will convince himself of

the truth of this.

[12810]6318 As, for example, Malqosh, the latter rain =Mal-Qash, fill

the stubble.

[12811]6319 Comp. generally, Hamburger, vol. ii. pp. 181-212, and the

'History of the Jewish Nation,' pp. 567-580, where the Rabbinic

Exegesis is fully explained.

[12812]6320 Besides the designations of God to which reference is made

in the text, Philo also applies to Him that of topov, 'place,' in

precisely the same manner as the later Rabbis (and especially the

Kabbalah) use the word {hebrew}. To Philo it implies that God is

extramundane. He sees this taught in Gen. xxii. 3, 4, where Abraham

came 'unto the place of which God had told him;' but, when he 'lifted

up his eyes,' 'saw the place after off' Similarly, the Rabbis when

commenting on Gen. xxviii. 11, assign this as the reason why God is

designated {hebrew} that He is extramundane; the discussion beign

whether God is the place of His Word or the reverse, and the decision

in favour of the former - Gen. xxviii. 11 being explained by Ex.

xxxiii. 21, and Deut xxxiii. 27 by Ps. xc. 1 (Ber. R. 68, ed. Warsh. p

125 b).

[12813]6321 I think it is Köster (Trinitätslehre vor Christo) who

distinguishes the two as God's Presence within and without the

congregation. In general his brochure is of little real value. Dr. S.

Maybaum (Anthropmorphien u. Anthropopathien ber Onkelos) affords a

curious instance of modern Jewish criticism. With much learning and

not a little ingenuity he tries to prove by a detailed analysis, that

the three terms Memra, Shekhinah, and Yeqara have not the meaning

above explained! The force of 'tendency-argumentation' could scarcely

go farther than his essay.

[12814]6322 Not as Grimm (Clavis N.T. p. 107 a) would have it, the

Shekhinah, though he rightly regards the N.T. d_xa in this

signification of the word, as the equivalent of the Old Testament

{hebrew}. Clear notions on the subject are so important that we give a

list of the chief passages in which the two terms are used in the

Targum Onkelos, viz. Yeqara: Gen. xvii. 22; xviii. 33; xxviii. 13;

xxxv. 13; Ex. iii. 1, 6; xvi. 7, 10; xvii. 16; xviii. 5: xx. 17, 18,

xxiv. 10, 11, 17; xxix. 43; xxxiii. 18, 22, 23,:xl. 34, 38; Lev. ix.

4, 6, 23; Numb. x. 36: xii. 8; xiv. 14, 22. Shekhinah: Gen. ix. 27;

Ex. xvii. 7, 16; xx. 21: xxv. 8; xxix. 45, 46; xxxiii. 3, 5, 14-16,

20; xxxiv. 6,9; Numb. v. 3; vi. 25 xi. 20; xiv. 14, 42; xxiii. 21;

xxxv. 34;Deut. 1. 42; iii. 24; iv. 39; vi. 15; vil. 21 xii. 5, 11, 21;

xiv. 23, 24; xvi. 2, 6, 11, xxiii. 15; xxvi. 2; xxxii. 10; xxxiii. 26.

[12815]6323 As these sheets are passing through the press for a second

edition, the classic edition of the Targum Onkelos by Dr. Berliner (in

2 vols. berlin, 1884) has reached me. Vol.i. gives the text after the

editio Sabioneta (of they 1557). Vol ii. adds critical notes to the

text (pp. 1-70). which are followed by very interesting Prolegomena,

entering fully one all questions connected with this Targum,

historical, exegetical, and critical, and treating them with equal

learning and breadth and sobriety of judgment. On comparing our

ordinary text with that published by Dr. Berliner I find that in the

three passages italicised (Gen. vii. 16, vi. 6, once, and xxviii. 21)

the ed. Sabion. has not the word Memra. This is specially noteworthy

as regards the very important passage, Gen. xxviii. 21.

[12816]6324 The Nasi R. Gamaliel made use of representations of the

moon in questioning ignorant witnesses with a view of fixing (by the

new moon) the beginning of the month. But this must be regarded as a

necessary exception to the rule.

[12817]6325 Following the insufficient reasoning of Ewald (Gesch. d.

Volkes Isr. vol. v. p. 83), Schürer represents the non-issue of coins

with the image of Herod as a concession to Jewish prejudices, and

argues that the coins of the Emperors struck in Palestine bore no

effigy. The assertion is, however, unsupported, and St. Matt. xxii. 20

proves that coins with an image of Cæsar were in general circulation.

Wieseler (Beitr. pp. 83-87 had shown that the absence of Herod's

effigy on coins proves his inferior position relatively to Rome, and

as this has an important bearing on the question of a Roman census

during his reign, it was scarcely fair to simply ignore it. The Talmud

(Baba K. 97 b) speaks of coins bearing on one side David and Solomon

(? their effigies or their names), and on the other 'Jerusalem, the

holy City.' But if it be doubtful whether these coins had respectively

the effigies of David or of Solomon, there can be no doubt about the

coins ascribed in Ber. R. (Par. 39, ed. Warshau, p. 71 b) to Abraham,

Joshua, David, and Mordecai - that of Abraham being described as

bearing on one side the figures of an old man and an old woman

(Abraham and Sarah), and on the other those of a young man and a young

woman (Isaac and Rebekah). The coins of Joshua are stated to have

borne on one side a bullock, on the other a ram, according to Deut.

xxxiii. 17. There could, therefore, have been no such abhorrence of

such coins, and if there had been Herod was scarcely the man to be

deterred by it. On these supposed coins of David, &c., see the very

curious remarks of Wagenseil, Sota, pp. 574, and following. The

fullest and most accurate information on all connected with the coins

of the Jews is contained in the large and learned work of Mr. Madden,

' Coins of the Jews' (vol. ii. of 'The International Numismata

Orientalia,' 1881). Comp. also the Review of this book in the Journal

of the Royal Archæological Inst. for 1882 vol. xxxix. pp. 203-206.

[12818]6326 We do not here discuss the question, whether or not

Alexander really entered Jerusalem. Jewish legend has much to tell of

him, and reports many supposed inquiries on his part or discussions

between him and the Rabbis, that prove at least the deep impression

which his appearance had made, and the permanent results which

followed from it.

[12819]6327 Comp. Herzfeld, Gesch. d. Volkes Isr, vol. ii. passim, but

specially pp. 181 and 211.

[12820]6328 I have placed Johanan (Neh. xii. 22) before Jonathan, in

accordance with the ingenious reasoning of Herzfeld, ii. p. 372. The

chronology of their Pontificates is almost inextricably involved. In

other respects also there are not a few difficulties. See Zunz,

Gottesd. Vortr. p. 27, and the elaborate discussions of Herzfeld,

whose work, however, is very faulty in arrangement.

[12821]6329 Happily no divergence exists as to their succession.

[12822]6330 Some Christian and all Jewish writers assign the

designation of 'The Just' to Simon II. This is directly contrary to

the express statement of Josephus. Herzfeld (i. 377) appeals to Abhoth

i. 2, 3, Men. 109 b, and Jer. Yoma vi. 3, but immediately relinquishes

the two latter references as otherwise historically untenable. But

surely no historical inference - for such it is - from Ab. i. 2, 3 is

worth setting against the express statement of Josephus. Besides, Zunz

has rightly shown that the expression Qibbel must not be to closely

pressed, as indeed its use throughout the Perek seems to indicate

(Gottesd. Vortr. p. 37, Note).

[12823]6331 Of this more in the sequel. He is called {hebrew} which

however does not seem necessary to imply that he was actually a member

of it.

[12824]6332 It deserves notice that in these same Talmudic passages

reference is also made to the later entire cessation of the same

miracles, as indicating the coming destruction of the Temple.

[12825]6333 Or as he is designated in the Talmud; Chonyi, Nechunyah,

and even Nechunyon. Onias is a Grecianised form - itself a significant

fact.

[12826]6334 In 1 Macc. x. 29-33; Jos. And. xii;3. 3; xiii, 2. 3. In

view of these express testimonies the statement of Ewald (Gesch. d. V.

Isr. vol. iv. p. 373), to the effect that Palestine, or at least

Jerusalem, enjoyed immunity from taxation, seems strange indeed.

Schürer (u.s.p. 71) passes rather lightly over the troubles in Judæa

before Antiochus Epiphanes.

[12827]6335 Herzfeld rightly corrects 'Benjamin' in 2 Macc. iii. 4.

Comp. u. s. p. 218.

[12828]6336 The notice in Jos. Ant. xii. 5. 1 must be corrected by the

account in 2 Macc. Comp. Herzfeld, u. s.

[12829]6337 Besides Talmudic and Midrashic notices, we here refer to

that most interesting and ancient Megillath Taanith, or 'Rolls of

Fasts,' of which a translation is given in Appendix V. The passages

bearing on this period are collected in Derenbourg, Hist. de la

Palestine, pp. 59-63, although his reference to that on the 28th of

Adar is at least open to controversy.

[12830]6338 The designation 'Maccabee' was originally given to Judas

(1 Macc. ii. 4, 66; iii. 1; v. 24, 34). The name was, like that of

Charles Martel, probably derived from {hebrew}, or in Chaldee

{hebrew}, a hammer. Comp. Josippon ben Gorion, iii, 9. 7 (ed.

Breithaupt, p. 200) - only that he writes the name with a {hebrew},

and not a {hebrew}.

[12831]6339 {hebrew}. Josephus (Ant. xii. 6. 1) derives the word from

Asmonoeus, the great grandfather of Mattathias. Others derive it from

the word {hebrew} ('princes' in A.V. Ps. ixviii. 31).

[12832]6340 The Syrian force is said to have amounted to 100,000

footmen, 20,000 horsemen, and 32 war-elephants (1 Macc. vi. 30).

[12833]6341 We regard the opening sentence of Abhoth as marking out

the general principles and aims of the so-called 'Great Assembly.'

[12834]6342 A somewhat analogous change, at least of theological

opinions, distinguishes the later from the earlier 'Puritans.'

Theological schools which are partly political in their early history

often degenerate either into political partisans or else into extreme

sectaries, as either one or the other of their rationes vivendi

ceases.

[12835]6343 The Pharisees never forgave this. It is quite true that

this plea for their opposition to the Asmonæans is for the first time

reported during a later reign - that of John Hyrcanus I. - and that it

was then ostensibly based on the ground of Hyrcanus' mother having

been a captive of war. But see our remarks on this point further on.

[12836]6344 The story, however, differently told by Josephus (Ant.

Xiii. 4. 3). I have followed the account in 1 Macc., which is

generally regarded as the more trustworthy, though I am not without

misgivings, since Josephus evidently had the Book of Maccabees before

him.

[12837]6345 The derivation of the name Hyrcanus, or in Rabbinical

writings Horqenos, proposed by Grätz (Geesch. d. Juden. vol. ii. p.

55), and supported by Hamburger (Real. Encycl. für Bibel u. Talmud,

sect ii. p. 421, note 15) is untenable, in view of the fact, that not

a few Rabbinical authorities bore the same name (comp. Ab. ii. 8;

Sanh. 68 a). It could not, therefore, the victory of Hyrcanus 'over

Cendeboeus, the Hyrcanian.'

[12838]6346 The name Jannai is supposed to have been an abbreviation

of Jochanan. Many Rabbinic teachers of that name are mentioned.

Derenbourg (Hist. de la Palest. p. 95) regards it as an abbreviation

of Jonathan, but his reasoning is not convincing.

[12839]6347 According to Jer. Soath ix. 13, and Sot. 33 a, a 'Bath

Qol,' or Heavenly Voice, issuing from the Most Holy Place, had

announced to Hyrcanus, while officiating in the Temple, the victory of

his sons at Samaria. Josephus (Ant. xiii. 10. 7), assigns on this

ground to Hyrcanus the prophetic, as well as the priestly and royal,

title.

[12840]6348 These are the 15th and 16th Sivan, the 16th Adar, and the

7th Iyar. Comp. the Meg. Taan.

[12841]6349 Schürer (Neutest. Zeitg. p. 113) does not give this

inscription correctly. Comp. Levy, Gesch. d. Jud. Munzen, pp. 52, 53.

See especially Madden. 'Coins of the Jews,' pp. 74-81, where all the

varieties of inscription are given.

[12842]6350 We dismiss the fanciful readings and explanations of the

word {hebrew} by De Saulcy and Ewald. But I cannot agree with Schürer

in applying it to the people as a whole. Even the passage which he

quotes (Ber, iv. 7, with which the corresponding Gemara should be

compared), proves that the word is not used loosely for the people,

but with reference to their ecclesiastical nexus. Comp, also Meg. 27

[12843]6351 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Time of

Christ,' pp. 233, 234.

[12844]6352 Josephus calls him Eleazar, but the Talmud (Kidd. 66 a)

Jehudah ben Gedidim, for which Hamburger would read Nedidim, the sect

of 'the solitaries,' which he regards as another designation for the

extreme Chasidim.

[12845]6353 By a curious mistake, Schürer locates Ituræa north instead

of east of the Lake of Galilee, and speaks of 'Jewish tradition' as

drawing such a dark picture of Aristobulus. Dr. S. must refer to

Josephus, since Jewish tradition never named Aristobulus (Neuest.

Zeitg. p. 118).

[12846]6354 For the coins of that reign comp. Madden, u. s. pp. 83-93.

I have however arranged them somewhat differently.

[12847]6355 According, on the second series of coins, which date from

his return to Jerusalem, and breach with the Pharisees, we have on the

reverse the device of an anchor with two cross-bars.

[12848]6356 Jewish tradition, of course, vindicates a much earlier

origin for the Sanhedrin, and assumes its existence not only in the

time of Moses, David, and Solomon, but even in that of Mordecai!

(Comp. Buxtorf, Lex. Chald. Talmud col. 1514.)

[12849]6357 In quoting this passage, Derenbourg (u. s. p 111) and

Schürer leave out these words. [They are ommitted in the corresponding

account of this story in Vayy. R. 35, ed. Warsh. p. 54 a; in Siphré,

ed. Friedmann, p. 80 a; also in Siphra, ed. Weiss, p. 110 d, where the

whole connected is very much as in Vavy. R.] Yet the words are, in one

sense, most significant, since these fertilising rains, descending on

these two nights when it was specially forbidden to go out, since on

them innumerable demons haunted on the air (Pes. 112 b, line 10 from

the bottom), indicated an exceptional blessing. The reason why these

two nights are singled out as dangerous is, that Chanina b. Dosa, of

whom Rabbinic tradition has so many miracles to relate, conceded them

to the hurtful sway of Agrath bath Machlath and her 18 myriads of

Angels. See App. xiii. In view of this, M. Derenbourg's explanatory

note would seem to require to be modified. But, in general, rain even

on the night before the Sabbath was regarded as a curse (Vayy. R. 35),

and it has been ingeniously suggested that the {hebrew} in the Midrash

must be taken in the sense in which that word is explained in Taan. 6

a, viz. as the ordinary time of rain. Why the night before Wednesday

and Friday night are represented as left in the power of hurtful

demons might open an interesting field for speculation.

[12850]6358 This notice is followed by the somewhat blasphemous story

of the achievements of Choni (Onias) hammeaggel, to which reference

will be made in the sequel.

[12851]6359 Chammumoth.

[12852]6360 Comp. also Sanh. 46 a.

[12853]6361 Comp. Derenbourg, pp. 108, 109.

[12854]6362 According to some (Ant. xiv. 1. 3), he was of noble

Jewish, according to others, or heathen and slave descent. The truth

lies probably between these extremes.

[12855]6363 It almost seems as if this repugnant story were a sort of

Jewish Imitation of the circle which Popilius Lænas drew around

Antiochus Epiphanes, bidding him decide, ere he left it, whether or

not he would comply with the demand of the Romans.

[12856]6364 Both Josephus and the Talmud (Sotah 49 b) give an account,

though in different version, of the manner in which the besieged

sought a supply of sacrifices from the besiegers.

[12857]6365 According to Josephus, it was on the Day of Atonement;

according to Dio Cassius, apparently on a Sabbath. Comp. the remarks

of Derenbourg on these conflicting statements (u. s. p. 117, note).

[12858]6366 The captives then brought to Rome and sold as slaves

became the nucleus of the Jewish community in the imperial city.

[12859]6367 Comp. the masterly survey of the state of matters in Syria

and Judæa in Marquardt, Handb. d. Rom. Alterth., vol. iv. pp. 247-260.

[12860]6368 Comp. Geiger, Urschrift, p. 204; Derenbourg, p. 119, note.

[12861]6369 Comp. Geiger, u. s. p. 205, Note, Hamburger, u. s. p. 367.

Various strange and most unsatisfactory explanations have been

proposed of these mysterious words, which yet, on consideration, seem

so easy of understanding. Comp. the curious explanations of Grimm,

Ewald, and others, in Grimm's Exeget. hand. zu d. Apokryphen, 3te

Lief. p. xvii. Derenbourg (Hist. de la Palest. pp. 450-452) regards

sarb_d as a corruption for safarb_d, and would render the whole by

'Book of the family of the Chief ({hebrew}) of the people of God.'

[12862]6370 The numbers given by Maimonides, in his Preface to the

Mishnah, and their arrangement, are somewhat different, but I prefer

the more critical (sometimes even hypercritical) enumeration of

Herzfeld. They are also enumerated in Peiser's Nachlath Shimoni, Part

I. pp. 47-49 b.

[12863]6371 Peah ii. 6; Yad. iv. 3; Tos. Peah iii. 2; Orlah iii. 9.

[12864]6372 Erub. 4 a; Nidd. 72 b; Ab. d. R. N. 19, 25; Tos. Chall. i.

6; Shabb 70 a; Bekh. 16 a; Naz. 28 b; Chull. 27 a, 28 a; 42 a, 43 a;

Moed Q 3 b. Of these, the most interesting to the Christian reader are

about the 11 ingredients of the sacred incensed (Ker. 6 b); about the

26 kinds of work prohibited on the Sabbath (Shabb. 70 a); that the

father, but not the mother, might dedicate a child under age to the

Nazirate (Naz. 28 b); the 7 rules as to slaughtering animals; to cut

the neck; to cut through the trachea, and, in the case of four-footed

animals, also through the gullet; not to pause while slaughtering; to

use a knife perfectly free of all notches, and quite sharp; not to

strike with the knife; not to cut too near the head; and not to stick,

the knife into the throat; certain determinations about the Feast of

Tabernacles, such as about the pouring out of the water, &c.

[12865]6373 Ab. Z. 36 b; Niddah 45 a, 72 b.

[12866]6374 Jer. Meg. i. 9; Shabb. 28 b; Men. 32 a; 35 a.

[12867]6375 Ned. 37 b. These four Halakhoth are: as to the

authoritative pronunciation of certain words in the Bible; as to the

Itur Sopherim, or syntactic and stylistic emendation in the following

five passages: Gen xviii. 5, xxiv. 55; Numb. xxxi. 2; Ps. 1xviii. 22

(A.V. 21); xxxvi. 7 (A.V. 6); about the Qeri velo Kethibh, words read

but not written in the text; and the Kethibh velo Qeri, words written

but not read in the text.

[12868]6376 Pes. 110 b. Not to eat two (even numbers) of an egg, a

nut, or cucumber, &c.

[12869]6377 Eduy. viii. 7; Tanch. 60 a. The first of these Halakhoth

speaks of the activity of Elijah in preparation for the coming of the

Messiah (Mal. iii. 23, 24, A.V. iv. 5, 6), as directed to restore

those of pure Israelitish descent who had been improperly extruded,

and to extrude those who had been improperly admitted.

[12870]6378 Baba K. 81 a; Tos. Baba M. 11; Jer. Baba K. iii. 2. Among

the police regulations is this curious one, that all were allowed to

fish in the Lake of Galilee, but not to lay down nets, so as not to

impede the navigation.

[12871]6379 According to tradition (Sot. 47 a and b) the Eshkoloth, or

'bunches of grapes,' ceased with José. The expression refers to the

Rabbis, and Herzfeld ingeniously suggests this explanation of the

designation, that after José they were no longer undivided like

bunches of grapes, but divided in their opinions. For other

explanations comp. Derenbourg, u. s. pp. 88, 456-458.

[12872]6380 For a detailed account of the views of Josephus on the

Canon and on Inspiration, I take leave to refer to my article in

'Smith's Dictionary of Christian Biography,' vol. iii pp 453, 454.

[12873]6381 Comp. Zunz, Gottesd Vortr. pp. 101, 102, and C. Seligmann,

d Buch d Weish d. Jesus Sirach. The Talmudic quotations from the work

of the elder Jesus have been repeatedly collated I may here take leave

to refer to my collection translation of them in Append. II. to the

'History of the Jewish Nation.'

[12874]6382 Comp. also 2 Macc. ii. 13, 14.

[12875]6383 The general statement that this decree was intended to

prevent a common or profane use of the Scripture does not explain its

origin. The latter seems to have been as follows: At first the priests

in the Temple were wont to deposit the Terumah near the copy of the

Law there kept (Shabb 14 a). But as mice were thereby attracted, and

damage to the Sacred roll was apprehended, it was enacted that the

Sacred Roll in the Temple rendered all meat that touched it unclean.

This decree gave rise to another, by way of further precaution, that

even the hands which touched the Sacred Roll, or any other part of the

Bible became unclean (so that, having touched the latter, they could

not touch the Terumah). Then followed (in the course of development) a

third decree, that such touch defiled also outside the Temple.

Finally, the first decree was modified to the effect that the Sacred

Roll in the Temple did not defile the hands., while all other

Scriptures (anywhere else) defiled them (Chel xv. 6) The explanation

offered to the Sadducees by R. Jochanan b. Zakkai is evidently

intended to mislead (Yad iv. 6), Comp. Levy, Neuhebr Wörterb. vol. ii.

pp. 163, 164.

[12876]6384 The difference in the degree of inspiration between the

Prophetic and the Hagiographic books is not accurately defined. Later

Jewish theologians rather evade it by describing the former as given

by 'the spirit of prophecy,' the latter 'by the Holy Spirit.' It must,

however, be admitted that in Jewish writings 'the Holy Spirit' is not

only not a Personality, but an influence very inferior to what we

associate with the designation.

[12877]6385 The proof-passages are quoted in Zunz, u. s. p.44 note,

also in J. Delitzsch, De Inspir. Script. S. pp. 7, 8.

[12878]6386 At the same time, in Meg. 31 b the formulation of the

curses by Moses in Lev. xxvi. is said to have been {hebrew} (from God

directly), while that in Deut. xxviii. was {hebrew} (from Moses

himself).

[12879]6387 A more terribly repulsive instance of this can scarcely be

conceived than in Debar R. 11, of which the worst parts are reproduced

in Yalkut 304 a, b, c.

[12880]6388 Comp. generally Hamburger's Real. Encycl. vols. i. and ii.

See also Delitzsch's work already quoted, and Fürst, Kanon d. Alten

Test. nach Talmud u. Midrasch.

[12881]6389 Fürst, u. s. pp. 57-59, quotes Ber. 57 b and Sot. 7 b, Ab

de R. Nathan 40. But no one who reads either Ber. 57 b, or Ab. de R.

Nathan 40, would feel inclined to draw from passages so strange and

repulsive any serious inference, while Sot. 7 b is far too vague to

serve as a basis. In general, this is one of the many instances in

which Fürst, as, indeed, many modern Jewish writers, propounds as

metters of undoubted fact, what, on critical examination, is seen to

rest on no certain historical basis - sometimes on no basis at all.

[12882]6390 Which in another place we have shown to be erroneous.

[12883]6391 Fürst, p. 56. See also Reuss, Gesch. d. Heil. Schr. A. T.

(p. 550), who gives its date as 132.

[12884]6392 Fürst, who holds the Maccabean origin of the Book of

Daniel, is so frequently inconsistent with himself in the course of

his remarks on the subject, that it is sometimes difficult to

understand him. Occasionally, when argument is wanting, he asserts

that a thing is self-evident (es versteht sich von selbst). Such a

'self evident' assertion, for which, however, no historical evidence

is offered - which, indeed, runs in the opposite direction - is

summarized on page 100. But the word 'self-evident' has no place in

historical discussions, where only that is evident which rests on

historical grounds.

[12885]6393 This is admitted even by Mr. Drummond ('Jewish Messiah,'

pp. 246, 245-257, 260). Mr. Drummond's book is quoted as representing

the advocacy by a distinguished English scholar of the Maccabean

theory of the authorship of Daniel.

[12886]6394 Drummond, u. s. p. 261.

[12887]6395 And yet there are frequent indications that Rabbinism

sought guidance on these very subjects in the prophecies of Daniel.

Thus, in the Pirqé de R. Eliezer there are repeated references ot the

four monarchies - the Persian, Median, Macedonian, and Roman - when,

in the time of the fifth monarchy, that of the children of Ishmael -

after a terrible war against Rome, the Messiah would come (comp. Pirqé

de R. El. 19, and especially 28, 30, and 48).

[12888]6396 Among them the following may be mentioned (Chull. 37 b):

Ezek. iv. 14 &c., and (Mop 45 a), Ezek. xiv. 31 were regarded as

suggesting that these prohibitions applied only to priests; (Moed. K.

5 a) Ezek. xliv. 19, seemed to imply that an ordinary Israelite might

perform sacrificial service, while Ezek. xiv. 18 appeared to enjoin a

sacrifice nowhere mentioned in the Pentateuch.

[12889]6397 For ex. Prov. xxvi. 4, 5.

[12890]6398 As for ex. Ps. cxv. 17 compared with Eccl. iv. 2 and ix.

[12891]6399 For ex. Eccl. ii. 2 comp. with vii. 3; and again, vii 15,

or iv. 2 comp. with ix. 4.

[12892]6400 The school of Shammai was against, that of Hillel in

favour of the Canonicity of Ecclesiastes (Eduy. v. 3). In Tos. Yad.

ii. Ecclesiastes is said to be uninspired, and to contain only the

wisdom of Solomon.

[12893]6401 But it must be admitted that some of these conciliations

are sufficiently curious.

[12894]6402 But on this subject opinion differ very widely (see Shir

haSh. R. 1, ed Warshan, pp. 3 b and 4 a) the only point on which all

are agreed being that he wrote Ecclesiastes last - Rabbi Jonathan

irreverently remarking that when a man is old he utters dibhré

hadhalim - vain words!

[12895]6403 In Jer. Tann. 68 a we read three codices of the

Pentateuch. respectively named after one word in each codex. the

reading of which was either rejected or adopted on comparison with the

others.

[12896]6404 Thus, we have different notices about the number of verses

in the Bible, the arrangement of the psalter, the medial latter and

medial word in the Pentateuch, and the number of its sections and

chapters (Kidd. 30 a; Yalkut i. § 855). But the sum total of verses in

the Bible (23,199) differs by 99 from that in our present text.

Similarity, one of the most learned Rabbinic critics of the third

century declares himself at a loss about the exact medial letter,

word, and verse of the Pentateuch, while in Palestine that Pentateuch

seems to have been arranged into 1,085, in Babalonia into 378 chapters

(comp. Fürst, Kultur-u. Liter. Gesch. p. 62).

[12897]6405 But comp. and opinion, previously quoted, about the last

verses in Deut.

[12898]6406 'History of the Jewish Nation,' p. 418.

[12899]6407 The expression 'the epistles of the kings concerning the

holy gifts' must refer ot the official Persian documents concerning

gifts to the Temple, &c.

[12900]6408 Shabb. 13 b; Chag. 13 a; Men. 45 a.

[12901]6409 There are in the Mishnah sixteen variations: Lev. xi. 33;

xxv. 36; Numb. xxviii. 5; xxxii. 22; Deut. xxiv. 19; Josh. viii. 33; 2

Sam. xv. 6; Is. x. 13; Ezek. xlvi. 21; Amos ix. 14: Mal. iii. 16, 23

(A. V. iv. 5); Ps. lxviii. 27; Job i. 1; Prov. xxii. 28; 2 Chron.

xxviii. 15. In the Talmud 105 such variations occur, viz., Gen. vii 8;

23; xv. 2; xxv. 6, xxxv. 18; Ex. xii. 3, 6; xiii. 16; xxiv. 5; xxv. 13

xxxi. 1; Lev. iv. 25, 30, 34; x. 12; xv. 10; xviii. 18; Numb. v. 19;

xviii. 16; Deut. vi. 7, 9, 20; xxiii. 1; xxv. 7; xxxiii. 27; xxxiv 6;

Josh. iii. 17; x. 11; xiv. 7, 10; xvi. 6; xxiii. 15; Judg. xv. 20;

xvi. 31; 1Sam. ii 24; 2 Sam. iii. 25; xxiv. 15; 2 Kings xvii. 31;

xxiii. 17; Is ii. 3; xxxviii. 16; xlii, 5; liviii. 7; Jer. iii 22;

xxix. 11; Ezek. x1. 48; xliv. 9; xlvii. 1; Hos. iv. 11; Amos. iv. 6;

viii. 11; ix. 14; Hag. ii 8; Mich. iv. 2; Zech. xii. 10; Mal. ii. 12;

Ps. v. 5; xvi. 10 (where the difference is important); xxvi. 5, 6;

xxxvii. 32; lvi. 11; lxii. 12; lxviii. 21; xcv. 5; xcvii. 7; cxxvii.

5; cxxxix. 5; 6; 8; xiii. 4 xiv. 16; xxxvi. 5, 11; Ruth, iii. 15; iv.

11; Eccl. ix. 14, 15; x. 5; Dan. ii. 29; iv. 14; vi. 18; x. 13; Ezr.

iv. 3; Neh. iv. 16; viii. 8 (bis), 15, 17; 1 Chron. iii. 17; iv. 10;

v. 24; xvl. 5; xvii. 9; xxvi. 8, 23; xxvii. 34; 2 Chron. xxvi. 2;

xxxi. 5, 13.

[12902]6410 'History of the Jewish Nation,' pp. 435, 436.

[12903]6411 The expression occurs already in Job xxvi. 7.

[12904]6412 Probably 'twofold' might best express the meaning.

[12905]6413 Mark also the symbolical significance of the numbers 3, 7,

12 as the manifestation of God - the Archetype of all else.

[12906]6414 All the glosses on and in the text have been omitted. The

edition of the Tractate in its present form used by us is that of

Warshau, 1874, and consists (with comments) of 20 octavo (double)

pages. For the criticism of the work see specially Grätz, Gesch. d.

Juden, vol. iii. pp. 415-428, and Derenbourg, Hist. de la Palest. pp.

439-446. A special tractate on the subject is Schmilg's inaugural

dissertation, Leipzig, 1874. It need scarcely be said that these

writers entertain different views as to the historical dates specially

commemorated in the Megillath Taanith, and the events to which they

refer. Comp. also Wolfius, Biblioth. Rabb. vol. i. p.385, vol. ii. p.

1325, vol. iii. p. 11963. My edition of Wolfius has the great

advantage of the marginal notes and corrections by the great Jewish

historian, the late Dr. Jost, who, many years ago, gave me his copy.

[12907]6415 We abstain from giving historical notes. For the different

explanations of the commemorative dates the reader is referred to the

books already mentioned.

[12908]6416 This feast seems to refer to the death of King Herod; that

on the 7th Kislev to the death of King Jannæus.

[12909]6417 This question is fully discussed in Ber. R. 71 towards the

close. Comp. also Shem. R. 40. For fuller details we refer to our

remarks on Gen. xlix. 19 in Appendix IX.

[12910]6418 I cannot agree with either of the explanations of this

passage offered by Castelli (Il Messia, p. 199), whose citation is

scarcely as accurate as usually. The passage quoted is in the Par.

Pinchas, opening lines.

[12911]6419 Castelli writes: Lo Prega a mandare in luogo suo Elic, già

esistente almeno in insipirito; e Dio risponde, che è predestinato non

a quella, ma alla finale redenzione. But there are three inaccuracies

here, for (1) Moses does not name Elijah; (2) there is not a hint that

Elijah was pre-existing in spirit; while (3) God's reply to Moses is

as in our text.

[12912]6420 The question has been raised whether Jeremiah (or even

Isaiah) was also to appear in Messianic days. In favour of this view 2

Macc. ii. 1-8 and xv. 14-16 afford, to say the least, presumptive

evidence. We do not refer to 4 Esdras ii. 18, because the two first

and the two last chapters of that book in our Apocrypha (2 Esdras) are

spurious, being for much later, probably Christian authorship. Gfrörer

thinks that 4 Esdras v. (2 Esdras vii. 28) refers to Jeremiah and

Isaiah (Urchrist vol. ii. p. 230). But I cannot draw the same

inference from it. On the other hand, there is a remarkable passage in

Mechilta on Ex. xvi. 33 (ed. Weiss, p. 59 b), which not only seems to

conjoin Jeremiah with the Messiah (though the inaccurate rendering of

Wetstein, Nov. Test. vol. i. p. 430 conveys an exaggerated and wrong

impression of this), but reminds us of 2 Mac. ii. 1-18.

[12913]6421 In this passage also reference is made to the zeal of

Phinehas as corresponding to that of Elijah.

[12914]6422 Schöttgen (Horæ Hebr. tomus ii. p. 534) has not correctly

apprehended the meaning of this passage. It is not 'statim cum ipso

Messiæ adventu,' but prope or proxime ({hebrew}.) Schöttgen writes

inaccurately {hebrew}.

[12915]6423 Of course this is the Hebrew word used in Is. lii. 7

('that published salvation'). None the less significant, however, in

this connection, is the fact that the word is pronounced like the Name

of Jesus.

[12916]6424 The reader will find, in our remarks on Ps. ex. 2 in

Append. IX. the curious traditions about this rod of Aaron, as given

in Bemid. R. 18 and Yalkut on Ps. cx. 2. The story of the

wonder-working rod is told somewhat differently in the Targum

Pseudo-Jon. on Ex. ii. 20, 21 and iv. 20; and again, with other

variations, in Pirké de R. Eliez. 40. In the latter passage we are

told, that this rod had passed from the possession of Joseph (after

his death) into the palace of Pharaoh. Thence Jethro, who was one of

the magicians of Egypt, had removed it to his own home. The ability of

Moses to read the writing on the rod - according to other traditions,

to uproot it out of the garden - indicated him to Jethro as the future

deliverer of Israel, and determined him to give to Moses Zipporah for

his wife (in preference to all other suitors). According to other

traditions, Noses had been for many years imprisoned, and ministered

to by Zipporah, who loved him. It may be added, that, according to

very ancient tradition, the rod of Aaron was one of the things created

on the eve of the world's first Sabbath (Siphré, ed. Friedmann, p. 147

a, last line).

[12917]6425 We have purposely omitted all reference to the connection

between Elijah and the 'second' Messiah, the son of Ephraim, because

that line of tradition belongs to a later period than that of Christ.

[12918]6426 The view of the Apocrypha on the Mission of Elijah may be

gathered from Ecclus. xlviii. 1-12. Some additional Talmudic notices

about Elijah will be found at the close of Append. IX. The Sepher

Eliyahu (Apocalypse of Elijah), published in Jellinek's Beth haMidr.

part ii. pp. 65-68, adds nothing to our knowledge. It professes to be

a revelation by the Angel Michael to Elijah of the end and the last

days, at the close of the fourth monarchy. As it is simply an

Apocalyptic account of the events of those days, it cannot here find a

place, however interesting the Tractate. I have purposely not referred

to the abominable story about Elijah told in Yoma 19 b, last lines.

[12919]6427 Indeed, this Parashah in Bedr. R. contains other similar

parallelisms between Gen. xvii. and Messianic times.

[12920]6428 As to these three measures of sufferings, and the share

falling to the age of the Messiah sea also the Midrash on Ps. ii. 7.

[12921]6429 The Midrash gives two very curious explanations of his

name.

[12922]6430 On the twofold Messiah, or rather the device of the Jews

on this subject, see in the text of the chapter. I cannot but suspect

that the words 'Son of Joseph' in the Talmud are a later and clumsy

emendation, since what follows evidently applies to the Son of David.

[12923]6431 The idea of an organic connection between Israel and the

Messiah seems also to underlie this passage.

[12924]6432 See the passage in Sanh. 96 b &c. given at the close of

this Appendix.

[12925]6433 Signor Castelli remarks in his learned treatise (Il

Messia, p. 164) that redemption is always ascribed to God, and not to

the Messiah. But the distinction is of no importance, seeing that this

is indeed the work of God, but carried out by the Messiah, while, on

the other hand, Rabbinic writings frequently refer Israel's

deliverance to the agency of the Messiah.

[12926]6434 From the above review of Old Testament passages, all

reference to sacrifices has been omitted, because, although the

Synagogue held the doctrine of the vicariousness and atoning character

of these sacrifices, no mention occurs of the Messiah in connection

with them.

[12927]6435 The Vienna edition of the Talmud has several lacunæ on

this page (98 a)

[12928]6436 So also by Maimonides, Yad ha-Chas. vol. iv. p. 241 a

(Hilc. Sanc. ch. iii.)

[12929]6437 A similar arrangement is described in Sot. vii. 8 as

connected with the reading of the Law by the kings of Israel to the

people according to Duet xxxi. 10. Will it be argued from this that

there was a Synagogue in the temple in the early days of the kings?

[12930]6438 In a former book ('Sketches of Jewish Life in the Time of

our Lord') I had expressed hesitation and misgivings on the subject.

These (as explained in the text), a fuller study has converted into

absolute certitude against the popularly accepted hypothesis. And

what, indeed, could have been the meaning of a Synagogue - which,

after all, stood as substitute for the Temple and its Services, within

the precincts of the Temple; or how could the respective services be

so arranged as not to clash; or, lastly, have not the prayers of the

Synagogue, admittedly, taken the place of the Services and Sacrifices

of the Temple?

[12931]6439 The case supposed by the school of Shammai would, however,

have been impossible, since, according to Rabbinic directions, a

certain time must have elapsed between circumcision and baptism.

[12932]6440 The following notice from Josephus (Ant. xviii. 5. 2) is

not only interesting in itself, but for the view which it presents of

baptism. It shows what views rationalising Jews took of the work of

the Baptist, and how little such were able to enter into the real

meaning of his baptism. 'But to some of the Jews it appeared, that the

destruction of Herod's army came from God, and, indeed, as a righteous

punishment on account of what had been done to John, who was surnamed

the Baptist. for Herod ordered him to be killed, a good man, and who

commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness

towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism.

For that the baptizing would be acceptable to Him, if they made use of

it, not for the putting away (remission) of some sins, but for the

purification of the body, after that the soul had been previously

cleansed by righteousness. And when others had come in crowds, for

they were exceedingly moved by hearing these words, Herod, fearing

lest such influence of his over the people might lead to some

rebellion, for they seemed ready to do any thing by his council,

deemed it best, before anything new should happen through him, to put

him to death, rather than that, when a change should arise in affairs,

he might have to repent,' &c. On the credibility of this testimony see

the Article on Josephus, in Smith's 'Dictionary of Christian

Biography,' vol. iii. pp. 441-460 (see especially pp. 458, 459).

[12933]6441 This stream issued from under the throne of God, and is

really the sweat of the 'living creatures' in their awe at the glory

of God (Ber. R. 78).

[12934]6442 In Jer. Ber 2 c it is 50 years.

[12935]6443 See also Pes. 94 b.

[12936]6444 Some add the Cherubim as another and separate class.

[12937]6445 According to Jer Ber. ix. 1, the abode of the living

creatures was to an extent of 515 years' journey, which is proved from

the numerical value of the word {hebrew} 'straight' (Ezek. i. 7).

[12938]6446 On the controversy on the meaning of the name Metatron,

whether it means under the throne, or behind the throne, or is the

same as Meatator, divider, arranger, representative, we will not

enter.

[12939]6447 Gabriel was also designated Itmon, because he stops up the

sins of Israel (Sanh. 45 b).

[12940]6448 The names of the four Angel-Princes - Michael, Gabriel,

Uriel, and Raphael - are explained in Bemid. R. 2.

[12941]6449 According to Jer. Ber. ix. 7 (p. 14 b), God only takes

counsel with His Sanhedrin when He takes away, not when He giveth (Job

i. 21) - and it is argued that, wherever the expression 'and Jehovah'

occurs, as in the last clause of 1 Kings xxii. 23, it means God His

Sanhedrin.

[12942]6450 Akhtariel - perhaps 'the crown of God' - seems to be a

name given to the Deity (Ber. 7 a).

[12943]6451 It is said that Gabriel had proposed in this manner of

deliver Abraham when in similar danger at the hands of Nimrod. And,

although God had by His own Hand delivered the patriarch, yet Gabriel

had obtained this as the reward of his proposal, that he was allowed

to deliver the Three Children from the fiery furnace.

[12944]6452 See also the names of the five angels of destruction of

whom Moses was afraid on his descent from the mount. Against three of

them the three Patriarchs were to fight, God Himself being asked, or

else proposing, to combat along with Moses against the other two

(Sanh. R. 41; 44)

[12945]6453 An analogous remark would apply to Jewish teaching about

the good angels, who are rather Jewish elves than the high spiritual

beings of the Bible.

[12946]6454 As a curious illustration how extremes meet, we subjoin

the following from Jonathan Edwards. After describing how 'Satan,

before his fall, was the chief of all the angels . . . nay, . . . the

Messiah or Christ (!), as he was the Anointed, so that in the respect,

Jesus Christ is exalted unto his place in heaven;' and that 'Lucifer

or Satan, while a holy angel . . . was a type of Christ,' the great

American divine explains his fall as follows: 'But when it was

revealed to him, high and glorious as he was, that he must be a

ministering spirit to the race of mankind which he had seen newly

created, which appeared so feeble, mean, and despicable, of vastly

inferior not only to him, the prince of the angels, and head of the

created universe, but also to the inferior angels, and that he must be

subject to one of that race which should hereafter be born, he could

not bear it, This occasioned his fall' (Tractate on 'The Fall of the

Angels,' Works, vol. ii. pp. 608, 609, 610). Could Jonathan Edwards

have heard of the Rabbinic legends, or is this only a strange

coincidence? The curious reader will find much quaint information,

though, I fear, little help, in Prof. W. Scott's vol. 'The Existence

of Evil Spirits,' London, 1843.

[12947]6455 The Rabbis point out, how Eve had added to the words of

God. He had only commanded them not to eat of the tree, while Eve

added to it, that they were not to touch it. Thus adding to the words

of God had led to the first sin with all the terrible consequences

connected with it.

[12948]6456 In Ber R. 56 the accusation is stated to have been brought

by the ministering angels.

[12949]6457 From the expression 'a son in his own likeness,' &c., it

is inferred that his previous offspring during the 138 years was not

in his likeness.

[12950]6458 The following Haggadah will illustrate both the power of

the evil spirits at night and how amenable they are to reasoning. A

Rabbi was distributing his gifts to the poor at night when he was

confronted by the Prince of the Ruchin with the quotation Deut. xix.

34 ('Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark'), which seemed to

give the 'spirit' a warrant for attacking him. But when the Rabbi

replied by quoting Prov. xxi. 14 ('a gift in secret appeaseth wrath'),

the 'spirit' fled in confusion (Jer. Peah viii. 9, p. 21 b).

[12951]6459 Hamburger ascribes this to the anxiety of the Palestinians

to guard Judaism from Gnostic elements. We are, however, willing to

recognise in it an indirect influence of Christianity.

[12952]6460 The Tarnegol Bera - a mythical animal reaching fron earth

to heaven (Targ. on Ps. 1, 11) - also called Naggar Tura (Gitt. 68 b)

from his activity in cleaving mountains.

[12953]6461 Hamburger renders it Ahriman, but it seems rather like

Hormuzd. Perhaps the Rabbis wished to combine both. Ahriman is written

Ahurmin, Sanh. 39 a, in that very curious notice of a controversy with

a Mage.

[12954]6462 The superstition 'There's luck in odd numbers' has passed

to all nations.

[12955]6463 Dr. Kohut's comparison of Rabbinic Angelology and

Demonology with Parseeism (Ueber d. jud. Angelol u. Damonol. in ihrer

Abhang. vom Parsismus) is extremely interesting, although not complete

and its conclusions sometimes strained. The negative arguments derived

from Jewish Angelology and Satanology by the author of 'Supernatural

Religion' are based on inaccurate and uncritical information, and do

not require detailed discussion.

[12956]6464 In the Book Cusari (ii. 49 ed. Cassel, p. 274) an

inference somewhat inconvenient to Rabbinism is drawn from this. If,

as it asserts Levitical uncleanness and holiness are correlative

terms, the one implying the other, would it not follow that with the

cessation of the Jewish economy the whole ceremonial Law would also

cease? See Cassel's note.

[12957]6465 For further particulars I refer to Stein, Schrift des

Lebens, i. pp. 319-336 (ch. on 'The Messiah'), to the article on the

Messiah in Hamburger's Real-Encycl. ii. pp. 747, 748, and especially

to that most interesting brochure of Rabbi Holdheim, Das

Ceremonialges. im Messias-Reich. I have not read a more clear

demonstration of the impossibility of Rabbinism, nor - strange as it

may sound - a fuller vindication of the fundamental positions of

Christianity.

[12958]6466 Stein, u.s. pp. 327, 328.

[12959]6467 Comp. on this Holdheim, Das Ceremonialges, p. 46.

[12960]6468 The learned reader will find a very curious illustration

of this in that strange Haggadah about the envy of the serpent being

excited on seeing Adam fed with meat from heaven - where another

equally curious Haggadah is related to show that 'nothing is unclean

which cometh down from heaven.'

[12961]6469 Yalkut i. 15, p. 4, d, towards the middle. A considerable

part of vol. iii. of 'Supernatural Religion' is devoted to

argumentation on this subject. But here also the information of the

writer on the subject is neither accurate nor critical, and hence his

reasoning and conclusions are vitiated.

[12962]6470 I must here correct the view expressed in my book on 'The

Temple,' p. 291, due to a misunderstanding of St. John iv. 35. Of

course, if latter had implied that Jesus was at Sychar in December,

the unnamed feast must have been Purim.

[12963]6471 I would here generally acknowledge my obligations to Dr.

Brecher's tractate on the subject.

[12964]6472 Erub. 41 b; Pes. 112 a. The more common designation is r.

tumeah; but there are others.

[12965]6473 See more on this subject in vol. ii. pp. 193, 194.

[12966]6474 We have here only been able to indicate this most

interesting subject. Much more remains to be said concerning Eliezer

b. Hyrecanus, and others. There seem even to have been regular

meeting-places for discussion between Jews and Christians. Nay, the

practice of some early Christians to make themselves eunuchs is

alluded to in the Talmud (Shabb. 152 a).

[12967]6475 In general palm-trees and their fruit are dangerous, and

you should always wash your hands after eating dates.

[12968]6476 The Jerusalem Talmud is not only the older and the shorter

of the two Gemaras, but would represent most fully the Palestinian

ideas.

[12969]6477 On the Sabbath-journey, and the reason for fixing it at a

distance of 2,000 cubits, see Kitto's Cyclop. (last ed.)

'Sabbath-way,' and 'The Temple and its Services,' p. 148.

[12970]6478 In the Jerusalem Talmud a Gemara is attached only to the

first twenty chapters of the Mishnic tractate Shabbath; in the Babylon

Talmud to all the Twenty-four chapters.

[12971]6479 I have counted about thirty-three Haggadic pieces in the

tractate.

[12972]6480 In the former case it might be a burden or lead to work,

while in the latter case the covering was presumably for warmth.

[12973]6481 Such a free place ({hebrew}) must cover less than four

square cubits - for ex., a pillar would be such. To this no legal

determination would apply. The 'wide space' is called Karmelith

({hebrew}). The Mishnah, however, expressly mentions only the

'private' and the 'public' place (or 'enclosed' and 'open'), although

the Karmeilth was in certain circumstances treated as 'public,' in

others as 'private' property. The explanation of the terms and legal

definitions is in Jer. Shabb. 12 d; 13 a; Shabb. 6, a, b; Toseft.

Shabb. 1.

[12974]6482 Here such questions are raised as what constitutes the

beginning, for ex., of shaving or a bath.

[12975]6483 To kill such vermin is, of course, strictly forbidden (to

kill a flea is like a camel). Rules are given how to dispose of such

insects. On the same occasion some curious ideas are broached as to

the transformation of animals, one into another.

[12976]6484 The Lulabh ({hebrew}) consisted of a palm with myrtle and

willow branch tied on either side of it, which every worshipper

carried on the Feast of Tabernacles ('Temple and its Services,' p.

238).

[12977]6485 Literally, a needle which has not an eyelet. Of course, it

would not be lawful for a modern Jew - if he observe the Rabbinic Law

- to carry a stick or a pencil on the Sabbath, to drive, or even to

smoke.

[12978]6486 The Rabbis contend for the lawfullness of changing the

{hebrew} into a {hebrew} for the sake of an interpretation. So

expressly here. (Jer. Shabb. 9 b) and in Jer. Peah 20 b ({hebrew} into

{hebrew} in Lev. xix. 24).

[12979]6487 It has been calculated by Herzfeld that a log = 0.36 of a

litre; 'six hen's eggs.'

[12980]6488 It is curious as bearing upon a recent controversy, to

note that on this occasion it is said that an Israelite may be buried

in the coffin and grave originally destined for a Gentile, but not

vice versâ.

[12981]6489 This destination or preparation is called Hachanah.

[12982]6490 Ex. xx. 8--11; xxiii. 12-17; xxxiv. 1-3; Deut. v. 12-15.

[12983]6491 Of course, we mean their general direction, not the

details.

[12984]6492 In view of the strange renderings and interpretations

given of Rosh haSh. 16 b, 17 a, I must call special attention to this

locus classicus.

References

1. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1

2. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2

3. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3

4. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4

5. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5

6. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6

7. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf7

8. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf8

9. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf9

10. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf10

11. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf11

12. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf12

13. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf13

14. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf14

15. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf15

16. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf16

17. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf17

18. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf18

19. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf19

20. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf20

21. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf21

22. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf22

23. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf23

24. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf24

25. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf25

26. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf26

27. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf27

28. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf28

29. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf29

30. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf30

31. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf31

32. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf32

33. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf33

34. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf34

35. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf35

36. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf36

37. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf37

38. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf38

39. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf39

40. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf40

41. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf41

42. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf42

43. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf43

44. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf44

45. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf45

46. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf46

47. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf47

48. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf48

49. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf49

50. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf50

51. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf51

52. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf52

53. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf53

54. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf54

55. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf55

56. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf56

57. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf57

58. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf58

59. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf59

60. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf60

61. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf61

62. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf62

63. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf63

64. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf64

65. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf65

66. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf66

67. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf67

68. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf68

69. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf69

70. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf70

71. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf71

72. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf72

73. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf73

74. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf74

75. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf75

76. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf76

77. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf77

78. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf78

79. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf79

80. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf80

81. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf81

82. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf82

83. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf83

84. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf84

85. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf85

86. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf86

87. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf87

88. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf88

89. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf89

90. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf90

91. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf91

92. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf92

93. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf93

94. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf94

95. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf95

96. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf96

97. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf97

98. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf98

99. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf99

100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf100

101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf101

102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf102

103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf103

104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf104

105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf105

106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf106

107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf107

108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf108

109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf109

110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf110

111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf111

112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf112

113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf113

114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf114

115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf115

116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf116

117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf117

118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf118

119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf119

120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf120

121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf121

122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf122

123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf123

124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf124

125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf125

126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf126

127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf127

128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf128

129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf129

130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf130

131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf131

132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf132

133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf133

134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf134

135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf135

136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf136

137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf137

138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf138

139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf139

140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf140

141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf141

142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf142

143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf143

144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf144

145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf145

146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf146

147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf147

148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf148

149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf149

150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf150

151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf151

152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf152

153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf153

154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf154

155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf155

156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf156

157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf157

158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf158

159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf159

160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf160

161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf161

162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf162

163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf163

164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf164

165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf165

166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf166

167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf167

168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf168

169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf169

170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf170

171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf171

172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf172

173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf173

174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf174

175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf175

176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf176

177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf177

178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf178

179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf179

180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf180

181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf181

182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf182

183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf183

184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf184

185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf185

186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf186

187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf187

188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf188

189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf189

190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf190

191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf191

192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf192

193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf193

194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf194

195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf195

196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf196

197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf197

198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf198

199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf199

200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf200

201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf201

202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf202

203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf203

204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf204

205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf205

206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf206

207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf207

208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf208

209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf209

210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf210

211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf211

212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf212

213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf213

214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf214

215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf215

216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf216

217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf217

218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf218

219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf219

220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf220

221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf221

222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf222

223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf223

224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf224

225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf225

226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf226

227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf227

228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf228

229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf229

230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf230

231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf231

232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf232

233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf233

234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf234

235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf235

236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf236

237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf237

238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf238

239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf239

240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf240

241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf241

242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf242

243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf243

244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf244

245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf245

246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf246

247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf247

248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf248

249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf249

250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf250

251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf251

252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf252

253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf253

254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf254

255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf255

256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf256

257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf257

258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf258

259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf259

260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf260

261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf261

262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf262

263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf263

264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf264

265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf265

266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf266

267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf267

268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf268

269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf269

270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf270

271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf271

272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf272

273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf273

274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf274

275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf275

276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf276

277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf277

278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf278

279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf279

280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf280

281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf281

282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf282

283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf283

284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf284

285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf285

286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf286

287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf287

288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf288

289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf289

290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf290

291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf291

292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf292

293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf293

294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf294

295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf295

296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf296

297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf297

298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf298

299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf299

300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf300

301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf301

302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf302

303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf303

304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf304

305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf305

306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf306

307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf307

308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf308

309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf309

310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf310

311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf311

312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf312

313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf313

314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf314

315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf315

316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf316

317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf317

318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf318

319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf319

320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf320

321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf321

322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf322

323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf323

324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf324

325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf325

326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf326

327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf327

328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf328

329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf329

330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf330

331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf331

332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf332

333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf333

334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf334

335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf335

336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf336

337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf337

338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf338

339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf339

340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf340

341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf341

342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf342

343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf343

344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf344

345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf345

346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf346

347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf347

348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf348

349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf349

350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf350

351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf351

352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf352

353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf353

354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf354

355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf355

356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf356

357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf357

358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf358

359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf359

360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf360

361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf361

362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf362

363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf363

364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf364

365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf365

366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf366

367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf367

368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf368

369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf369

370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf370

371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf371

372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf372

373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf373

374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf374

375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf375

376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf376

377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf377

378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf378

379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf379

380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf380

381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf381

382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf382

383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf383

384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf384

385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf385

386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf386

387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf387

388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf388

389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf389

390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf390

391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf391

392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf392

393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf393

394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf394

395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf395

396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf396

397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf397

398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf398

399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf399

400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf400

401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf401

402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf402

403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf403

404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf404

405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf405

406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf406

407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf407

408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf408

409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf409

410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf410

411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf411

412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf412

413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf413

414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf414

415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf415

416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf416

417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf417

418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf418

419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf419

420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf420

421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf421

422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf422

423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf423

424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf424

425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf425

426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf426

427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf427

428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf428

429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf429

430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf430

431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf431

432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf432

433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf433

434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf434

435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf435

436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf436

437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf437

438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf438

439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf439

440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf440

441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf441

442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf442

443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf443

444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf444

445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf445

446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf446

447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf447

448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf448

449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf449

450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf450

451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf451

452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf452

453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf453

454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf454

455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf455

456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf456

457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf457

458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf458

459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf459

460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf460

461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf461

462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf462

463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf463

464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf464

465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf465

466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf466

467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf467

468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf468

469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf469

470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf470

471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf471

472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf472

473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf473

474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf474

475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf475

476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf476

477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf477

478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf478

479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf479

480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf480

481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf481

482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf482

483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf483

484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf484

485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf485

486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf486

487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf487

488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf488

489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf489

490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf490

491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf491

492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf492

493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf493

494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf494

495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf495

496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf496

497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf497

498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf498

499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf499

500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf500

501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf501

502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf502

503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf503

504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf504

505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf505

506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf506

507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf507

508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf508

509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf509

510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf510

511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf511

512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf512

513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf513

514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf514

515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf515

516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf516

517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf517

518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf518

519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf519

520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf520

521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf521

522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf522

523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf523

524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf524

525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf525

526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf526

527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf527

528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf528

529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf529

530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf530

531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf531

532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf532

533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf533

534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf534

535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf535

536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf536

537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf537

538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf538

539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf539

540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf540

541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf541

542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf542

543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf543

544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf544

545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf545

546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf546

547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf547

548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf548

549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf549

550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf550

551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf551

552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf552

553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf553

554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf554

555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf555

556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf556

557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf557

558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf558

559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf559

560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf560

561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf561

562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf562

563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf563

564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf564

565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf565

566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf566

567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf567

568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf568

569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf569

570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf570

571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf571

572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf572

573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf573

574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf574

575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf575

576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf576

577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf577

578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf578

579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf579

580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf580

581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf581

582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf582

583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf583

584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf584

585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf585

586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf586

587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf587

588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf588

589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf589

590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf590

591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf591

592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf592

593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf593

594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf594

595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf595

596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf596

597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf597

598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf598

599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf599

600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf600

601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf601

602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf602

603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf603

604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf604

605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf605

606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf606

607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf607

608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf608

609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf609

610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf610

611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf611

612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf612

613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf613

614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf614

615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf615

616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf616

617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf617

618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf618

619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf619

620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf620

621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf621

622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf622

623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf623

624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf624

625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf625

626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf626

627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf627

628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf628

629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf629

630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf630

631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf631

632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf632

633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf633

634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf634

635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf635

636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf636

637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf637

638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf638

639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf639

640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf640

641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf641

642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf642

643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf643

644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf644

645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf645

646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf646

647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf647

648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf648

649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf649

650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf650

651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf651

652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf652

653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf653

654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf654

655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf655

656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf656

657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf657

658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf658

659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf659

660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf660

661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf661

662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf662

663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf663

664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf664

665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf665

666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf666

667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf667

668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf668

669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf669

670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf670

671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf671

672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf672

673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf673

674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf674

675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf675

676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf676

677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf677

678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf678

679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf679

680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf680

681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf681

682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf682

683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf683

684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf684

685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf685

686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf686

687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf687

688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf688

689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf689

690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf690

691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf691

692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf692

693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf693

694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf694

695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf695

696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf696

697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf697

698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf698

699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf699

700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf700

701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf701

702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf702

703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf703

704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf704

705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf705

706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf706

707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf707

708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf708

709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf709

710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf710

711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf711

712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf712

713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf713

714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf714

715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf715

716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf716

717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf717

718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf718

719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf719

720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf720

721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf721

722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf722

723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf723

724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf724

725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf725

726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf726

727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf727

728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf728

729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf729

730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf730

731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf731

732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf732

733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf733

734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf734

735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf735

736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf736

737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf737

738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf738

739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf739

740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf740

741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf741

742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf742

743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf743

744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf744

745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf745

746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf746

747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf747

748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf748

749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf749

750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf750

751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf751

752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf752

753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf753

754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf754

755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf755

756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf756

757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf757

758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf758

759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf759

760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf760

761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf761

762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf762

763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf763

764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf764

765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf765

766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf766

767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf767

768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf768

769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf769

770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf770

771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf771

772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf772

773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf773

774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf774

775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf775

776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf776

777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf777

778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf778

779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf779

780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf780

781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf781

782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf782

783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf783

784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf784

785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf785

786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf786

787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf787

788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf788

789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf789

790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf790

791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf791

792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf792

793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf793

794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf794

795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf795

796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf796

797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf797

798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf798

799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf799

800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf800

801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf801

802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf802

803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf803

804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf804

805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf805

806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf806

807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf807

808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf808

809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf809

810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf810

811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf811

812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf812

813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf813

814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf814

815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf815

816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf816

817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf817

818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf818

819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf819

820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf820

821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf821

822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf822

823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf823

824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf824

825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf825

826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf826

827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf827

828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf828

829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf829

830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf830

831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf831

832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf832

833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf833

834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf834

835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf835

836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf836

837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf837

838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf838

839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf839

840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf840

841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf841

842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf842

843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf843

844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf844

845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf845

846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf846

847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf847

848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf848

849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf849

850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf850

851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf851

852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf852

853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf853

854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf854

855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf855

856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf856

857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf857

858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf858

859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf859

860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf860

861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf861

862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf862

863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf863

864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf864

865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf865

866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf866

867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf867

868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf868

869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf869

870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf870

871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf871

872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf872

873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf873

874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf874

875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf875

876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf876

877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf877

878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf878

879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf879

880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf880

881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf881

882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf882

883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf883

884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf884

885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf885

886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf886

887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf887

888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf888

889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf889

890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf890

891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf891

892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf892

893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf893

894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf894

895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf895

896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf896

897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf897

898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf898

899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf899

900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf900

901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf901

902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf902

903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf903

904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf904

905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf905

906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf906

907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf907

908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf908

909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf909

910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf910

911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf911

912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf912

913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf913

914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf914

915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf915

916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf916

917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf917

918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf918

919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf919

920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf920

921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf921

922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf922

923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf923

924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf924

925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf925

926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf926

927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf927

928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf928

929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf929

930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf930

931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf931

932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf932

933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf933

934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf934

935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf935

936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf936

937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf937

938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf938

939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf939

940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf940

941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf941

942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf942

943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf943

944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf944

945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf945

946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf946

947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf947

948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf948

949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf949

950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf950

951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf951

952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf952

953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf953

954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf954

955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf955

956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf956

957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf957

958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf958

959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf959

960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf960

961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf961

962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf962

963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf963

964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf964

965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf965

966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf966

967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf967

968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf968

969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf969

970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf970

971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf971

972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf972

973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf973

974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf974

975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf975

976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf976

977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf977

978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf978

979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf979

980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf980

981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf981

982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf982

983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf983

984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf984

985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf985

986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf986

987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf987

988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf988

989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf989

990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf990

991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf991

992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf992

993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf993

994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf994

995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf995

996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf996

997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf997

998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf998

999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf999

1000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1000

1001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1001

1002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1002

1003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1003

1004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1004

1005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1005

1006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1006

1007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1007

1008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1008

1009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1009

1010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1010

1011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1011

1012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1012

1013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1013

1014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1014

1015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1015

1016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1016

1017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1017

1018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1018

1019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1019

1020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1020

1021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1021

1022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1022

1023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1023

1024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1024

1025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1025

1026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1026

1027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1027

1028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1028

1029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1029

1030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1030

1031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1031

1032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1032

1033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1033

1034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1034

1035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1035

1036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1036

1037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1037

1038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1038

1039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1039

1040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1040

1041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1041

1042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1042

1043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1043

1044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1044

1045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1045

1046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1046

1047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1047

1048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1048

1049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1049

1050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1050

1051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1051

1052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1052

1053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1053

1054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1054

1055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1055

1056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1056

1057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1057

1058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1058

1059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1059

1060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1060

1061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1061

1062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1062

1063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1063

1064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1064

1065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1065

1066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1066

1067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1067

1068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1068

1069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1069

1070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1070

1071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1071

1072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1072

1073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1073

1074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1074

1075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1075

1076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1076

1077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1077

1078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1078

1079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1079

1080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1080

1081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1081

1082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1082

1083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1083

1084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1084

1085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1085

1086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1086

1087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1087

1088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1088

1089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1089

1090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1090

1091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1091

1092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1092

1093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1093

1094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1094

1095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1095

1096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1096

1097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1097

1098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1098

1099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1099

1100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1100

1101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1101

1102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1102

1103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1103

1104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1104

1105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1105

1106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1106

1107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1107

1108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1108

1109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1109

1110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1110

1111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1111

1112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1112

1113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1113

1114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1114

1115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1115

1116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1116

1117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1117

1118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1118

1119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1119

1120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1120

1121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1121

1122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1122

1123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1123

1124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1124

1125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1125

1126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1126

1127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1127

1128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1128

1129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1129

1130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1130

1131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1131

1132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1132

1133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1133

1134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1134

1135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1135

1136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1136

1137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1137

1138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1138

1139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1139

1140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1140

1141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1141

1142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1142

1143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1143

1144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1144

1145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1145

1146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1146

1147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1147

1148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1148

1149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1149

1150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1150

1151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1151

1152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1152

1153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1153

1154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1154

1155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1155

1156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1156

1157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1157

1158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1158

1159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1159

1160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1160

1161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1161

1162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1162

1163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1163

1164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1164

1165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1165

1166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1166

1167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1167

1168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1168

1169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1169

1170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1170

1171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1171

1172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1172

1173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1173

1174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1174

1175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1175

1176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1176

1177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1177

1178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1178

1179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1179

1180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1180

1181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1181

1182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1182

1183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1183

1184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1184

1185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1185

1186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1186

1187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1187

1188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1188

1189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1189

1190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1190

1191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1191

1192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1192

1193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1193

1194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1194

1195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1195

1196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1196

1197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1197

1198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1198

1199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1199

1200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1200

1201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1201

1202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1202

1203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1203

1204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1204

1205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1205

1206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1206

1207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1207

1208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1208

1209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1209

1210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1210

1211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1211

1212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1212

1213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1213

1214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1214

1215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1215

1216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1216

1217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1217

1218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1218

1219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1219

1220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1220

1221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1221

1222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1222

1223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1223

1224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1224

1225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1225

1226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1226

1227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1227

1228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1228

1229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1229

1230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1230

1231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1231

1232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1232

1233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1233

1234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1234

1235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1235

1236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1236

1237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1237

1238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1238

1239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1239

1240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1240

1241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1241

1242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1242

1243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1243

1244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1244

1245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1245

1246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1246

1247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1247

1248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1248

1249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1249

1250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1250

1251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1251

1252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1252

1253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1253

1254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1254

1255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1255

1256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1256

1257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1257

1258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1258

1259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1259

1260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1260

1261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1261

1262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1262

1263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1263

1264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1264

1265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1265

1266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1266

1267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1267

1268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1268

1269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1269

1270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1270

1271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1271

1272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1272

1273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1273

1274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1274

1275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1275

1276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1276

1277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1277

1278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1278

1279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1279

1280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1280

1281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1281

1282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1282

1283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1283

1284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1284

1285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1285

1286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1286

1287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1287

1288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1288

1289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1289

1290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1290

1291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1291

1292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1292

1293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1293

1294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1294

1295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1295

1296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1296

1297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1297

1298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1298

1299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1299

1300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1300

1301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1301

1302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1302

1303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1303

1304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1304

1305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1305

1306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1306

1307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1307

1308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1308

1309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1309

1310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1310

1311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1311

1312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1312

1313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1313

1314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1314

1315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1315

1316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1316

1317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1317

1318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1318

1319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1319

1320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1320

1321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1321

1322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1322

1323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1323

1324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1324

1325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1325

1326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1326

1327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1327

1328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1328

1329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1329

1330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1330

1331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1331

1332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1332

1333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1333

1334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1334

1335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1335

1336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1336

1337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1337

1338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1338

1339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1339

1340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1340

1341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1341

1342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1342

1343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1343

1344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1344

1345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1345

1346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1346

1347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1347

1348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1348

1349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1349

1350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1350

1351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1351

1352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1352

1353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1353

1354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1354

1355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1355

1356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1356

1357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1357

1358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1358

1359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1359

1360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1360

1361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1361

1362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1362

1363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1363

1364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1364

1365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1365

1366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1366

1367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1367

1368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1368

1369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1369

1370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1370

1371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1371

1372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1372

1373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1373

1374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1374

1375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1375

1376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1376

1377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1377

1378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1378

1379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1379

1380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1380

1381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1381

1382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1382

1383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1383

1384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1384

1385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1385

1386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1386

1387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1387

1388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1388

1389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1389

1390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1390

1391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1391

1392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1392

1393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1393

1394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1394

1395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1395

1396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1396

1397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1397

1398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1398

1399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1399

1400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1400

1401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1401

1402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1402

1403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1403

1404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1404

1405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1405

1406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1406

1407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1407

1408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1408

1409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1409

1410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1410

1411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1411

1412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1412

1413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1413

1414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1414

1415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1415

1416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1416

1417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1417

1418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1418

1419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1419

1420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1420

1421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1421

1422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1422

1423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1423

1424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1424

1425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1425

1426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1426

1427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1427

1428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1428

1429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1429

1430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1430

1431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1431

1432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1432

1433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1433

1434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1434

1435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1435

1436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1436

1437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1437

1438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1438

1439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1439

1440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1440

1441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1441

1442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1442

1443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1443

1444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1444

1445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1445

1446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1446

1447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1447

1448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1448

1449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1449

1450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1450

1451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1451

1452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1452

1453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1453

1454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1454

1455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1455

1456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1456

1457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1457

1458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1458

1459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1459

1460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1460

1461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1461

1462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1462

1463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1463

1464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1464

1465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1465

1466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1466

1467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1467

1468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1468

1469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1469

1470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1470

1471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1471

1472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1472

1473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1473

1474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1474

1475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1475

1476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1476

1477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1477

1478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1478

1479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1479

1480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1480

1481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1481

1482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1482

1483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1483

1484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1484

1485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1485

1486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1486

1487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1487

1488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1488

1489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1489

1490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1490

1491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1491

1492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1492

1493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1493

1494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1494

1495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1495

1496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1496

1497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1497

1498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1498

1499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1499

1500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1500

1501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1501

1502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1502

1503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1503

1504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1504

1505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1505

1506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1506

1507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1507

1508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1508

1509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1509

1510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1510

1511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1511

1512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1512

1513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1513

1514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1514

1515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1515

1516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1516

1517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1517

1518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1518

1519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1519

1520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1520

1521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1521

1522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1522

1523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1523

1524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1524

1525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1525

1526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1526

1527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1527

1528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1528

1529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1529

1530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1530

1531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1531

1532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1532

1533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1533

1534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1534

1535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1535

1536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1536

1537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1537

1538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1538

1539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1539

1540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1540

1541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1541

1542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1542

1543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1543

1544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1544

1545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1545

1546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1546

1547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1547

1548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1548

1549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1549

1550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1550

1551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1551

1552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1552

1553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1553

1554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1554

1555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1555

1556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1556

1557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1557

1558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1558

1559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1559

1560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1560

1561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1561

1562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1562

1563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1563

1564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1564

1565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1565

1566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1566

1567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1567

1568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1568

1569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1569

1570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1570

1571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1571

1572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1572

1573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1573

1574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1574

1575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1575

1576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1576

1577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1577

1578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1578

1579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1579

1580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1580

1581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1581

1582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1582

1583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1583

1584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1584

1585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1585

1586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1586

1587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1587

1588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1588

1589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1589

1590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1590

1591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1591

1592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1592

1593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1593

1594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1594

1595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1595

1596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1596

1597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1597

1598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1598

1599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1599

1600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1600

1601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1601

1602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1602

1603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1603

1604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1604

1605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1605

1606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1606

1607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1607

1608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1608

1609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1609

1610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1610

1611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1611

1612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1612

1613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1613

1614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1614

1615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1615

1616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1616

1617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1617

1618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1618

1619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1619

1620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1620

1621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1621

1622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1622

1623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1623

1624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1624

1625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1625

1626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1626

1627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1627

1628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1628

1629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1629

1630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1630

1631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1631

1632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1632

1633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1633

1634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1634

1635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1635

1636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1636

1637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1637

1638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1638

1639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1639

1640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1640

1641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1641

1642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1642

1643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1643

1644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1644

1645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1645

1646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1646

1647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1647

1648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1648

1649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1649

1650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1650

1651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1651

1652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1652

1653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1653

1654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1654

1655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1655

1656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1656

1657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1657

1658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1658

1659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1659

1660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1660

1661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1661

1662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1662

1663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1663

1664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1664

1665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1665

1666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1666

1667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1667

1668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1668

1669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1669

1670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1670

1671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1671

1672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1672

1673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1673

1674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1674

1675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1675

1676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1676

1677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1677

1678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1678

1679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1679

1680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1680

1681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1681

1682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1682

1683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1683

1684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1684

1685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1685

1686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1686

1687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1687

1688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1688

1689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1689

1690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1690

1691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1691

1692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1692

1693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1693

1694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1694

1695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1695

1696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1696

1697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1697

1698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1698

1699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1699

1700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1700

1701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1701

1702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1702

1703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1703

1704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1704

1705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1705

1706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1706

1707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1707

1708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1708

1709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1709

1710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1710

1711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1711

1712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1712

1713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1713

1714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1714

1715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1715

1716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1716

1717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1717

1718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1718

1719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1719

1720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1720

1721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1721

1722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1722

1723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1723

1724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1724

1725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1725

1726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1726

1727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1727

1728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1728

1729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1729

1730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1730

1731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1731

1732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1732

1733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1733

1734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1734

1735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1735

1736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1736

1737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1737

1738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1738

1739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1739

1740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1740

1741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1741

1742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1742

1743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1743

1744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1744

1745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1745

1746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1746

1747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1747

1748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1748

1749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1749

1750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1750

1751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1751

1752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1752

1753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1753

1754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1754

1755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1755

1756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1756

1757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1757

1758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1758

1759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1759

1760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1760

1761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1761

1762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1762

1763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1763

1764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1764

1765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1765

1766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1766

1767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1767

1768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1768

1769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1769

1770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1770

1771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1771

1772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1772

1773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1773

1774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1774

1775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1775

1776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1776

1777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1777

1778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1778

1779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1779

1780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1780

1781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1781

1782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1782

1783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1783

1784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1784

1785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1785

1786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1786

1787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1787

1788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1788

1789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1789

1790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1790

1791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1791

1792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1792

1793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1793

1794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1794

1795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1795

1796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1796

1797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1797

1798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1798

1799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1799

1800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1800

1801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1801

1802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1802

1803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1803

1804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1804

1805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1805

1806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1806

1807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1807

1808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1808

1809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1809

1810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1810

1811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1811

1812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1812

1813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1813

1814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1814

1815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1815

1816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1816

1817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1817

1818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1818

1819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1819

1820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1820

1821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1821

1822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1822

1823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1823

1824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1824

1825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1825

1826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1826

1827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1827

1828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1828

1829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1829

1830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1830

1831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1831

1832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1832

1833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1833

1834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1834

1835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1835

1836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1836

1837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1837

1838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1838

1839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1839

1840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1840

1841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1841

1842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1842

1843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1843

1844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1844

1845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1845

1846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1846

1847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1847

1848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1848

1849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1849

1850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1850

1851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1851

1852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1852

1853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1853

1854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1854

1855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1855

1856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1856

1857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1857

1858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1858

1859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1859

1860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1860

1861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1861

1862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1862

1863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1863

1864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1864

1865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1865

1866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1866

1867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1867

1868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1868

1869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1869

1870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1870

1871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1871

1872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1872

1873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1873

1874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1874

1875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1875

1876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1876

1877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1877

1878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1878

1879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1879

1880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1880

1881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1881

1882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1882

1883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1883

1884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1884

1885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1885

1886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1886

1887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1887

1888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1888

1889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1889

1890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1890

1891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1891

1892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1892

1893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1893

1894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1894

1895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1895

1896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1896

1897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1897

1898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1898

1899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1899

1900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1900

1901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1901

1902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1902

1903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1903

1904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1904

1905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1905

1906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1906

1907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1907

1908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1908

1909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1909

1910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1910

1911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1911

1912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1912

1913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1913

1914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1914

1915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1915

1916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1916

1917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1917

1918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1918

1919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1919

1920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1920

1921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1921

1922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1922

1923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1923

1924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1924

1925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1925

1926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1926

1927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1927

1928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1928

1929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1929

1930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1930

1931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1931

1932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1932

1933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1933

1934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1934

1935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1935

1936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1936

1937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1937

1938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1938

1939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1939

1940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1940

1941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1941

1942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1942

1943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1943

1944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1944

1945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1945

1946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1946

1947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1947

1948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1948

1949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1949

1950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1950

1951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1951

1952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1952

1953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1953

1954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1954

1955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1955

1956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1956

1957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1957

1958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1958

1959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1959

1960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1960

1961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1961

1962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1962

1963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1963

1964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1964

1965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1965

1966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1966

1967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1967

1968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1968

1969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1969

1970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1970

1971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1971

1972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1972

1973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1973

1974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1974

1975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1975

1976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1976

1977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1977

1978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1978

1979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1979

1980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1980

1981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1981

1982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1982

1983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1983

1984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1984

1985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1985

1986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1986

1987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1987

1988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1988

1989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1989

1990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1990

1991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1991

1992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1992

1993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1993

1994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1994

1995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1995

1996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1996

1997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1997

1998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1998

1999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf1999

2000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2000

2001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2001

2002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2002

2003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2003

2004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2004

2005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2005

2006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2006

2007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2007

2008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2008

2009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2009

2010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2010

2011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2011

2012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2012

2013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2013

2014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2014

2015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2015

2016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2016

2017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2017

2018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2018

2019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2019

2020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2020

2021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2021

2022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2022

2023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2023

2024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2024

2025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2025

2026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2026

2027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2027

2028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2028

2029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2029

2030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2030

2031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2031

2032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2032

2033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2033

2034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2034

2035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2035

2036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2036

2037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2037

2038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2038

2039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2039

2040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2040

2041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2041

2042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2042

2043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2043

2044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2044

2045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2045

2046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2046

2047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2047

2048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2048

2049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2049

2050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2050

2051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2051

2052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2052

2053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2053

2054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2054

2055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2055

2056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2056

2057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2057

2058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2058

2059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2059

2060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2060

2061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2061

2062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2062

2063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2063

2064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2064

2065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2065

2066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2066

2067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2067

2068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2068

2069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2069

2070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2070

2071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2071

2072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2072

2073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2073

2074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2074

2075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2075

2076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2076

2077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2077

2078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2078

2079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2079

2080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2080

2081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2081

2082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2082

2083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2083

2084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2084

2085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2085

2086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2086

2087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2087

2088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2088

2089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2089

2090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2090

2091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2091

2092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2092

2093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2093

2094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2094

2095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2095

2096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2096

2097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2097

2098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2098

2099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2099

2100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2100

2101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2101

2102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2102

2103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2103

2104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2104

2105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2105

2106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2106

2107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2107

2108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2108

2109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2109

2110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2110

2111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2111

2112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2112

2113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2113

2114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2114

2115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2115

2116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2116

2117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2117

2118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2118

2119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2119

2120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2120

2121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2121

2122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2122

2123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2123

2124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2124

2125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2125

2126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2126

2127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2127

2128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2128

2129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2129

2130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2130

2131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2131

2132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2132

2133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2133

2134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2134

2135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2135

2136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2136

2137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2137

2138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2138

2139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2139

2140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2140

2141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2141

2142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2142

2143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2143

2144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2144

2145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2145

2146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2146

2147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2147

2148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2148

2149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2149

2150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2150

2151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2151

2152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2152

2153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2153

2154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2154

2155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2155

2156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2156

2157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2157

2158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2158

2159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2159

2160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2160

2161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2161

2162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2162

2163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2163

2164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2164

2165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2165

2166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2166

2167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2167

2168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2168

2169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2169

2170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2170

2171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2171

2172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2172

2173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2173

2174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2174

2175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2175

2176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2176

2177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2177

2178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2178

2179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2179

2180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2180

2181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2181

2182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2182

2183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2183

2184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2184

2185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2185

2186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2186

2187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2187

2188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2188

2189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2189

2190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2190

2191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2191

2192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2192

2193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2193

2194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2194

2195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2195

2196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2196

2197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2197

2198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2198

2199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2199

2200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2200

2201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2201

2202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2202

2203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2203

2204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2204

2205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2205

2206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2206

2207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2207

2208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2208

2209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2209

2210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2210

2211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2211

2212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2212

2213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2213

2214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2214

2215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2215

2216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2216

2217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2217

2218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2218

2219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2219

2220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2220

2221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2221

2222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2222

2223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2223

2224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2224

2225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2225

2226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2226

2227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2227

2228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2228

2229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2229

2230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2230

2231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2231

2232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2232

2233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2233

2234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2234

2235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2235

2236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2236

2237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2237

2238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2238

2239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2239

2240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2240

2241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2241

2242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2242

2243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2243

2244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2244

2245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2245

2246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2246

2247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2247

2248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2248

2249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2249

2250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2250

2251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2251

2252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2252

2253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2253

2254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2254

2255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2255

2256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2256

2257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2257

2258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2258

2259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2259

2260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2260

2261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2261

2262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2262

2263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2263

2264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2264

2265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2265

2266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2266

2267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2267

2268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2268

2269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2269

2270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2270

2271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2271

2272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2272

2273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2273

2274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2274

2275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2275

2276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2276

2277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2277

2278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2278

2279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2279

2280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2280

2281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2281

2282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2282

2283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2283

2284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2284

2285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2285

2286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2286

2287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2287

2288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2288

2289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2289

2290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2290

2291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2291

2292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2292

2293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2293

2294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2294

2295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2295

2296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2296

2297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2297

2298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2298

2299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2299

2300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2300

2301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2301

2302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2302

2303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2303

2304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2304

2305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2305

2306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2306

2307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2307

2308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2308

2309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2309

2310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2310

2311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2311

2312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2312

2313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2313

2314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2314

2315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2315

2316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2316

2317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2317

2318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2318

2319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2319

2320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2320

2321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2321

2322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2322

2323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2323

2324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2324

2325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2325

2326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2326

2327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2327

2328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2328

2329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2329

2330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2330

2331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2331

2332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2332

2333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2333

2334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2334

2335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2335

2336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2336

2337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2337

2338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2338

2339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2339

2340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2340

2341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2341

2342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2342

2343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2343

2344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2344

2345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2345

2346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2346

2347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2347

2348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2348

2349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2349

2350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2350

2351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2351

2352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2352

2353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2353

2354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2354

2355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2355

2356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2356

2357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2357

2358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2358

2359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2359

2360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2360

2361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2361

2362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2362

2363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2363

2364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2364

2365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2365

2366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2366

2367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2367

2368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2368

2369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2369

2370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2370

2371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2371

2372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2372

2373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2373

2374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2374

2375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2375

2376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2376

2377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2377

2378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2378

2379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2379

2380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2380

2381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2381

2382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2382

2383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2383

2384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2384

2385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2385

2386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2386

2387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2387

2388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2388

2389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2389

2390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2390

2391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2391

2392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2392

2393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2393

2394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2394

2395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2395

2396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2396

2397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2397

2398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2398

2399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2399

2400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2400

2401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2401

2402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2402

2403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2403

2404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2404

2405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2405

2406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2406

2407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2407

2408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2408

2409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2409

2410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2410

2411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2411

2412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2412

2413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2413

2414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2414

2415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2415

2416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2416

2417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2417

2418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2418

2419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2419

2420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2420

2421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2421

2422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2422

2423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2423

2424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2424

2425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2425

2426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2426

2427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2427

2428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2428

2429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2429

2430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2430

2431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2431

2432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2432

2433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2433

2434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2434

2435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2435

2436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2436

2437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2437

2438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2438

2439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2439

2440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2440

2441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2441

2442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2442

2443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2443

2444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2444

2445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2445

2446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2446

2447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2447

2448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2448

2449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2449

2450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2450

2451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2451

2452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2452

2453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2453

2454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2454

2455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2455

2456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2456

2457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2457

2458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2458

2459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2459

2460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2460

2461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2461

2462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2462

2463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2463

2464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2464

2465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2465

2466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2466

2467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2467

2468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2468

2469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2469

2470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2470

2471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2471

2472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2472

2473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2473

2474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2474

2475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2475

2476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2476

2477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2477

2478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2478

2479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2479

2480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2480

2481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2481

2482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2482

2483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2483

2484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2484

2485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2485

2486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2486

2487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2487

2488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2488

2489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2489

2490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2490

2491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2491

2492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2492

2493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2493

2494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2494

2495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2495

2496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2496

2497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2497

2498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2498

2499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2499

2500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2500

2501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2501

2502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2502

2503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2503

2504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2504

2505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2505

2506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2506

2507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2507

2508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2508

2509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2509

2510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2510

2511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2511

2512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2512

2513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2513

2514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2514

2515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2515

2516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2516

2517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2517

2518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2518

2519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2519

2520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2520

2521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2521

2522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2522

2523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2523

2524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2524

2525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2525

2526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2526

2527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2527

2528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2528

2529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2529

2530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2530

2531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2531

2532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2532

2533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2533

2534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2534

2535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2535

2536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2536

2537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2537

2538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2538

2539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2539

2540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2540

2541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2541

2542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2542

2543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2543

2544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2544

2545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2545

2546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2546

2547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2547

2548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2548

2549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2549

2550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2550

2551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2551

2552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2552

2553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2553

2554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2554

2555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2555

2556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2556

2557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2557

2558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2558

2559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2559

2560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2560

2561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2561

2562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2562

2563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2563

2564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2564

2565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2565

2566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2566

2567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2567

2568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2568

2569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2569

2570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2570

2571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2571

2572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2572

2573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2573

2574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2574

2575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2575

2576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2576

2577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2577

2578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2578

2579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2579

2580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2580

2581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2581

2582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2582

2583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2583

2584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2584

2585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2585

2586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2586

2587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2587

2588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2588

2589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2589

2590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2590

2591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2591

2592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2592

2593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2593

2594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2594

2595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2595

2596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2596

2597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2597

2598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2598

2599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2599

2600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2600

2601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2601

2602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2602

2603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2603

2604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2604

2605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2605

2606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2606

2607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2607

2608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2608

2609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2609

2610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2610

2611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2611

2612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2612

2613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2613

2614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2614

2615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2615

2616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2616

2617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2617

2618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2618

2619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2619

2620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2620

2621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2621

2622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2622

2623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2623

2624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2624

2625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2625

2626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2626

2627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2627

2628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2628

2629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2629

2630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2630

2631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2631

2632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2632

2633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2633

2634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2634

2635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2635

2636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2636

2637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2637

2638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2638

2639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2639

2640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2640

2641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2641

2642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2642

2643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2643

2644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2644

2645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2645

2646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2646

2647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2647

2648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2648

2649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2649

2650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2650

2651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2651

2652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2652

2653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2653

2654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2654

2655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2655

2656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2656

2657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2657

2658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2658

2659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2659

2660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2660

2661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2661

2662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2662

2663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2663

2664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2664

2665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2665

2666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2666

2667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2667

2668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2668

2669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2669

2670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2670

2671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2671

2672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2672

2673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2673

2674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2674

2675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2675

2676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2676

2677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2677

2678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2678

2679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2679

2680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2680

2681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2681

2682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2682

2683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2683

2684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2684

2685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2685

2686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2686

2687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2687

2688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2688

2689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2689

2690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2690

2691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2691

2692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2692

2693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2693

2694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2694

2695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2695

2696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2696

2697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2697

2698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2698

2699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2699

2700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2700

2701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2701

2702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2702

2703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2703

2704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2704

2705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2705

2706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2706

2707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2707

2708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2708

2709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2709

2710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2710

2711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2711

2712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2712

2713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2713

2714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2714

2715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2715

2716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2716

2717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2717

2718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2718

2719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2719

2720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2720

2721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2721

2722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2722

2723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2723

2724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2724

2725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2725

2726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2726

2727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2727

2728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2728

2729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2729

2730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2730

2731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2731

2732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2732

2733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2733

2734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2734

2735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2735

2736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2736

2737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2737

2738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2738

2739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2739

2740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2740

2741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2741

2742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2742

2743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2743

2744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2744

2745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2745

2746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2746

2747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2747

2748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2748

2749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2749

2750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2750

2751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2751

2752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2752

2753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2753

2754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2754

2755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2755

2756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2756

2757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2757

2758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2758

2759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2759

2760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2760

2761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2761

2762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2762

2763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2763

2764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2764

2765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2765

2766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2766

2767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2767

2768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2768

2769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2769

2770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2770

2771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2771

2772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2772

2773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2773

2774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2774

2775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2775

2776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2776

2777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2777

2778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2778

2779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2779

2780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2780

2781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2781

2782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2782

2783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2783

2784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2784

2785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2785

2786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2786

2787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2787

2788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2788

2789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2789

2790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2790

2791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2791

2792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2792

2793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2793

2794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2794

2795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2795

2796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2796

2797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2797

2798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2798

2799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2799

2800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2800

2801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2801

2802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2802

2803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2803

2804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2804

2805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2805

2806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2806

2807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2807

2808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2808

2809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2809

2810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2810

2811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2811

2812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2812

2813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2813

2814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2814

2815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2815

2816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2816

2817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2817

2818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2818

2819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2819

2820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2820

2821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2821

2822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2822

2823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2823

2824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2824

2825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2825

2826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2826

2827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2827

2828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2828

2829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2829

2830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2830

2831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2831

2832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2832

2833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2833

2834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2834

2835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2835

2836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2836

2837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2837

2838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2838

2839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2839

2840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2840

2841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2841

2842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2842

2843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2843

2844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2844

2845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2845

2846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2846

2847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2847

2848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2848

2849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2849

2850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2850

2851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2851

2852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2852

2853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2853

2854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2854

2855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2855

2856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2856

2857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2857

2858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2858

2859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2859

2860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2860

2861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2861

2862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2862

2863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2863

2864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2864

2865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2865

2866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2866

2867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2867

2868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2868

2869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2869

2870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2870

2871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2871

2872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2872

2873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2873

2874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2874

2875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2875

2876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2876

2877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2877

2878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2878

2879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2879

2880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2880

2881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2881

2882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2882

2883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2883

2884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2884

2885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2885

2886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2886

2887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2887

2888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2888

2889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2889

2890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2890

2891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2891

2892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2892

2893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2893

2894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2894

2895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2895

2896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2896

2897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2897

2898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2898

2899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2899

2900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2900

2901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2901

2902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2902

2903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2903

2904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2904

2905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2905

2906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2906

2907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2907

2908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2908

2909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2909

2910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2910

2911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2911

2912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2912

2913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2913

2914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2914

2915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2915

2916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2916

2917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2917

2918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2918

2919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2919

2920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2920

2921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2921

2922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2922

2923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2923

2924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2924

2925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2925

2926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2926

2927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2927

2928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2928

2929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2929

2930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2930

2931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2931

2932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2932

2933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2933

2934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2934

2935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2935

2936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2936

2937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2937

2938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2938

2939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2939

2940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2940

2941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2941

2942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2942

2943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2943

2944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2944

2945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2945

2946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2946

2947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2947

2948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2948

2949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2949

2950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2950

2951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2951

2952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2952

2953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2953

2954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2954

2955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2955

2956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2956

2957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2957

2958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2958

2959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2959

2960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2960

2961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2961

2962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2962

2963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2963

2964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2964

2965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2965

2966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2966

2967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2967

2968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2968

2969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2969

2970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2970

2971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2971

2972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2972

2973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2973

2974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2974

2975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2975

2976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2976

2977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2977

2978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2978

2979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2979

2980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2980

2981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2981

2982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2982

2983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2983

2984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2984

2985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2985

2986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2986

2987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2987

2988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2988

2989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2989

2990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2990

2991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2991

2992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2992

2993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2993

2994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2994

2995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2995

2996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2996

2997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2997

2998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2998

2999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf2999

3000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3000

3001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3001

3002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3002

3003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3003

3004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3004

3005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3005

3006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3006

3007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3007

3008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3008

3009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3009

3010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3010

3011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3011

3012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3012

3013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3013

3014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3014

3015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3015

3016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3016

3017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3017

3018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3018

3019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3019

3020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3020

3021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3021

3022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3022

3023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3023

3024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3024

3025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3025

3026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3026

3027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3027

3028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3028

3029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3029

3030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3030

3031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3031

3032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3032

3033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3033

3034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3034

3035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3035

3036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3036

3037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3037

3038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3038

3039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3039

3040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3040

3041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3041

3042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3042

3043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3043

3044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3044

3045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3045

3046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3046

3047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3047

3048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3048

3049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3049

3050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3050

3051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3051

3052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3052

3053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3053

3054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3054

3055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3055

3056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3056

3057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3057

3058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3058

3059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3059

3060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3060

3061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3061

3062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3062

3063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3063

3064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3064

3065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3065

3066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3066

3067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3067

3068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3068

3069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3069

3070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3070

3071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3071

3072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3072

3073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3073

3074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3074

3075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3075

3076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3076

3077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3077

3078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3078

3079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3079

3080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3080

3081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3081

3082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3082

3083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3083

3084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3084

3085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3085

3086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3086

3087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3087

3088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3088

3089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3089

3090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3090

3091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3091

3092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3092

3093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3093

3094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3094

3095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3095

3096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3096

3097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3097

3098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3098

3099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3099

3100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3100

3101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3101

3102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3102

3103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3103

3104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3104

3105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3105

3106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3106

3107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3107

3108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3108

3109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3109

3110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3110

3111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3111

3112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3112

3113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3113

3114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3114

3115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3115

3116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3116

3117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3117

3118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3118

3119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3119

3120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3120

3121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3121

3122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3122

3123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3123

3124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3124

3125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3125

3126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3126

3127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3127

3128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3128

3129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3129

3130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3130

3131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3131

3132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3132

3133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3133

3134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3134

3135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3135

3136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3136

3137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3137

3138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3138

3139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3139

3140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3140

3141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3141

3142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3142

3143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3143

3144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3144

3145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3145

3146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3146

3147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3147

3148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3148

3149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3149

3150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3150

3151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3151

3152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3152

3153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3153

3154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3154

3155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3155

3156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3156

3157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3157

3158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3158

3159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3159

3160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3160

3161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3161

3162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3162

3163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3163

3164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3164

3165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3165

3166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3166

3167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3167

3168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3168

3169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3169

3170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3170

3171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3171

3172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3172

3173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3173

3174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3174

3175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3175

3176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3176

3177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3177

3178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3178

3179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3179

3180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3180

3181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3181

3182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3182

3183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3183

3184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3184

3185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3185

3186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3186

3187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3187

3188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3188

3189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3189

3190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3190

3191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3191

3192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3192

3193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3193

3194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3194

3195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3195

3196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3196

3197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3197

3198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3198

3199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3199

3200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3200

3201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3201

3202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3202

3203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3203

3204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3204

3205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3205

3206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3206

3207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3207

3208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3208

3209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3209

3210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3210

3211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3211

3212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3212

3213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3213

3214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3214

3215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3215

3216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3216

3217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3217

3218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3218

3219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3219

3220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3220

3221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3221

3222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3222

3223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3223

3224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3224

3225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3225

3226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3226

3227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3227

3228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3228

3229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3229

3230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3230

3231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3231

3232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3232

3233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3233

3234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3234

3235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3235

3236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3236

3237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3237

3238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3238

3239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3239

3240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3240

3241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3241

3242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3242

3243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3243

3244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3244

3245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3245

3246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3246

3247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3247

3248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3248

3249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3249

3250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3250

3251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3251

3252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3252

3253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3253

3254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3254

3255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3255

3256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3256

3257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3257

3258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3258

3259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3259

3260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3260

3261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3261

3262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3262

3263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3263

3264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3264

3265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3265

3266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3266

3267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3267

3268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3268

3269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3269

3270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3270

3271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3271

3272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3272

3273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3273

3274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3274

3275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3275

3276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3276

3277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3277

3278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3278

3279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3279

3280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3280

3281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3281

3282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3282

3283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3283

3284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3284

3285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3285

3286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3286

3287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3287

3288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3288

3289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3289

3290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3290

3291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3291

3292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3292

3293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3293

3294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3294

3295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3295

3296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3296

3297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3297

3298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3298

3299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3299

3300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3300

3301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3301

3302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3302

3303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3303

3304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3304

3305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3305

3306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3306

3307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3307

3308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3308

3309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3309

3310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3310

3311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3311

3312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3312

3313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3313

3314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3314

3315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3315

3316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3316

3317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3317

3318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3318

3319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3319

3320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3320

3321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3321

3322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3322

3323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3323

3324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3324

3325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3325

3326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3326

3327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3327

3328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3328

3329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3329

3330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3330

3331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3331

3332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3332

3333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3333

3334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3334

3335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3335

3336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3336

3337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3337

3338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3338

3339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3339

3340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3340

3341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3341

3342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3342

3343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3343

3344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3344

3345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3345

3346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3346

3347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3347

3348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3348

3349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3349

3350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3350

3351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3351

3352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3352

3353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3353

3354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3354

3355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3355

3356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3356

3357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3357

3358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3358

3359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3359

3360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3360

3361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3361

3362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3362

3363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3363

3364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3364

3365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3365

3366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3366

3367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3367

3368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3368

3369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3369

3370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3370

3371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3371

3372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3372

3373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3373

3374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3374

3375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3375

3376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3376

3377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3377

3378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3378

3379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3379

3380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3380

3381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3381

3382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3382

3383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3383

3384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3384

3385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3385

3386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3386

3387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3387

3388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3388

3389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3389

3390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3390

3391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3391

3392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3392

3393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3393

3394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3394

3395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3395

3396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3396

3397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3397

3398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3398

3399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3399

3400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3400

3401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3401

3402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3402

3403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3403

3404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3404

3405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3405

3406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3406

3407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3407

3408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3408

3409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3409

3410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3410

3411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3411

3412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3412

3413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3413

3414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3414

3415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3415

3416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3416

3417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3417

3418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3418

3419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3419

3420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3420

3421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3421

3422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3422

3423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3423

3424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3424

3425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3425

3426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3426

3427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3427

3428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3428

3429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3429

3430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3430

3431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3431

3432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3432

3433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3433

3434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3434

3435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3435

3436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3436

3437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3437

3438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3438

3439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3439

3440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3440

3441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3441

3442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3442

3443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3443

3444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3444

3445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3445

3446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3446

3447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3447

3448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3448

3449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3449

3450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3450

3451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3451

3452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3452

3453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3453

3454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3454

3455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3455

3456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3456

3457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3457

3458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3458

3459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3459

3460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3460

3461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3461

3462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3462

3463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3463

3464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3464

3465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3465

3466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3466

3467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3467

3468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3468

3469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3469

3470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3470

3471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3471

3472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3472

3473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3473

3474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3474

3475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3475

3476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3476

3477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3477

3478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3478

3479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3479

3480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3480

3481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3481

3482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3482

3483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3483

3484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3484

3485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3485

3486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3486

3487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3487

3488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3488

3489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3489

3490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3490

3491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3491

3492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3492

3493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3493

3494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3494

3495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3495

3496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3496

3497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3497

3498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3498

3499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3499

3500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3500

3501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3501

3502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3502

3503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3503

3504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3504

3505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3505

3506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3506

3507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3507

3508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3508

3509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3509

3510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3510

3511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3511

3512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3512

3513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3513

3514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3514

3515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3515

3516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3516

3517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3517

3518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3518

3519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3519

3520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3520

3521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3521

3522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3522

3523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3523

3524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3524

3525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3525

3526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3526

3527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3527

3528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3528

3529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3529

3530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3530

3531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3531

3532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3532

3533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3533

3534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3534

3535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3535

3536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3536

3537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3537

3538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3538

3539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3539

3540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3540

3541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3541

3542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3542

3543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3543

3544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3544

3545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3545

3546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3546

3547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3547

3548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3548

3549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3549

3550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3550

3551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3551

3552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3552

3553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3553

3554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3554

3555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3555

3556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3556

3557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3557

3558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3558

3559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3559

3560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3560

3561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3561

3562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3562

3563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3563

3564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3564

3565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3565

3566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3566

3567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3567

3568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3568

3569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3569

3570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3570

3571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3571

3572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3572

3573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3573

3574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3574

3575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3575

3576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3576

3577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3577

3578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3578

3579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3579

3580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3580

3581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3581

3582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3582

3583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3583

3584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3584

3585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3585

3586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3586

3587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3587

3588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3588

3589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3589

3590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3590

3591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3591

3592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3592

3593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3593

3594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3594

3595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3595

3596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3596

3597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3597

3598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3598

3599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3599

3600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3600

3601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3601

3602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3602

3603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3603

3604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3604

3605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3605

3606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3606

3607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3607

3608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3608

3609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3609

3610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3610

3611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3611

3612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3612

3613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3613

3614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3614

3615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3615

3616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3616

3617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3617

3618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3618

3619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3619

3620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3620

3621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3621

3622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3622

3623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3623

3624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3624

3625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3625

3626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3626

3627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3627

3628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3628

3629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3629

3630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3630

3631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3631

3632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3632

3633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3633

3634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3634

3635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3635

3636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3636

3637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3637

3638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3638

3639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3639

3640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3640

3641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3641

3642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3642

3643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3643

3644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3644

3645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3645

3646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3646

3647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3647

3648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3648

3649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3649

3650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3650

3651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3651

3652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3652

3653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3653

3654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3654

3655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3655

3656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3656

3657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3657

3658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3658

3659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3659

3660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3660

3661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3661

3662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3662

3663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3663

3664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3664

3665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3665

3666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3666

3667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3667

3668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3668

3669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3669

3670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3670

3671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3671

3672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3672

3673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3673

3674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3674

3675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3675

3676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3676

3677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3677

3678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3678

3679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3679

3680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3680

3681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3681

3682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3682

3683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3683

3684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3684

3685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3685

3686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3686

3687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3687

3688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3688

3689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3689

3690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3690

3691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3691

3692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3692

3693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3693

3694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3694

3695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3695

3696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3696

3697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3697

3698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3698

3699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3699

3700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3700

3701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3701

3702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3702

3703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3703

3704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3704

3705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3705

3706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3706

3707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3707

3708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3708

3709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3709

3710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3710

3711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3711

3712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3712

3713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3713

3714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3714

3715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3715

3716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3716

3717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3717

3718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3718

3719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3719

3720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3720

3721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3721

3722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3722

3723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3723

3724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3724

3725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3725

3726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3726

3727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3727

3728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3728

3729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3729

3730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3730

3731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3731

3732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3732

3733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3733

3734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3734

3735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3735

3736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3736

3737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3737

3738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3738

3739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3739

3740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3740

3741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3741

3742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3742

3743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3743

3744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3744

3745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3745

3746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3746

3747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3747

3748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3748

3749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3749

3750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3750

3751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3751

3752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3752

3753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3753

3754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3754

3755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3755

3756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3756

3757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3757

3758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3758

3759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3759

3760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3760

3761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3761

3762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3762

3763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3763

3764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3764

3765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3765

3766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3766

3767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3767

3768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3768

3769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3769

3770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3770

3771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3771

3772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3772

3773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3773

3774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3774

3775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3775

3776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3776

3777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3777

3778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3778

3779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3779

3780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3780

3781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3781

3782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3782

3783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3783

3784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3784

3785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3785

3786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3786

3787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3787

3788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3788

3789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3789

3790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3790

3791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3791

3792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3792

3793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3793

3794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3794

3795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3795

3796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3796

3797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3797

3798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3798

3799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3799

3800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3800

3801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3801

3802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3802

3803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3803

3804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3804

3805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3805

3806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3806

3807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3807

3808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3808

3809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3809

3810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3810

3811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3811

3812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3812

3813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3813

3814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3814

3815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3815

3816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3816

3817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3817

3818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3818

3819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3819

3820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3820

3821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3821

3822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3822

3823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3823

3824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3824

3825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3825

3826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3826

3827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3827

3828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3828

3829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3829

3830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3830

3831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3831

3832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3832

3833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3833

3834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3834

3835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3835

3836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3836

3837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3837

3838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3838

3839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3839

3840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3840

3841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3841

3842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3842

3843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3843

3844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3844

3845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3845

3846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3846

3847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3847

3848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3848

3849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3849

3850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3850

3851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3851

3852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3852

3853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3853

3854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3854

3855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3855

3856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3856

3857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3857

3858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3858

3859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3859

3860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3860

3861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3861

3862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3862

3863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3863

3864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3864

3865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3865

3866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3866

3867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3867

3868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3868

3869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3869

3870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3870

3871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3871

3872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3872

3873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3873

3874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3874

3875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3875

3876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3876

3877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3877

3878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3878

3879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3879

3880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3880

3881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3881

3882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3882

3883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3883

3884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3884

3885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3885

3886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3886

3887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3887

3888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3888

3889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3889

3890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3890

3891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3891

3892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3892

3893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3893

3894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3894

3895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3895

3896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3896

3897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3897

3898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3898

3899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3899

3900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3900

3901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3901

3902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3902

3903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3903

3904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3904

3905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3905

3906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3906

3907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3907

3908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3908

3909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3909

3910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3910

3911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3911

3912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3912

3913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3913

3914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3914

3915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3915

3916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3916

3917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3917

3918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3918

3919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3919

3920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3920

3921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3921

3922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3922

3923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3923

3924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3924

3925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3925

3926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3926

3927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3927

3928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3928

3929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3929

3930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3930

3931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3931

3932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3932

3933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3933

3934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3934

3935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3935

3936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3936

3937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3937

3938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3938

3939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3939

3940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3940

3941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3941

3942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3942

3943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3943

3944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3944

3945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3945

3946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3946

3947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3947

3948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3948

3949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3949

3950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3950

3951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3951

3952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3952

3953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3953

3954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3954

3955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3955

3956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3956

3957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3957

3958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3958

3959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3959

3960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3960

3961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3961

3962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3962

3963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3963

3964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3964

3965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3965

3966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3966

3967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3967

3968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3968

3969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3969

3970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3970

3971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3971

3972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3972

3973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3973

3974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3974

3975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3975

3976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3976

3977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3977

3978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3978

3979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3979

3980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3980

3981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3981

3982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3982

3983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3983

3984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3984

3985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3985

3986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3986

3987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3987

3988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3988

3989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3989

3990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3990

3991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3991

3992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3992

3993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3993

3994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3994

3995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3995

3996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3996

3997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3997

3998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3998

3999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf3999

4000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4000

4001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4001

4002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4002

4003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4003

4004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4004

4005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4005

4006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4006

4007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4007

4008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4008

4009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4009

4010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4010

4011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4011

4012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4012

4013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4013

4014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4014

4015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4015

4016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4016

4017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4017

4018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4018

4019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4019

4020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4020

4021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4021

4022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4022

4023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4023

4024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4024

4025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4025

4026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4026

4027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4027

4028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4028

4029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4029

4030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4030

4031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4031

4032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4032

4033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4033

4034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4034

4035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4035

4036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4036

4037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4037

4038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4038

4039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4039

4040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4040

4041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4041

4042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4042

4043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4043

4044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4044

4045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4045

4046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4046

4047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4047

4048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4048

4049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4049

4050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4050

4051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4051

4052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4052

4053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4053

4054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4054

4055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4055

4056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4056

4057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4057

4058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4058

4059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4059

4060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4060

4061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4061

4062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4062

4063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4063

4064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4064

4065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4065

4066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4066

4067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4067

4068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4068

4069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4069

4070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4070

4071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4071

4072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4072

4073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4073

4074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4074

4075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4075

4076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4076

4077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4077

4078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4078

4079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4079

4080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4080

4081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4081

4082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4082

4083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4083

4084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4084

4085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4085

4086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4086

4087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4087

4088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4088

4089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4089

4090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4090

4091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4091

4092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4092

4093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4093

4094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4094

4095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4095

4096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4096

4097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4097

4098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4098

4099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4099

4100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4100

4101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4101

4102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4102

4103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4103

4104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4104

4105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4105

4106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4106

4107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4107

4108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4108

4109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4109

4110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4110

4111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4111

4112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4112

4113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4113

4114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4114

4115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4115

4116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4116

4117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4117

4118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4118

4119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4119

4120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4120

4121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4121

4122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4122

4123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4123

4124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4124

4125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4125

4126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4126

4127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4127

4128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4128

4129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4129

4130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4130

4131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4131

4132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4132

4133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4133

4134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4134

4135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4135

4136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4136

4137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4137

4138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4138

4139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4139

4140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4140

4141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4141

4142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4142

4143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4143

4144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4144

4145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4145

4146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4146

4147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4147

4148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4148

4149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4149

4150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4150

4151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4151

4152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4152

4153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4153

4154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4154

4155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4155

4156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4156

4157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4157

4158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4158

4159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4159

4160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4160

4161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4161

4162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4162

4163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4163

4164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4164

4165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4165

4166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4166

4167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4167

4168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4168

4169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4169

4170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4170

4171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4171

4172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4172

4173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4173

4174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4174

4175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4175

4176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4176

4177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4177

4178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4178

4179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4179

4180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4180

4181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4181

4182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4182

4183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4183

4184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4184

4185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4185

4186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4186

4187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4187

4188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4188

4189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4189

4190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4190

4191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4191

4192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4192

4193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4193

4194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4194

4195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4195

4196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4196

4197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4197

4198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4198

4199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4199

4200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4200

4201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4201

4202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4202

4203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4203

4204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4204

4205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4205

4206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4206

4207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4207

4208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4208

4209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4209

4210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4210

4211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4211

4212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4212

4213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4213

4214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4214

4215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4215

4216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4216

4217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4217

4218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4218

4219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4219

4220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4220

4221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4221

4222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4222

4223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4223

4224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4224

4225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4225

4226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4226

4227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4227

4228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4228

4229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4229

4230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4230

4231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4231

4232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4232

4233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4233

4234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4234

4235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4235

4236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4236

4237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4237

4238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4238

4239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4239

4240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4240

4241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4241

4242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4242

4243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4243

4244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4244

4245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4245

4246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4246

4247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4247

4248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4248

4249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4249

4250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4250

4251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4251

4252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4252

4253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4253

4254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4254

4255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4255

4256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4256

4257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4257

4258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4258

4259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4259

4260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4260

4261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4261

4262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4262

4263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4263

4264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4264

4265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4265

4266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4266

4267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4267

4268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4268

4269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4269

4270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4270

4271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4271

4272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4272

4273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4273

4274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4274

4275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4275

4276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4276

4277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4277

4278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4278

4279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4279

4280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4280

4281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4281

4282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4282

4283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4283

4284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4284

4285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4285

4286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4286

4287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4287

4288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4288

4289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4289

4290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4290

4291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4291

4292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4292

4293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4293

4294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4294

4295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4295

4296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4296

4297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4297

4298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4298

4299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4299

4300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4300

4301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4301

4302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4302

4303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4303

4304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4304

4305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4305

4306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4306

4307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4307

4308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4308

4309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4309

4310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4310

4311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4311

4312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4312

4313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4313

4314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4314

4315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4315

4316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4316

4317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4317

4318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4318

4319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4319

4320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4320

4321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4321

4322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4322

4323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4323

4324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4324

4325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4325

4326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4326

4327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4327

4328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4328

4329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4329

4330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4330

4331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4331

4332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4332

4333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4333

4334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4334

4335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4335

4336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4336

4337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4337

4338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4338

4339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4339

4340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4340

4341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4341

4342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4342

4343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4343

4344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4344

4345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4345

4346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4346

4347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4347

4348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4348

4349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4349

4350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4350

4351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4351

4352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4352

4353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4353

4354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4354

4355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4355

4356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4356

4357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4357

4358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4358

4359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4359

4360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4360

4361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4361

4362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4362

4363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4363

4364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4364

4365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4365

4366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4366

4367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4367

4368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4368

4369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4369

4370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4370

4371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4371

4372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4372

4373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4373

4374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4374

4375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4375

4376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4376

4377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4377

4378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4378

4379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4379

4380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4380

4381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4381

4382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4382

4383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4383

4384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4384

4385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4385

4386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4386

4387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4387

4388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4388

4389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4389

4390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4390

4391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4391

4392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4392

4393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4393

4394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4394

4395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4395

4396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4396

4397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4397

4398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4398

4399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4399

4400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4400

4401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4401

4402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4402

4403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4403

4404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4404

4405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4405

4406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4406

4407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4407

4408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4408

4409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4409

4410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4410

4411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4411

4412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4412

4413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4413

4414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4414

4415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4415

4416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4416

4417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4417

4418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4418

4419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4419

4420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4420

4421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4421

4422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4422

4423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4423

4424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4424

4425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4425

4426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4426

4427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4427

4428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4428

4429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4429

4430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4430

4431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4431

4432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4432

4433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4433

4434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4434

4435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4435

4436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4436

4437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4437

4438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4438

4439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4439

4440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4440

4441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4441

4442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4442

4443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4443

4444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4444

4445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4445

4446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4446

4447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4447

4448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4448

4449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4449

4450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4450

4451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4451

4452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4452

4453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4453

4454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4454

4455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4455

4456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4456

4457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4457

4458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4458

4459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4459

4460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4460

4461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4461

4462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4462

4463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4463

4464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4464

4465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4465

4466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4466

4467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4467

4468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4468

4469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4469

4470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4470

4471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4471

4472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4472

4473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4473

4474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4474

4475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4475

4476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4476

4477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4477

4478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4478

4479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4479

4480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4480

4481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4481

4482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4482

4483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4483

4484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4484

4485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4485

4486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4486

4487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4487

4488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4488

4489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4489

4490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4490

4491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4491

4492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4492

4493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4493

4494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4494

4495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4495

4496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4496

4497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4497

4498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4498

4499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4499

4500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4500

4501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4501

4502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4502

4503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4503

4504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4504

4505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4505

4506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4506

4507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4507

4508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4508

4509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4509

4510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4510

4511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4511

4512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4512

4513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4513

4514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4514

4515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4515

4516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4516

4517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4517

4518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4518

4519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4519

4520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4520

4521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4521

4522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4522

4523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4523

4524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4524

4525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4525

4526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4526

4527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4527

4528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4528

4529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4529

4530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4530

4531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4531

4532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4532

4533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4533

4534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4534

4535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4535

4536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4536

4537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4537

4538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4538

4539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4539

4540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4540

4541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4541

4542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4542

4543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4543

4544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4544

4545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4545

4546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4546

4547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4547

4548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4548

4549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4549

4550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4550

4551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4551

4552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4552

4553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4553

4554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4554

4555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4555

4556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4556

4557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4557

4558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4558

4559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4559

4560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4560

4561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4561

4562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4562

4563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4563

4564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4564

4565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4565

4566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4566

4567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4567

4568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4568

4569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4569

4570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4570

4571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4571

4572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4572

4573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4573

4574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4574

4575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4575

4576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4576

4577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4577

4578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4578

4579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4579

4580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4580

4581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4581

4582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4582

4583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4583

4584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4584

4585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4585

4586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4586

4587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4587

4588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4588

4589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4589

4590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4590

4591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4591

4592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4592

4593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4593

4594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4594

4595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4595

4596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4596

4597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4597

4598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4598

4599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4599

4600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4600

4601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4601

4602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4602

4603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4603

4604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4604

4605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4605

4606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4606

4607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4607

4608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4608

4609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4609

4610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4610

4611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4611

4612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4612

4613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4613

4614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4614

4615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4615

4616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4616

4617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4617

4618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4618

4619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4619

4620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4620

4621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4621

4622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4622

4623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4623

4624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4624

4625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4625

4626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4626

4627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4627

4628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4628

4629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4629

4630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4630

4631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4631

4632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4632

4633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4633

4634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4634

4635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4635

4636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4636

4637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4637

4638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4638

4639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4639

4640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4640

4641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4641

4642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4642

4643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4643

4644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4644

4645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4645

4646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4646

4647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4647

4648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4648

4649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4649

4650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4650

4651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4651

4652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4652

4653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4653

4654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4654

4655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4655

4656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4656

4657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4657

4658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4658

4659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4659

4660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4660

4661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4661

4662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4662

4663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4663

4664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4664

4665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4665

4666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4666

4667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4667

4668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4668

4669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4669

4670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4670

4671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4671

4672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4672

4673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4673

4674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4674

4675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4675

4676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4676

4677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4677

4678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4678

4679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4679

4680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4680

4681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4681

4682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4682

4683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4683

4684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4684

4685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4685

4686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4686

4687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4687

4688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4688

4689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4689

4690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4690

4691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4691

4692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4692

4693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4693

4694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4694

4695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4695

4696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4696

4697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4697

4698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4698

4699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4699

4700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4700

4701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4701

4702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4702

4703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4703

4704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4704

4705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4705

4706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4706

4707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4707

4708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4708

4709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4709

4710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4710

4711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4711

4712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4712

4713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4713

4714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4714

4715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4715

4716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4716

4717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4717

4718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4718

4719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4719

4720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4720

4721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4721

4722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4722

4723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4723

4724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4724

4725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4725

4726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4726

4727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4727

4728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4728

4729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4729

4730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4730

4731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4731

4732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4732

4733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4733

4734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4734

4735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4735

4736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4736

4737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4737

4738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4738

4739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4739

4740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4740

4741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4741

4742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4742

4743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4743

4744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4744

4745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4745

4746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4746

4747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4747

4748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4748

4749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4749

4750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4750

4751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4751

4752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4752

4753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4753

4754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4754

4755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4755

4756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4756

4757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4757

4758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4758

4759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4759

4760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4760

4761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4761

4762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4762

4763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4763

4764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4764

4765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4765

4766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4766

4767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4767

4768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4768

4769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4769

4770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4770

4771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4771

4772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4772

4773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4773

4774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4774

4775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4775

4776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4776

4777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4777

4778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4778

4779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4779

4780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4780

4781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4781

4782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4782

4783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4783

4784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4784

4785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4785

4786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4786

4787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4787

4788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4788

4789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4789

4790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4790

4791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4791

4792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4792

4793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4793

4794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4794

4795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4795

4796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4796

4797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4797

4798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4798

4799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4799

4800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4800

4801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4801

4802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4802

4803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4803

4804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4804

4805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4805

4806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4806

4807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4807

4808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4808

4809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4809

4810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4810

4811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4811

4812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4812

4813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4813

4814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4814

4815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4815

4816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4816

4817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4817

4818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4818

4819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4819

4820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4820

4821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4821

4822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4822

4823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4823

4824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4824

4825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4825

4826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4826

4827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4827

4828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4828

4829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4829

4830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4830

4831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4831

4832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4832

4833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4833

4834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4834

4835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4835

4836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4836

4837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4837

4838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4838

4839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4839

4840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4840

4841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4841

4842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4842

4843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4843

4844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4844

4845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4845

4846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4846

4847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4847

4848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4848

4849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4849

4850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4850

4851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4851

4852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4852

4853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4853

4854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4854

4855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4855

4856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4856

4857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4857

4858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4858

4859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4859

4860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4860

4861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4861

4862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4862

4863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4863

4864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4864

4865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4865

4866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4866

4867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4867

4868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4868

4869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4869

4870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4870

4871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4871

4872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4872

4873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4873

4874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4874

4875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4875

4876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4876

4877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4877

4878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4878

4879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4879

4880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4880

4881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4881

4882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4882

4883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4883

4884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4884

4885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4885

4886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4886

4887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4887

4888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4888

4889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4889

4890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4890

4891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4891

4892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4892

4893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4893

4894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4894

4895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4895

4896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4896

4897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4897

4898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4898

4899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4899

4900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4900

4901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4901

4902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4902

4903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4903

4904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4904

4905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4905

4906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4906

4907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4907

4908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4908

4909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4909

4910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4910

4911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4911

4912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4912

4913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4913

4914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4914

4915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4915

4916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4916

4917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4917

4918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4918

4919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4919

4920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4920

4921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4921

4922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4922

4923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4923

4924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4924

4925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4925

4926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4926

4927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4927

4928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4928

4929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4929

4930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4930

4931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4931

4932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4932

4933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4933

4934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4934

4935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4935

4936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4936

4937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4937

4938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4938

4939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4939

4940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4940

4941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4941

4942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4942

4943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4943

4944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4944

4945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4945

4946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4946

4947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4947

4948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4948

4949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4949

4950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4950

4951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4951

4952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4952

4953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4953

4954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4954

4955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4955

4956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4956

4957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4957

4958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4958

4959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4959

4960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4960

4961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4961

4962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4962

4963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4963

4964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4964

4965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4965

4966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4966

4967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4967

4968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4968

4969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4969

4970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4970

4971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4971

4972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4972

4973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4973

4974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4974

4975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4975

4976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4976

4977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4977

4978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4978

4979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4979

4980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4980

4981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4981

4982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4982

4983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4983

4984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4984

4985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4985

4986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4986

4987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4987

4988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4988

4989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4989

4990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4990

4991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4991

4992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4992

4993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4993

4994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4994

4995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4995

4996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4996

4997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4997

4998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4998

4999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf4999

5000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5000

5001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5001

5002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5002

5003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5003

5004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5004

5005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5005

5006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5006

5007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5007

5008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5008

5009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5009

5010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5010

5011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5011

5012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5012

5013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5013

5014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5014

5015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5015

5016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5016

5017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5017

5018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5018

5019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5019

5020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5020

5021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5021

5022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5022

5023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5023

5024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5024

5025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5025

5026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5026

5027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5027

5028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5028

5029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5029

5030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5030

5031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5031

5032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5032

5033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5033

5034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5034

5035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5035

5036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5036

5037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5037

5038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5038

5039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5039

5040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5040

5041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5041

5042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5042

5043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5043

5044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5044

5045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5045

5046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5046

5047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5047

5048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5048

5049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5049

5050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5050

5051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5051

5052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5052

5053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5053

5054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5054

5055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5055

5056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5056

5057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5057

5058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5058

5059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5059

5060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5060

5061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5061

5062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5062

5063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5063

5064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5064

5065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5065

5066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5066

5067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5067

5068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5068

5069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5069

5070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5070

5071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5071

5072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5072

5073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5073

5074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5074

5075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5075

5076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5076

5077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5077

5078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5078

5079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5079

5080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5080

5081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5081

5082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5082

5083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5083

5084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5084

5085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5085

5086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5086

5087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5087

5088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5088

5089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5089

5090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5090

5091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5091

5092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5092

5093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5093

5094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5094

5095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5095

5096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5096

5097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5097

5098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5098

5099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5099

5100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5100

5101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5101

5102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5102

5103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5103

5104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5104

5105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5105

5106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5106

5107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5107

5108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5108

5109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5109

5110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5110

5111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5111

5112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5112

5113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5113

5114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5114

5115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5115

5116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5116

5117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5117

5118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5118

5119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5119

5120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5120

5121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5121

5122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5122

5123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5123

5124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5124

5125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5125

5126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5126

5127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5127

5128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5128

5129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5129

5130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5130

5131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5131

5132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5132

5133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5133

5134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5134

5135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5135

5136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5136

5137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5137

5138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5138

5139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5139

5140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5140

5141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5141

5142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5142

5143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5143

5144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5144

5145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5145

5146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5146

5147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5147

5148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5148

5149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5149

5150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5150

5151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5151

5152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5152

5153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5153

5154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5154

5155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5155

5156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5156

5157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5157

5158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5158

5159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5159

5160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5160

5161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5161

5162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5162

5163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5163

5164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5164

5165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5165

5166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5166

5167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5167

5168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5168

5169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5169

5170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5170

5171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5171

5172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5172

5173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5173

5174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5174

5175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5175

5176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5176

5177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5177

5178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5178

5179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5179

5180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5180

5181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5181

5182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5182

5183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5183

5184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5184

5185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5185

5186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5186

5187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5187

5188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5188

5189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5189

5190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5190

5191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5191

5192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5192

5193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5193

5194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5194

5195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5195

5196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5196

5197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5197

5198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5198

5199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5199

5200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5200

5201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5201

5202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5202

5203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5203

5204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5204

5205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5205

5206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5206

5207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5207

5208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5208

5209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5209

5210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5210

5211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5211

5212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5212

5213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5213

5214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5214

5215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5215

5216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5216

5217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5217

5218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5218

5219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5219

5220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5220

5221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5221

5222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5222

5223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5223

5224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5224

5225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5225

5226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5226

5227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5227

5228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5228

5229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5229

5230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5230

5231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5231

5232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5232

5233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5233

5234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5234

5235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5235

5236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5236

5237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5237

5238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5238

5239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5239

5240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5240

5241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5241

5242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5242

5243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5243

5244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5244

5245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5245

5246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5246

5247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5247

5248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5248

5249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5249

5250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5250

5251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5251

5252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5252

5253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5253

5254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5254

5255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5255

5256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5256

5257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5257

5258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5258

5259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5259

5260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5260

5261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5261

5262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5262

5263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5263

5264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5264

5265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5265

5266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5266

5267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5267

5268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5268

5269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5269

5270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5270

5271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5271

5272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5272

5273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5273

5274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5274

5275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5275

5276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5276

5277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5277

5278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5278

5279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5279

5280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5280

5281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5281

5282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5282

5283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5283

5284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5284

5285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5285

5286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5286

5287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5287

5288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5288

5289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5289

5290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5290

5291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5291

5292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5292

5293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5293

5294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5294

5295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5295

5296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5296

5297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5297

5298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5298

5299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5299

5300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5300

5301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5301

5302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5302

5303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5303

5304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5304

5305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5305

5306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5306

5307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5307

5308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5308

5309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5309

5310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5310

5311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5311

5312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5312

5313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5313

5314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5314

5315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5315

5316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5316

5317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5317

5318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5318

5319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5319

5320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5320

5321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5321

5322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5322

5323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5323

5324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5324

5325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5325

5326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5326

5327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5327

5328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5328

5329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5329

5330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5330

5331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5331

5332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5332

5333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5333

5334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5334

5335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5335

5336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5336

5337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5337

5338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5338

5339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5339

5340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5340

5341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5341

5342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5342

5343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5343

5344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5344

5345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5345

5346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5346

5347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5347

5348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5348

5349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5349

5350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5350

5351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5351

5352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5352

5353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5353

5354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5354

5355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5355

5356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5356

5357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5357

5358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5358

5359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5359

5360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5360

5361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5361

5362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5362

5363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5363

5364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5364

5365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5365

5366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5366

5367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5367

5368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5368

5369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5369

5370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5370

5371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5371

5372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5372

5373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5373

5374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5374

5375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5375

5376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5376

5377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5377

5378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5378

5379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5379

5380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5380

5381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5381

5382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5382

5383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5383

5384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5384

5385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5385

5386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5386

5387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5387

5388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5388

5389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5389

5390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5390

5391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5391

5392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5392

5393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5393

5394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5394

5395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5395

5396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5396

5397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5397

5398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5398

5399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5399

5400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5400

5401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5401

5402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5402

5403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5403

5404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5404

5405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5405

5406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5406

5407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5407

5408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5408

5409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5409

5410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5410

5411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5411

5412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5412

5413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5413

5414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5414

5415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5415

5416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5416

5417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5417

5418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5418

5419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5419

5420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5420

5421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5421

5422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5422

5423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5423

5424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5424

5425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5425

5426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5426

5427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5427

5428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5428

5429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5429

5430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5430

5431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5431

5432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5432

5433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5433

5434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5434

5435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5435

5436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5436

5437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5437

5438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5438

5439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5439

5440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5440

5441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5441

5442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5442

5443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5443

5444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5444

5445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5445

5446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5446

5447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5447

5448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5448

5449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5449

5450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5450

5451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5451

5452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5452

5453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5453

5454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5454

5455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5455

5456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5456

5457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5457

5458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5458

5459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5459

5460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5460

5461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5461

5462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5462

5463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5463

5464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5464

5465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5465

5466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5466

5467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5467

5468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5468

5469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5469

5470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5470

5471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5471

5472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5472

5473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5473

5474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5474

5475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5475

5476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5476

5477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5477

5478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5478

5479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5479

5480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5480

5481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5481

5482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5482

5483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5483

5484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5484

5485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5485

5486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5486

5487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5487

5488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5488

5489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5489

5490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5490

5491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5491

5492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5492

5493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5493

5494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5494

5495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5495

5496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5496

5497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5497

5498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5498

5499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5499

5500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5500

5501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5501

5502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5502

5503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5503

5504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5504

5505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5505

5506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5506

5507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5507

5508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5508

5509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5509

5510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5510

5511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5511

5512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5512

5513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5513

5514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5514

5515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5515

5516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5516

5517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5517

5518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5518

5519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5519

5520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5520

5521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5521

5522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5522

5523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5523

5524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5524

5525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5525

5526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5526

5527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5527

5528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5528

5529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5529

5530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5530

5531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5531

5532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5532

5533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5533

5534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5534

5535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5535

5536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5536

5537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5537

5538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5538

5539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5539

5540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5540

5541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5541

5542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5542

5543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5543

5544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5544

5545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5545

5546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5546

5547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5547

5548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5548

5549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5549

5550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5550

5551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5551

5552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5552

5553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5553

5554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5554

5555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5555

5556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5556

5557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5557

5558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5558

5559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5559

5560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5560

5561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5561

5562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5562

5563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5563

5564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5564

5565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5565

5566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5566

5567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5567

5568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5568

5569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5569

5570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5570

5571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5571

5572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5572

5573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5573

5574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5574

5575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5575

5576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5576

5577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5577

5578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5578

5579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5579

5580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5580

5581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5581

5582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5582

5583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5583

5584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5584

5585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5585

5586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5586

5587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5587

5588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5588

5589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5589

5590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5590

5591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5591

5592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5592

5593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5593

5594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5594

5595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5595

5596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5596

5597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5597

5598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5598

5599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5599

5600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5600

5601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5601

5602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5602

5603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5603

5604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5604

5605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5605

5606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5606

5607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5607

5608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5608

5609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5609

5610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5610

5611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5611

5612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5612

5613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5613

5614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5614

5615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5615

5616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5616

5617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5617

5618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5618

5619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5619

5620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5620

5621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5621

5622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5622

5623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5623

5624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5624

5625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5625

5626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5626

5627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5627

5628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5628

5629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5629

5630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5630

5631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5631

5632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5632

5633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5633

5634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5634

5635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5635

5636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5636

5637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5637

5638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5638

5639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5639

5640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5640

5641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5641

5642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5642

5643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5643

5644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5644

5645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5645

5646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5646

5647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5647

5648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5648

5649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5649

5650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5650

5651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5651

5652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5652

5653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5653

5654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5654

5655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5655

5656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5656

5657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5657

5658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5658

5659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5659

5660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5660

5661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5661

5662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5662

5663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5663

5664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5664

5665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5665

5666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5666

5667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5667

5668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5668

5669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5669

5670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5670

5671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5671

5672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5672

5673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5673

5674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5674

5675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5675

5676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5676

5677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5677

5678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5678

5679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5679

5680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5680

5681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5681

5682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5682

5683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5683

5684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5684

5685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5685

5686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5686

5687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5687

5688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5688

5689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5689

5690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5690

5691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5691

5692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5692

5693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5693

5694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5694

5695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5695

5696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5696

5697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5697

5698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5698

5699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5699

5700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5700

5701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5701

5702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5702

5703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5703

5704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5704

5705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5705

5706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5706

5707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5707

5708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5708

5709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5709

5710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5710

5711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5711

5712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5712

5713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5713

5714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5714

5715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5715

5716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5716

5717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5717

5718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5718

5719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5719

5720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5720

5721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5721

5722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5722

5723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5723

5724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5724

5725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5725

5726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5726

5727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5727

5728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5728

5729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5729

5730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5730

5731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5731

5732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5732

5733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5733

5734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5734

5735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5735

5736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5736

5737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5737

5738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5738

5739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5739

5740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5740

5741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5741

5742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5742

5743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5743

5744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5744

5745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5745

5746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5746

5747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5747

5748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5748

5749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5749

5750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5750

5751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5751

5752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5752

5753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5753

5754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5754

5755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5755

5756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5756

5757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5757

5758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5758

5759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5759

5760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5760

5761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5761

5762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5762

5763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5763

5764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5764

5765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5765

5766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5766

5767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5767

5768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5768

5769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5769

5770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5770

5771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5771

5772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5772

5773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5773

5774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5774

5775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5775

5776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5776

5777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5777

5778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5778

5779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5779

5780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5780

5781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5781

5782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5782

5783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5783

5784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5784

5785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5785

5786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5786

5787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5787

5788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5788

5789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5789

5790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5790

5791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5791

5792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5792

5793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5793

5794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5794

5795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5795

5796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5796

5797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5797

5798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5798

5799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5799

5800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5800

5801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5801

5802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5802

5803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5803

5804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5804

5805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5805

5806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5806

5807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5807

5808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5808

5809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5809

5810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5810

5811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5811

5812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5812

5813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5813

5814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5814

5815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5815

5816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5816

5817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5817

5818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5818

5819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5819

5820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5820

5821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5821

5822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5822

5823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5823

5824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5824

5825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5825

5826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5826

5827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5827

5828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5828

5829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5829

5830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5830

5831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5831

5832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5832

5833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5833

5834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5834

5835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5835

5836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5836

5837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5837

5838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5838

5839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5839

5840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5840

5841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5841

5842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5842

5843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5843

5844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5844

5845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5845

5846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5846

5847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5847

5848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5848

5849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5849

5850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5850

5851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5851

5852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5852

5853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5853

5854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5854

5855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5855

5856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5856

5857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5857

5858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5858

5859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5859

5860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5860

5861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5861

5862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5862

5863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5863

5864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5864

5865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5865

5866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5866

5867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5867

5868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5868

5869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5869

5870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5870

5871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5871

5872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5872

5873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5873

5874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5874

5875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5875

5876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5876

5877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5877

5878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5878

5879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5879

5880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5880

5881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5881

5882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5882

5883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5883

5884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5884

5885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5885

5886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5886

5887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5887

5888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5888

5889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5889

5890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5890

5891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5891

5892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5892

5893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5893

5894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5894

5895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5895

5896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5896

5897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5897

5898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5898

5899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5899

5900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5900

5901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5901

5902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5902

5903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5903

5904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5904

5905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5905

5906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5906

5907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5907

5908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5908

5909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5909

5910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5910

5911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5911

5912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5912

5913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5913

5914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5914

5915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5915

5916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5916

5917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5917

5918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5918

5919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5919

5920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5920

5921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5921

5922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5922

5923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5923

5924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5924

5925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5925

5926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5926

5927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5927

5928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5928

5929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5929

5930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5930

5931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5931

5932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5932

5933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5933

5934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5934

5935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5935

5936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5936

5937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5937

5938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5938

5939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5939

5940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5940

5941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5941

5942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5942

5943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5943

5944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5944

5945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5945

5946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5946

5947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5947

5948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5948

5949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5949

5950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5950

5951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5951

5952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5952

5953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5953

5954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5954

5955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5955

5956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5956

5957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5957

5958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5958

5959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5959

5960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5960

5961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5961

5962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5962

5963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5963

5964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5964

5965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5965

5966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5966

5967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5967

5968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5968

5969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5969

5970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5970

5971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5971

5972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5972

5973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5973

5974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5974

5975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5975

5976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5976

5977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5977

5978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5978

5979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5979

5980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5980

5981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5981

5982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5982

5983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5983

5984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5984

5985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5985

5986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5986

5987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5987

5988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5988

5989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5989

5990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5990

5991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5991

5992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5992

5993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5993

5994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5994

5995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5995

5996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5996

5997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5997

5998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5998

5999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf5999

6000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6000

6001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6001

6002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6002

6003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6003

6004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6004

6005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6005

6006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6006

6007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6007

6008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6008

6009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6009

6010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6010

6011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6011

6012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6012

6013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6013

6014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6014

6015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6015

6016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6016

6017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6017

6018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6018

6019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6019

6020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6020

6021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6021

6022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6022

6023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6023

6024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6024

6025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6025

6026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6026

6027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6027

6028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6028

6029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6029

6030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6030

6031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6031

6032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6032

6033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6033

6034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6034

6035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6035

6036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6036

6037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6037

6038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6038

6039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6039

6040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6040

6041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6041

6042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6042

6043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6043

6044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6044

6045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6045

6046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6046

6047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6047

6048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6048

6049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6049

6050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6050

6051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6051

6052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6052

6053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6053

6054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6054

6055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6055

6056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6056

6057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6057

6058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6058

6059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6059

6060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6060

6061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6061

6062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6062

6063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6063

6064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6064

6065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6065

6066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6066

6067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6067

6068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6068

6069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6069

6070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6070

6071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6071

6072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6072

6073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6073

6074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6074

6075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6075

6076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6076

6077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6077

6078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6078

6079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6079

6080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6080

6081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6081

6082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6082

6083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6083

6084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6084

6085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6085

6086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6086

6087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6087

6088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6088

6089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6089

6090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6090

6091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6091

6092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6092

6093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6093

6094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6094

6095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6095

6096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6096

6097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6097

6098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6098

6099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6099

6100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6100

6101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6101

6102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6102

6103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6103

6104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6104

6105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6105

6106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6106

6107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6107

6108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6108

6109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6109

6110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6110

6111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6111

6112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6112

6113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6113

6114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6114

6115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6115

6116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6116

6117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6117

6118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6118

6119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6119

6120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6120

6121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6121

6122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6122

6123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6123

6124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6124

6125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6125

6126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6126

6127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6127

6128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6128

6129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6129

6130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6130

6131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6131

6132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6132

6133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6133

6134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6134

6135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6135

6136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6136

6137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6137

6138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6138

6139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6139

6140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6140

6141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6141

6142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6142

6143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6143

6144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6144

6145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6145

6146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6146

6147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6147

6148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6148

6149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6149

6150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6150

6151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6151

6152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6152

6153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6153

6154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6154

6155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6155

6156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6156

6157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6157

6158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6158

6159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6159

6160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6160

6161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6161

6162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6162

6163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6163

6164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6164

6165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6165

6166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6166

6167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6167

6168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6168

6169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6169

6170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6170

6171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6171

6172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6172

6173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6173

6174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6174

6175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6175

6176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6176

6177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6177

6178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6178

6179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6179

6180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6180

6181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6181

6182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6182

6183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6183

6184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6184

6185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6185

6186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6186

6187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6187

6188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6188

6189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6189

6190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6190

6191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6191

6192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6192

6193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6193

6194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6194

6195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6195

6196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6196

6197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6197

6198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6198

6199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6199

6200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6200

6201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6201

6202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6202

6203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6203

6204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6204

6205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6205

6206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6206

6207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6207

6208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6208

6209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6209

6210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6210

6211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6211

6212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6212

6213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6213

6214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6214

6215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6215

6216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6216

6217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6217

6218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6218

6219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6219

6220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6220

6221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6221

6222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6222

6223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6223

6224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6224

6225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6225

6226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6226

6227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6227

6228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6228

6229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6229

6230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6230

6231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6231

6232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6232

6233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6233

6234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6234

6235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6235

6236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6236

6237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6237

6238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6238

6239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6239

6240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6240

6241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6241

6242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6242

6243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6243

6244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6244

6245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6245

6246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6246

6247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6247

6248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6248

6249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6249

6250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6250

6251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6251

6252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6252

6253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6253

6254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6254

6255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6255

6256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6256

6257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6257

6258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6258

6259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6259

6260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6260

6261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6261

6262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6262

6263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6263

6264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6264

6265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6265

6266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6266

6267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6267

6268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6268

6269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6269

6270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6270

6271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6271

6272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6272

6273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6273

6274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6274

6275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6275

6276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6276

6277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6277

6278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6278

6279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6279

6280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6280

6281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6281

6282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6282

6283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6283

6284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6284

6285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6285

6286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6286

6287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6287

6288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6288

6289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6289

6290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6290

6291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6291

6292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6292

6293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6293

6294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6294

6295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6295

6296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6296

6297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6297

6298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6298

6299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6299

6300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6300

6301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6301

6302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6302

6303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6303

6304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6304

6305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6305

6306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6306

6307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6307

6308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6308

6309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6309

6310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6310

6311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6311

6312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6312

6313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6313

6314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6314

6315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6315

6316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6316

6317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6317

6318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6318

6319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6319

6320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6320

6321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6321

6322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6322

6323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6323

6324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6324

6325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6325

6326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6326

6327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6327

6328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6328

6329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6329

6330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6330

6331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6331

6332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6332

6333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6333

6334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6334

6335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6335

6336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6336

6337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6337

6338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6338

6339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6339

6340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6340

6341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6341

6342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6342

6343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6343

6344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6344

6345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6345

6346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6346

6347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6347

6348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6348

6349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6349

6350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6350

6351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6351

6352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6352

6353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6353

6354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6354

6355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6355

6356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6356

6357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6357

6358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6358

6359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6359

6360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6360

6361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6361

6362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6362

6363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6363

6364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6364

6365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6365

6366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6366

6367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6367

6368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6368

6369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6369

6370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6370

6371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6371

6372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6372

6373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6373

6374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6374

6375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6375

6376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6376

6377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6377

6378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6378

6379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6379

6380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6380

6381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6381

6382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6382

6383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6383

6384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6384

6385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6385

6386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6386

6387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6387

6388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6388

6389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6389

6390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6390

6391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6391

6392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6392

6393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6393

6394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6394

6395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6395

6396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6396

6397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6397

6398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6398

6399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6399

6400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6400

6401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6401

6402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6402

6403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6403

6404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6404

6405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6405

6406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6406

6407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6407

6408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6408

6409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6409

6410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6410

6411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6411

6412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6412

6413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6413

6414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6414

6415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6415

6416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6416

6417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6417

6418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6418

6419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6419

6420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6420

6421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6421

6422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6422

6423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6423

6424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6424

6425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6425

6426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6426

6427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6427

6428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6428

6429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6429

6430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6430

6431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6431

6432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6432

6433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6433

6434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6434

6435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6435

6436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6436

6437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6437

6438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6438

6439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6439

6440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6440

6441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6441

6442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6442

6443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6443

6444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6444

6445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6445

6446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6446

6447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6447

6448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6448

6449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6449

6450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6450

6451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6451

6452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6452

6453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6453

6454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6454

6455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6455

6456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6456

6457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6457

6458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6458

6459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6459

6460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6460

6461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6461

6462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6462

6463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6463

6464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6464

6465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6465

6466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6466

6467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6467

6468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6468

6469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6469

6470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6470

6471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6471

6472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6472

6473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6473

6474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6474

6475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6475

6476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6476

6477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6477

6478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6478

6479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6479

6480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6480

6481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6481

6482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6482

6483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6483

6484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6484

6485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6485

6486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6486

6487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6487

6488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6488

6489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6489

6490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6490

6491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6491

6492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnf6492

6493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1

6494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2

6495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3

6496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4

6497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5

6498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6

6499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb7

6500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb8

6501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb9

6502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb10

6503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb11

6504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb12

6505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb13

6506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb14

6507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb15

6508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb16

6509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb17

6510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb18

6511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb19

6512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb20

6513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb21

6514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb22

6515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb23

6516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb24

6517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb25

6518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb26

6519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb27

6520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb28

6521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb29

6522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb30

6523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb31

6524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb32

6525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb33

6526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb34

6527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb35

6528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb36

6529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb37

6530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb38

6531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb39

6532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb40

6533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb41

6534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb42

6535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb43

6536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb44

6537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb45

6538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb46

6539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb47

6540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb48

6541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb49

6542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb50

6543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb51

6544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb52

6545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb53

6546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb54

6547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb55

6548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb56

6549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb57

6550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb58

6551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb59

6552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb60

6553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb61

6554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb62

6555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb63

6556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb64

6557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb65

6558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb66

6559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb67

6560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb68

6561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb69

6562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb70

6563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb71

6564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb72

6565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb73

6566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb74

6567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb75

6568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb76

6569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb77

6570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb78

6571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb79

6572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb80

6573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb81

6574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb82

6575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb83

6576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb84

6577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb85

6578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb86

6579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb87

6580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb88

6581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb89

6582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb90

6583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb91

6584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb92

6585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb93

6586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb94

6587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb95

6588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb96

6589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb97

6590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb98

6591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb99

6592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb100

6593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb101

6594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb102

6595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb103

6596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb104

6597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb105

6598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb106

6599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb107

6600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb108

6601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb109

6602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb110

6603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb111

6604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb112

6605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb113

6606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb114

6607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb115

6608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb116

6609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb117

6610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb118

6611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb119

6612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb120

6613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb121

6614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb122

6615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb123

6616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb124

6617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb125

6618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb126

6619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb127

6620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb128

6621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb129

6622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb130

6623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb131

6624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb132

6625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb133

6626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb134

6627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb135

6628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb136

6629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb137

6630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb138

6631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb139

6632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb140

6633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb141

6634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb142

6635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb143

6636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb144

6637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb145

6638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb146

6639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb147

6640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb148

6641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb149

6642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb150

6643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb151

6644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb152

6645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb153

6646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb154

6647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb155

6648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb156

6649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb157

6650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb158

6651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb159

6652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb160

6653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb161

6654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb162

6655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb163

6656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb164

6657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb165

6658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb166

6659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb167

6660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb168

6661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb169

6662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb170

6663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb171

6664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb172

6665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb173

6666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb174

6667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb175

6668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb176

6669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb177

6670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb178

6671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb179

6672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb180

6673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb181

6674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb182

6675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb183

6676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb184

6677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb185

6678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb186

6679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb187

6680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb188

6681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb189

6682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb190

6683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb191

6684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb192

6685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb193

6686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb194

6687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb195

6688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb196

6689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb197

6690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb198

6691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb199

6692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb200

6693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb201

6694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb202

6695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb203

6696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb204

6697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb205

6698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb206

6699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb207

6700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb208

6701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb209

6702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb210

6703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb211

6704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb212

6705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb213

6706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb214

6707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb215

6708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb216

6709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb217

6710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb218

6711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb219

6712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb220

6713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb221

6714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb222

6715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb223

6716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb224

6717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb225

6718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb226

6719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb227

6720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb228

6721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb229

6722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb230

6723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb231

6724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb232

6725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb233

6726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb234

6727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb235

6728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb236

6729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb237

6730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb238

6731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb239

6732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb240

6733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb241

6734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb242

6735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb243

6736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb244

6737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb245

6738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb246

6739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb247

6740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb248

6741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb249

6742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb250

6743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb251

6744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb252

6745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb253

6746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb254

6747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb255

6748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb256

6749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb257

6750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb258

6751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb259

6752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb260

6753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb261

6754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb262

6755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb263

6756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb264

6757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb265

6758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb266

6759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb267

6760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb268

6761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb269

6762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb270

6763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb271

6764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb272

6765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb273

6766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb274

6767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb275

6768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb276

6769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb277

6770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb278

6771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb279

6772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb280

6773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb281

6774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb282

6775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb283

6776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb284

6777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb285

6778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb286

6779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb287

6780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb288

6781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb289

6782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb290

6783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb291

6784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb292

6785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb293

6786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb294

6787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb295

6788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb296

6789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb297

6790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb298

6791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb299

6792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb300

6793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb301

6794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb302

6795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb303

6796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb304

6797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb305

6798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb306

6799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb307

6800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb308

6801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb309

6802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb310

6803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb311

6804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb312

6805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb313

6806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb314

6807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb315

6808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb316

6809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb317

6810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb318

6811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb319

6812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb320

6813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb321

6814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb322

6815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb323

6816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb324

6817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb325

6818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb326

6819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb327

6820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb328

6821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb329

6822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb330

6823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb331

6824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb332

6825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb333

6826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb334

6827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb335

6828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb336

6829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb337

6830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb338

6831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb339

6832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb340

6833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb341

6834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb342

6835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb343

6836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb344

6837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb345

6838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb346

6839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb347

6840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb348

6841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb349

6842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb350

6843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb351

6844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb352

6845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb353

6846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb354

6847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb355

6848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb356

6849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb357

6850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb358

6851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb359

6852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb360

6853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb361

6854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb362

6855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb363

6856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb364

6857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb365

6858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb366

6859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb367

6860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb368

6861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb369

6862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb370

6863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb371

6864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb372

6865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb373

6866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb374

6867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb375

6868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb376

6869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb377

6870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb378

6871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb379

6872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb380

6873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb381

6874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb382

6875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb383

6876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb384

6877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb385

6878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb386

6879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb387

6880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb388

6881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb389

6882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb390

6883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb391

6884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb392

6885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb393

6886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb394

6887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb395

6888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb396

6889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb397

6890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb398

6891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb399

6892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb400

6893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb401

6894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb402

6895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb403

6896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb404

6897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb405

6898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb406

6899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb407

6900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb408

6901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb409

6902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb410

6903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb411

6904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb412

6905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb413

6906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb414

6907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb415

6908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb416

6909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb417

6910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb418

6911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb419

6912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb420

6913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb421

6914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb422

6915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb423

6916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb424

6917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb425

6918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb426

6919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb427

6920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb428

6921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb429

6922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb430

6923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb431

6924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb432

6925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb433

6926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb434

6927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb435

6928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb436

6929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb437

6930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb438

6931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb439

6932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb440

6933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb441

6934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb442

6935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb443

6936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb444

6937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb445

6938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb446

6939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb447

6940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb448

6941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb449

6942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb450

6943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb451

6944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb452

6945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb453

6946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb454

6947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb455

6948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb456

6949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb457

6950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb458

6951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb459

6952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb460

6953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb461

6954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb462

6955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb463

6956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb464

6957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb465

6958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb466

6959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb467

6960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb468

6961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb469

6962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb470

6963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb471

6964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb472

6965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb473

6966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb474

6967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb475

6968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb476

6969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb477

6970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb478

6971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb479

6972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb480

6973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb481

6974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb482

6975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb483

6976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb484

6977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb485

6978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb486

6979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb487

6980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb488

6981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb489

6982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb490

6983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb491

6984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb492

6985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb493

6986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb494

6987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb495

6988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb496

6989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb497

6990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb498

6991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb499

6992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb500

6993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb501

6994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb502

6995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb503

6996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb504

6997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb505

6998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb506

6999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb507

7000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb508

7001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb509

7002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb510

7003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb511

7004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb512

7005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb513

7006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb514

7007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb515

7008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb516

7009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb517

7010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb518

7011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb519

7012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb520

7013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb521

7014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb522

7015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb523

7016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb524

7017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb525

7018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb526

7019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb527

7020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb528

7021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb529

7022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb530

7023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb531

7024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb532

7025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb533

7026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb534

7027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb535

7028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb536

7029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb537

7030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb538

7031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb539

7032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb540

7033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb541

7034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb542

7035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb543

7036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb544

7037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb545

7038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb546

7039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb547

7040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb548

7041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb549

7042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb550

7043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb551

7044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb552

7045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb553

7046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb554

7047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb555

7048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb556

7049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb557

7050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb558

7051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb559

7052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb560

7053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb561

7054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb562

7055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb563

7056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb564

7057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb565

7058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb566

7059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb567

7060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb568

7061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb569

7062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb570

7063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb571

7064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb572

7065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb573

7066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb574

7067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb575

7068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb576

7069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb577

7070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb578

7071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb579

7072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb580

7073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb581

7074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb582

7075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb583

7076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb584

7077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb585

7078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb586

7079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb587

7080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb588

7081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb589

7082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb590

7083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb591

7084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb592

7085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb593

7086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb594

7087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb595

7088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb596

7089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb597

7090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb598

7091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb599

7092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb600

7093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb601

7094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb602

7095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb603

7096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb604

7097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb605

7098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb606

7099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb607

7100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb608

7101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb609

7102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb610

7103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb611

7104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb612

7105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb613

7106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb614

7107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb615

7108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb616

7109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb617

7110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb618

7111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb619

7112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb620

7113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb621

7114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb622

7115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb623

7116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb624

7117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb625

7118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb626

7119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb627

7120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb628

7121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb629

7122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb630

7123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb631

7124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb632

7125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb633

7126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb634

7127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb635

7128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb636

7129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb637

7130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb638

7131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb639

7132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb640

7133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb641

7134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb642

7135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb643

7136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb644

7137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb645

7138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb646

7139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb647

7140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb648

7141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb649

7142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb650

7143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb651

7144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb652

7145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb653

7146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb654

7147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb655

7148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb656

7149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb657

7150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb658

7151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb659

7152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb660

7153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb661

7154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb662

7155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb663

7156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb664

7157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb665

7158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb666

7159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb667

7160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb668

7161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb669

7162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb670

7163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb671

7164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb672

7165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb673

7166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb674

7167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb675

7168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb676

7169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb677

7170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb678

7171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb679

7172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb680

7173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb681

7174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb682

7175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb683

7176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb684

7177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb685

7178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb686

7179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb687

7180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb688

7181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb689

7182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb690

7183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb691

7184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb692

7185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb693

7186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb694

7187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb695

7188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb696

7189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb697

7190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb698

7191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb699

7192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb700

7193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb701

7194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb702

7195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb703

7196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb704

7197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb705

7198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb706

7199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb707

7200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb708

7201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb709

7202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb710

7203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb711

7204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb712

7205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb713

7206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb714

7207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb715

7208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb716

7209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb717

7210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb718

7211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb719

7212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb720

7213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb721

7214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb722

7215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb723

7216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb724

7217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb725

7218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb726

7219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb727

7220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb728

7221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb729

7222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb730

7223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb731

7224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb732

7225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb733

7226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb734

7227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb735

7228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb736

7229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb737

7230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb738

7231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb739

7232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb740

7233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb741

7234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb742

7235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb743

7236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb744

7237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb745

7238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb746

7239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb747

7240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb748

7241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb749

7242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb750

7243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb751

7244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb752

7245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb753

7246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb754

7247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb755

7248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb756

7249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb757

7250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb758

7251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb759

7252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb760

7253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb761

7254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb762

7255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb763

7256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb764

7257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb765

7258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb766

7259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb767

7260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb768

7261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb769

7262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb770

7263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb771

7264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb772

7265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb773

7266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb774

7267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb775

7268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb776

7269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb777

7270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb778

7271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb779

7272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb780

7273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb781

7274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb782

7275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb783

7276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb784

7277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb785

7278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb786

7279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb787

7280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb788

7281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb789

7282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb790

7283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb791

7284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb792

7285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb793

7286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb794

7287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb795

7288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb796

7289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb797

7290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb798

7291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb799

7292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb800

7293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb801

7294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb802

7295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb803

7296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb804

7297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb805

7298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb806

7299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb807

7300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb808

7301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb809

7302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb810

7303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb811

7304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb812

7305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb813

7306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb814

7307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb815

7308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb816

7309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb817

7310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb818

7311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb819

7312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb820

7313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb821

7314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb822

7315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb823

7316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb824

7317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb825

7318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb826

7319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb827

7320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb828

7321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb829

7322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb830

7323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb831

7324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb832

7325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb833

7326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb834

7327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb835

7328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb836

7329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb837

7330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb838

7331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb839

7332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb840

7333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb841

7334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb842

7335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb843

7336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb844

7337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb845

7338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb846

7339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb847

7340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb848

7341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb849

7342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb850

7343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb851

7344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb852

7345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb853

7346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb854

7347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb855

7348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb856

7349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb857

7350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb858

7351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb859

7352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb860

7353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb861

7354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb862

7355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb863

7356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb864

7357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb865

7358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb866

7359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb867

7360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb868

7361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb869

7362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb870

7363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb871

7364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb872

7365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb873

7366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb874

7367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb875

7368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb876

7369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb877

7370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb878

7371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb879

7372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb880

7373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb881

7374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb882

7375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb883

7376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb884

7377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb885

7378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb886

7379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb887

7380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb888

7381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb889

7382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb890

7383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb891

7384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb892

7385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb893

7386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb894

7387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb895

7388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb896

7389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb897

7390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb898

7391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb899

7392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb900

7393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb901

7394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb902

7395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb903

7396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb904

7397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb905

7398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb906

7399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb907

7400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb908

7401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb909

7402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb910

7403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb911

7404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb912

7405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb913

7406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb914

7407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb915

7408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb916

7409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb917

7410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb918

7411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb919

7412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb920

7413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb921

7414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb922

7415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb923

7416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb924

7417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb925

7418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb926

7419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb927

7420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb928

7421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb929

7422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb930

7423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb931

7424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb932

7425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb933

7426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb934

7427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb935

7428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb936

7429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb937

7430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb938

7431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb939

7432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb940

7433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb941

7434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb942

7435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb943

7436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb944

7437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb945

7438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb946

7439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb947

7440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb948

7441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb949

7442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb950

7443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb951

7444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb952

7445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb953

7446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb954

7447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb955

7448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb956

7449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb957

7450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb958

7451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb959

7452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb960

7453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb961

7454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb962

7455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb963

7456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb964

7457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb965

7458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb966

7459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb967

7460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb968

7461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb969

7462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb970

7463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb971

7464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb972

7465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb973

7466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb974

7467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb975

7468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb976

7469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb977

7470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb978

7471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb979

7472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb980

7473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb981

7474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb982

7475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb983

7476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb984

7477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb985

7478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb986

7479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb987

7480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb988

7481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb989

7482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb990

7483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb991

7484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb992

7485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb993

7486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb994

7487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb995

7488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb996

7489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb997

7490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb998

7491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb999

7492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1000

7493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1001

7494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1002

7495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1003

7496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1004

7497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1005

7498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1006

7499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1007

7500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1008

7501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1009

7502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1010

7503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1011

7504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1012

7505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1013

7506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1014

7507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1015

7508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1016

7509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1017

7510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1018

7511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1019

7512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1020

7513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1021

7514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1022

7515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1023

7516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1024

7517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1025

7518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1026

7519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1027

7520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1028

7521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1029

7522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1030

7523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1031

7524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1032

7525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1033

7526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1034

7527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1035

7528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1036

7529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1037

7530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1038

7531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1039

7532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1040

7533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1041

7534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1042

7535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1043

7536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1044

7537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1045

7538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1046

7539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1047

7540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1048

7541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1049

7542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1050

7543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1051

7544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1052

7545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1053

7546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1054

7547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1055

7548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1056

7549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1057

7550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1058

7551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1059

7552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1060

7553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1061

7554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1062

7555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1063

7556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1064

7557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1065

7558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1066

7559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1067

7560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1068

7561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1069

7562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1070

7563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1071

7564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1072

7565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1073

7566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1074

7567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1075

7568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1076

7569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1077

7570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1078

7571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1079

7572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1080

7573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1081

7574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1082

7575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1083

7576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1084

7577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1085

7578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1086

7579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1087

7580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1088

7581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1089

7582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1090

7583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1091

7584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1092

7585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1093

7586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1094

7587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1095

7588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1096

7589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1097

7590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1098

7591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1099

7592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1100

7593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1101

7594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1102

7595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1103

7596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1104

7597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1105

7598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1106

7599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1107

7600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1108

7601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1109

7602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1110

7603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1111

7604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1112

7605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1113

7606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1114

7607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1115

7608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1116

7609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1117

7610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1118

7611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1119

7612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1120

7613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1121

7614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1122

7615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1123

7616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1124

7617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1125

7618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1126

7619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1127

7620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1128

7621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1129

7622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1130

7623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1131

7624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1132

7625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1133

7626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1134

7627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1135

7628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1136

7629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1137

7630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1138

7631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1139

7632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1140

7633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1141

7634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1142

7635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1143

7636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1144

7637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1145

7638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1146

7639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1147

7640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1148

7641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1149

7642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1150

7643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1151

7644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1152

7645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1153

7646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1154

7647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1155

7648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1156

7649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1157

7650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1158

7651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1159

7652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1160

7653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1161

7654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1162

7655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1163

7656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1164

7657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1165

7658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1166

7659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1167

7660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1168

7661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1169

7662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1170

7663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1171

7664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1172

7665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1173

7666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1174

7667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1175

7668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1176

7669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1177

7670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1178

7671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1179

7672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1180

7673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1181

7674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1182

7675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1183

7676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1184

7677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1185

7678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1186

7679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1187

7680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1188

7681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1189

7682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1190

7683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1191

7684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1192

7685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1193

7686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1194

7687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1195

7688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1196

7689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1197

7690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1198

7691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1199

7692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1200

7693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1201

7694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1202

7695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1203

7696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1204

7697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1205

7698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1206

7699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1207

7700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1208

7701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1209

7702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1210

7703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1211

7704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1212

7705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1213

7706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1214

7707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1215

7708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1216

7709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1217

7710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1218

7711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1219

7712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1220

7713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1221

7714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1222

7715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1223

7716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1224

7717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1225

7718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1226

7719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1227

7720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1228

7721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1229

7722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1230

7723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1231

7724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1232

7725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1233

7726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1234

7727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1235

7728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1236

7729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1237

7730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1238

7731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1239

7732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1240

7733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1241

7734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1242

7735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1243

7736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1244

7737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1245

7738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1246

7739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1247

7740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1248

7741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1249

7742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1250

7743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1251

7744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1252

7745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1253

7746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1254

7747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1255

7748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1256

7749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1257

7750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1258

7751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1259

7752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1260

7753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1261

7754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1262

7755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1263

7756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1264

7757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1265

7758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1266

7759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1267

7760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1268

7761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1269

7762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1270

7763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1271

7764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1272

7765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1273

7766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1274

7767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1275

7768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1276

7769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1277

7770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1278

7771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1279

7772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1280

7773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1281

7774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1282

7775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1283

7776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1284

7777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1285

7778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1286

7779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1287

7780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1288

7781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1289

7782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1290

7783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1291

7784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1292

7785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1293

7786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1294

7787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1295

7788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1296

7789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1297

7790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1298

7791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1299

7792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1300

7793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1301

7794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1302

7795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1303

7796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1304

7797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1305

7798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1306

7799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1307

7800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1308

7801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1309

7802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1310

7803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1311

7804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1312

7805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1313

7806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1314

7807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1315

7808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1316

7809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1317

7810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1318

7811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1319

7812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1320

7813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1321

7814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1322

7815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1323

7816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1324

7817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1325

7818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1326

7819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1327

7820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1328

7821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1329

7822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1330

7823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1331

7824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1332

7825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1333

7826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1334

7827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1335

7828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1336

7829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1337

7830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1338

7831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1339

7832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1340

7833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1341

7834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1342

7835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1343

7836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1344

7837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1345

7838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1346

7839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1347

7840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1348

7841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1349

7842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1350

7843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1351

7844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1352

7845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1353

7846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1354

7847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1355

7848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1356

7849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1357

7850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1358

7851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1359

7852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1360

7853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1361

7854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1362

7855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1363

7856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1364

7857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1365

7858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1366

7859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1367

7860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1368

7861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1369

7862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1370

7863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1371

7864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1372

7865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1373

7866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1374

7867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1375

7868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1376

7869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1377

7870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1378

7871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1379

7872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1380

7873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1381

7874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1382

7875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1383

7876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1384

7877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1385

7878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1386

7879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1387

7880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1388

7881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1389

7882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1390

7883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1391

7884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1392

7885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1393

7886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1394

7887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1395

7888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1396

7889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1397

7890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1398

7891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1399

7892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1400

7893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1401

7894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1402

7895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1403

7896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1404

7897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1405

7898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1406

7899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1407

7900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1408

7901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1409

7902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1410

7903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1411

7904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1412

7905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1413

7906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1414

7907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1415

7908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1416

7909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1417

7910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1418

7911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1419

7912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1420

7913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1421

7914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1422

7915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1423

7916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1424

7917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1425

7918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1426

7919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1427

7920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1428

7921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1429

7922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1430

7923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1431

7924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1432

7925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1433

7926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1434

7927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1435

7928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1436

7929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1437

7930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1438

7931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1439

7932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1440

7933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1441

7934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1442

7935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1443

7936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1444

7937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1445

7938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1446

7939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1447

7940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1448

7941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1449

7942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1450

7943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1451

7944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1452

7945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1453

7946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1454

7947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1455

7948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1456

7949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1457

7950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1458

7951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1459

7952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1460

7953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1461

7954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1462

7955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1463

7956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1464

7957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1465

7958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1466

7959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1467

7960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1468

7961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1469

7962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1470

7963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1471

7964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1472

7965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1473

7966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1474

7967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1475

7968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1476

7969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1477

7970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1478

7971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1479

7972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1480

7973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1481

7974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1482

7975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1483

7976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1484

7977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1485

7978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1486

7979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1487

7980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1488

7981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1489

7982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1490

7983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1491

7984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1492

7985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1493

7986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1494

7987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1495

7988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1496

7989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1497

7990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1498

7991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1499

7992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1500

7993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1501

7994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1502

7995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1503

7996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1504

7997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1505

7998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1506

7999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1507

8000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1508

8001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1509

8002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1510

8003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1511

8004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1512

8005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1513

8006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1514

8007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1515

8008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1516

8009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1517

8010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1518

8011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1519

8012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1520

8013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1521

8014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1522

8015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1523

8016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1524

8017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1525

8018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1526

8019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1527

8020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1528

8021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1529

8022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1530

8023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1531

8024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1532

8025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1533

8026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1534

8027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1535

8028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1536

8029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1537

8030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1538

8031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1539

8032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1540

8033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1541

8034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1542

8035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1543

8036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1544

8037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1545

8038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1546

8039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1547

8040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1548

8041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1549

8042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1550

8043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1551

8044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1552

8045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1553

8046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1554

8047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1555

8048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1556

8049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1557

8050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1558

8051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1559

8052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1560

8053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1561

8054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1562

8055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1563

8056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1564

8057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1565

8058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1566

8059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1567

8060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1568

8061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1569

8062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1570

8063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1571

8064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1572

8065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1573

8066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1574

8067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1575

8068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1576

8069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1577

8070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1578

8071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1579

8072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1580

8073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1581

8074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1582

8075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1583

8076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1584

8077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1585

8078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1586

8079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1587

8080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1588

8081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1589

8082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1590

8083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1591

8084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1592

8085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1593

8086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1594

8087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1595

8088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1596

8089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1597

8090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1598

8091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1599

8092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1600

8093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1601

8094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1602

8095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1603

8096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1604

8097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1605

8098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1606

8099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1607

8100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1608

8101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1609

8102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1610

8103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1611

8104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1612

8105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1613

8106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1614

8107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1615

8108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1616

8109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1617

8110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1618

8111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1619

8112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1620

8113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1621

8114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1622

8115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1623

8116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1624

8117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1625

8118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1626

8119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1627

8120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1628

8121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1629

8122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1630

8123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1631

8124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1632

8125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1633

8126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1634

8127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1635

8128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1636

8129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1637

8130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1638

8131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1639

8132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1640

8133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1641

8134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1642

8135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1643

8136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1644

8137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1645

8138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1646

8139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1647

8140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1648

8141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1649

8142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1650

8143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1651

8144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1652

8145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1653

8146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1654

8147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1655

8148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1656

8149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1657

8150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1658

8151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1659

8152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1660

8153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1661

8154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1662

8155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1663

8156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1664

8157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1665

8158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1666

8159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1667

8160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1668

8161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1669

8162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1670

8163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1671

8164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1672

8165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1673

8166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1674

8167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1675

8168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1676

8169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1677

8170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1678

8171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1679

8172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1680

8173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1681

8174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1682

8175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1683

8176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1684

8177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1685

8178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1686

8179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1687

8180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1688

8181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1689

8182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1690

8183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1691

8184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1692

8185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1693

8186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1694

8187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1695

8188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1696

8189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1697

8190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1698

8191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1699

8192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1700

8193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1701

8194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1702

8195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1703

8196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1704

8197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1705

8198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1706

8199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1707

8200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1708

8201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1709

8202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1710

8203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1711

8204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1712

8205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1713

8206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1714

8207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1715

8208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1716

8209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1717

8210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1718

8211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1719

8212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1720

8213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1721

8214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1722

8215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1723

8216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1724

8217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1725

8218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1726

8219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1727

8220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1728

8221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1729

8222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1730

8223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1731

8224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1732

8225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1733

8226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1734

8227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1735

8228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1736

8229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1737

8230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1738

8231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1739

8232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1740

8233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1741

8234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1742

8235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1743

8236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1744

8237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1745

8238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1746

8239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1747

8240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1748

8241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1749

8242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1750

8243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1751

8244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1752

8245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1753

8246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1754

8247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1755

8248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1756

8249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1757

8250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1758

8251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1759

8252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1760

8253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1761

8254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1762

8255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1763

8256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1764

8257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1765

8258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1766

8259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1767

8260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1768

8261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1769

8262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1770

8263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1771

8264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1772

8265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1773

8266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1774

8267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1775

8268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1776

8269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1777

8270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1778

8271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1779

8272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1780

8273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1781

8274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1782

8275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1783

8276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1784

8277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1785

8278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1786

8279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1787

8280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1788

8281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1789

8282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1790

8283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1791

8284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1792

8285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1793

8286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1794

8287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1795

8288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1796

8289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1797

8290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1798

8291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1799

8292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1800

8293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1801

8294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1802

8295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1803

8296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1804

8297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1805

8298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1806

8299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1807

8300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1808

8301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1809

8302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1810

8303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1811

8304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1812

8305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1813

8306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1814

8307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1815

8308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1816

8309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1817

8310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1818

8311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1819

8312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1820

8313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1821

8314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1822

8315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1823

8316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1824

8317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1825

8318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1826

8319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1827

8320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1828

8321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1829

8322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1830

8323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1831

8324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1832

8325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1833

8326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1834

8327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1835

8328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1836

8329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1837

8330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1838

8331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1839

8332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1840

8333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1841

8334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1842

8335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1843

8336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1844

8337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1845

8338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1846

8339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1847

8340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1848

8341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1849

8342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1850

8343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1851

8344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1852

8345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1853

8346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1854

8347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1855

8348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1856

8349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1857

8350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1858

8351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1859

8352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1860

8353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1861

8354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1862

8355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1863

8356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1864

8357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1865

8358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1866

8359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1867

8360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1868

8361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1869

8362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1870

8363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1871

8364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1872

8365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1873

8366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1874

8367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1875

8368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1876

8369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1877

8370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1878

8371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1879

8372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1880

8373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1881

8374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1882

8375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1883

8376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1884

8377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1885

8378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1886

8379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1887

8380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1888

8381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1889

8382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1890

8383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1891

8384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1892

8385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1893

8386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1894

8387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1895

8388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1896

8389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1897

8390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1898

8391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1899

8392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1900

8393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1901

8394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1902

8395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1903

8396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1904

8397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1905

8398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1906

8399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1907

8400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1908

8401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1909

8402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1910

8403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1911

8404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1912

8405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1913

8406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1914

8407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1915

8408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1916

8409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1917

8410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1918

8411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1919

8412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1920

8413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1921

8414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1922

8415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1923

8416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1924

8417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1925

8418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1926

8419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1927

8420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1928

8421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1929

8422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1930

8423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1931

8424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1932

8425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1933

8426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1934

8427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1935

8428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1936

8429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1937

8430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1938

8431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1939

8432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1940

8433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1941

8434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1942

8435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1943

8436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1944

8437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1945

8438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1946

8439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1947

8440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1948

8441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1949

8442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1950

8443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1951

8444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1952

8445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1953

8446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1954

8447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1955

8448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1956

8449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1957

8450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1958

8451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1959

8452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1960

8453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1961

8454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1962

8455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1963

8456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1964

8457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1965

8458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1966

8459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1967

8460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1968

8461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1969

8462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1970

8463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1971

8464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1972

8465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1973

8466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1974

8467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1975

8468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1976

8469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1977

8470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1978

8471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1979

8472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1980

8473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1981

8474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1982

8475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1983

8476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1984

8477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1985

8478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1986

8479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1987

8480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1988

8481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1989

8482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1990

8483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1991

8484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1992

8485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1993

8486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1994

8487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1995

8488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1996

8489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1997

8490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1998

8491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb1999

8492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2000

8493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2001

8494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2002

8495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2003

8496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2004

8497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2005

8498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2006

8499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2007

8500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2008

8501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2009

8502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2010

8503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2011

8504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2012

8505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2013

8506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2014

8507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2015

8508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2016

8509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2017

8510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2018

8511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2019

8512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2020

8513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2021

8514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2022

8515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2023

8516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2024

8517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2025

8518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2026

8519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2027

8520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2028

8521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2029

8522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2030

8523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2031

8524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2032

8525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2033

8526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2034

8527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2035

8528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2036

8529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2037

8530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2038

8531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2039

8532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2040

8533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2041

8534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2042

8535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2043

8536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2044

8537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2045

8538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2046

8539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2047

8540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2048

8541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2049

8542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2050

8543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2051

8544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2052

8545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2053

8546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2054

8547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2055

8548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2056

8549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2057

8550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2058

8551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2059

8552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2060

8553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2061

8554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2062

8555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2063

8556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2064

8557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2065

8558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2066

8559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2067

8560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2068

8561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2069

8562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2070

8563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2071

8564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2072

8565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2073

8566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2074

8567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2075

8568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2076

8569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2077

8570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2078

8571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2079

8572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2080

8573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2081

8574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2082

8575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2083

8576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2084

8577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2085

8578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2086

8579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2087

8580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2088

8581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2089

8582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2090

8583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2091

8584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2092

8585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2093

8586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2094

8587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2095

8588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2096

8589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2097

8590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2098

8591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2099

8592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2100

8593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2101

8594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2102

8595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2103

8596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2104

8597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2105

8598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2106

8599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2107

8600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2108

8601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2109

8602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2110

8603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2111

8604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2112

8605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2113

8606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2114

8607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2115

8608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2116

8609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2117

8610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2118

8611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2119

8612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2120

8613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2121

8614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2122

8615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2123

8616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2124

8617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2125

8618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2126

8619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2127

8620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2128

8621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2129

8622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2130

8623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2131

8624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2132

8625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2133

8626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2134

8627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2135

8628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2136

8629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2137

8630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2138

8631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2139

8632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2140

8633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2141

8634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2142

8635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2143

8636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2144

8637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2145

8638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2146

8639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2147

8640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2148

8641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2149

8642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2150

8643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2151

8644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2152

8645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2153

8646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2154

8647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2155

8648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2156

8649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2157

8650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2158

8651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2159

8652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2160

8653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2161

8654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2162

8655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2163

8656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2164

8657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2165

8658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2166

8659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2167

8660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2168

8661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2169

8662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2170

8663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2171

8664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2172

8665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2173

8666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2174

8667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2175

8668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2176

8669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2177

8670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2178

8671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2179

8672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2180

8673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2181

8674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2182

8675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2183

8676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2184

8677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2185

8678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2186

8679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2187

8680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2188

8681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2189

8682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2190

8683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2191

8684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2192

8685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2193

8686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2194

8687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2195

8688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2196

8689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2197

8690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2198

8691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2199

8692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2200

8693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2201

8694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2202

8695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2203

8696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2204

8697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2205

8698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2206

8699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2207

8700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2208

8701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2209

8702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2210

8703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2211

8704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2212

8705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2213

8706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2214

8707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2215

8708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2216

8709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2217

8710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2218

8711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2219

8712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2220

8713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2221

8714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2222

8715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2223

8716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2224

8717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2225

8718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2226

8719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2227

8720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2228

8721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2229

8722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2230

8723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2231

8724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2232

8725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2233

8726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2234

8727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2235

8728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2236

8729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2237

8730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2238

8731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2239

8732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2240

8733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2241

8734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2242

8735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2243

8736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2244

8737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2245

8738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2246

8739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2247

8740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2248

8741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2249

8742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2250

8743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2251

8744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2252

8745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2253

8746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2254

8747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2255

8748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2256

8749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2257

8750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2258

8751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2259

8752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2260

8753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2261

8754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2262

8755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2263

8756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2264

8757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2265

8758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2266

8759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2267

8760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2268

8761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2269

8762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2270

8763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2271

8764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2272

8765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2273

8766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2274

8767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2275

8768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2276

8769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2277

8770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2278

8771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2279

8772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2280

8773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2281

8774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2282

8775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2283

8776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2284

8777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2285

8778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2286

8779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2287

8780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2288

8781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2289

8782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2290

8783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2291

8784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2292

8785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2293

8786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2294

8787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2295

8788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2296

8789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2297

8790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2298

8791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2299

8792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2300

8793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2301

8794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2302

8795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2303

8796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2304

8797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2305

8798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2306

8799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2307

8800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2308

8801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2309

8802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2310

8803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2311

8804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2312

8805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2313

8806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2314

8807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2315

8808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2316

8809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2317

8810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2318

8811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2319

8812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2320

8813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2321

8814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2322

8815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2323

8816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2324

8817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2325

8818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2326

8819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2327

8820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2328

8821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2329

8822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2330

8823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2331

8824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2332

8825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2333

8826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2334

8827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2335

8828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2336

8829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2337

8830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2338

8831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2339

8832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2340

8833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2341

8834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2342

8835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2343

8836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2344

8837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2345

8838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2346

8839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2347

8840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2348

8841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2349

8842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2350

8843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2351

8844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2352

8845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2353

8846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2354

8847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2355

8848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2356

8849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2357

8850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2358

8851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2359

8852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2360

8853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2361

8854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2362

8855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2363

8856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2364

8857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2365

8858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2366

8859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2367

8860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2368

8861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2369

8862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2370

8863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2371

8864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2372

8865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2373

8866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2374

8867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2375

8868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2376

8869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2377

8870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2378

8871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2379

8872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2380

8873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2381

8874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2382

8875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2383

8876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2384

8877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2385

8878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2386

8879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2387

8880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2388

8881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2389

8882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2390

8883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2391

8884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2392

8885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2393

8886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2394

8887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2395

8888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2396

8889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2397

8890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2398

8891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2399

8892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2400

8893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2401

8894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2402

8895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2403

8896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2404

8897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2405

8898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2406

8899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2407

8900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2408

8901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2409

8902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2410

8903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2411

8904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2412

8905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2413

8906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2414

8907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2415

8908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2416

8909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2417

8910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2418

8911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2419

8912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2420

8913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2421

8914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2422

8915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2423

8916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2424

8917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2425

8918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2426

8919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2427

8920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2428

8921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2429

8922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2430

8923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2431

8924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2432

8925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2433

8926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2434

8927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2435

8928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2436

8929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2437

8930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2438

8931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2439

8932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2440

8933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2441

8934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2442

8935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2443

8936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2444

8937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2445

8938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2446

8939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2447

8940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2448

8941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2449

8942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2450

8943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2451

8944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2452

8945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2453

8946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2454

8947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2455

8948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2456

8949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2457

8950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2458

8951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2459

8952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2460

8953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2461

8954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2462

8955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2463

8956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2464

8957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2465

8958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2466

8959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2467

8960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2468

8961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2469

8962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2470

8963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2471

8964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2472

8965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2473

8966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2474

8967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2475

8968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2476

8969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2477

8970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2478

8971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2479

8972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2480

8973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2481

8974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2482

8975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2483

8976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2484

8977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2485

8978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2486

8979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2487

8980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2488

8981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2489

8982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2490

8983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2491

8984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2492

8985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2493

8986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2494

8987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2495

8988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2496

8989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2497

8990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2498

8991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2499

8992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2500

8993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2501

8994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2502

8995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2503

8996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2504

8997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2505

8998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2506

8999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2507

9000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2508

9001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2509

9002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2510

9003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2511

9004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2512

9005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2513

9006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2514

9007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2515

9008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2516

9009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2517

9010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2518

9011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2519

9012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2520

9013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2521

9014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2522

9015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2523

9016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2524

9017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2525

9018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2526

9019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2527

9020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2528

9021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2529

9022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2530

9023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2531

9024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2532

9025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2533

9026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2534

9027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2535

9028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2536

9029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2537

9030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2538

9031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2539

9032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2540

9033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2541

9034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2542

9035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2543

9036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2544

9037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2545

9038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2546

9039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2547

9040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2548

9041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2549

9042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2550

9043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2551

9044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2552

9045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2553

9046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2554

9047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2555

9048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2556

9049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2557

9050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2558

9051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2559

9052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2560

9053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2561

9054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2562

9055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2563

9056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2564

9057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2565

9058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2566

9059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2567

9060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2568

9061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2569

9062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2570

9063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2571

9064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2572

9065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2573

9066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2574

9067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2575

9068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2576

9069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2577

9070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2578

9071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2579

9072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2580

9073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2581

9074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2582

9075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2583

9076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2584

9077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2585

9078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2586

9079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2587

9080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2588

9081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2589

9082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2590

9083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2591

9084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2592

9085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2593

9086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2594

9087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2595

9088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2596

9089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2597

9090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2598

9091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2599

9092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2600

9093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2601

9094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2602

9095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2603

9096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2604

9097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2605

9098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2606

9099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2607

9100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2608

9101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2609

9102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2610

9103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2611

9104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2612

9105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2613

9106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2614

9107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2615

9108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2616

9109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2617

9110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2618

9111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2619

9112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2620

9113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2621

9114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2622

9115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2623

9116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2624

9117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2625

9118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2626

9119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2627

9120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2628

9121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2629

9122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2630

9123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2631

9124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2632

9125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2633

9126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2634

9127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2635

9128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2636

9129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2637

9130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2638

9131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2639

9132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2640

9133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2641

9134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2642

9135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2643

9136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2644

9137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2645

9138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2646

9139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2647

9140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2648

9141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2649

9142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2650

9143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2651

9144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2652

9145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2653

9146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2654

9147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2655

9148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2656

9149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2657

9150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2658

9151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2659

9152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2660

9153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2661

9154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2662

9155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2663

9156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2664

9157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2665

9158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2666

9159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2667

9160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2668

9161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2669

9162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2670

9163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2671

9164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2672

9165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2673

9166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2674

9167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2675

9168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2676

9169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2677

9170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2678

9171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2679

9172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2680

9173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2681

9174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2682

9175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2683

9176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2684

9177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2685

9178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2686

9179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2687

9180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2688

9181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2689

9182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2690

9183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2691

9184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2692

9185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2693

9186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2694

9187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2695

9188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2696

9189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2697

9190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2698

9191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2699

9192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2700

9193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2701

9194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2702

9195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2703

9196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2704

9197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2705

9198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2706

9199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2707

9200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2708

9201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2709

9202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2710

9203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2711

9204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2712

9205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2713

9206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2714

9207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2715

9208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2716

9209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2717

9210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2718

9211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2719

9212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2720

9213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2721

9214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2722

9215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2723

9216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2724

9217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2725

9218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2726

9219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2727

9220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2728

9221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2729

9222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2730

9223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2731

9224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2732

9225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2733

9226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2734

9227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2735

9228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2736

9229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2737

9230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2738

9231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2739

9232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2740

9233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2741

9234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2742

9235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2743

9236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2744

9237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2745

9238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2746

9239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2747

9240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2748

9241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2749

9242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2750

9243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2751

9244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2752

9245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2753

9246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2754

9247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2755

9248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2756

9249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2757

9250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2758

9251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2759

9252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2760

9253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2761

9254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2762

9255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2763

9256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2764

9257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2765

9258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2766

9259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2767

9260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2768

9261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2769

9262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2770

9263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2771

9264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2772

9265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2773

9266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2774

9267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2775

9268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2776

9269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2777

9270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2778

9271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2779

9272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2780

9273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2781

9274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2782

9275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2783

9276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2784

9277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2785

9278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2786

9279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2787

9280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2788

9281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2789

9282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2790

9283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2791

9284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2792

9285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2793

9286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2794

9287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2795

9288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2796

9289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2797

9290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2798

9291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2799

9292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2800

9293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2801

9294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2802

9295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2803

9296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2804

9297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2805

9298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2806

9299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2807

9300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2808

9301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2809

9302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2810

9303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2811

9304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2812

9305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2813

9306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2814

9307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2815

9308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2816

9309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2817

9310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2818

9311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2819

9312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2820

9313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2821

9314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2822

9315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2823

9316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2824

9317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2825

9318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2826

9319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2827

9320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2828

9321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2829

9322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2830

9323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2831

9324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2832

9325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2833

9326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2834

9327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2835

9328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2836

9329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2837

9330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2838

9331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2839

9332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2840

9333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2841

9334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2842

9335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2843

9336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2844

9337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2845

9338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2846

9339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2847

9340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2848

9341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2849

9342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2850

9343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2851

9344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2852

9345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2853

9346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2854

9347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2855

9348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2856

9349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2857

9350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2858

9351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2859

9352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2860

9353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2861

9354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2862

9355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2863

9356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2864

9357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2865

9358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2866

9359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2867

9360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2868

9361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2869

9362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2870

9363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2871

9364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2872

9365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2873

9366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2874

9367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2875

9368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2876

9369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2877

9370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2878

9371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2879

9372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2880

9373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2881

9374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2882

9375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2883

9376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2884

9377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2885

9378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2886

9379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2887

9380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2888

9381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2889

9382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2890

9383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2891

9384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2892

9385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2893

9386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2894

9387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2895

9388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2896

9389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2897

9390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2898

9391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2899

9392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2900

9393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2901

9394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2902

9395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2903

9396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2904

9397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2905

9398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2906

9399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2907

9400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2908

9401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2909

9402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2910

9403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2911

9404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2912

9405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2913

9406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2914

9407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2915

9408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2916

9409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2917

9410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2918

9411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2919

9412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2920

9413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2921

9414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2922

9415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2923

9416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2924

9417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2925

9418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2926

9419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2927

9420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2928

9421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2929

9422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2930

9423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2931

9424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2932

9425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2933

9426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2934

9427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2935

9428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2936

9429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2937

9430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2938

9431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2939

9432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2940

9433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2941

9434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2942

9435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2943

9436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2944

9437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2945

9438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2946

9439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2947

9440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2948

9441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2949

9442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2950

9443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2951

9444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2952

9445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2953

9446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2954

9447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2955

9448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2956

9449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2957

9450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2958

9451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2959

9452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2960

9453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2961

9454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2962

9455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2963

9456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2964

9457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2965

9458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2966

9459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2967

9460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2968

9461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2969

9462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2970

9463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2971

9464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2972

9465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2973

9466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2974

9467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2975

9468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2976

9469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2977

9470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2978

9471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2979

9472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2980

9473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2981

9474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2982

9475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2983

9476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2984

9477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2985

9478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2986

9479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2987

9480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2988

9481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2989

9482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2990

9483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2991

9484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2992

9485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2993

9486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2994

9487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2995

9488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2996

9489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2997

9490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2998

9491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb2999

9492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3000

9493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3001

9494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3002

9495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3003

9496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3004

9497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3005

9498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3006

9499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3007

9500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3008

9501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3009

9502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3010

9503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3011

9504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3012

9505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3013

9506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3014

9507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3015

9508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3016

9509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3017

9510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3018

9511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3019

9512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3020

9513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3021

9514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3022

9515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3023

9516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3024

9517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3025

9518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3026

9519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3027

9520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3028

9521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3029

9522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3030

9523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3031

9524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3032

9525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3033

9526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3034

9527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3035

9528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3036

9529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3037

9530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3038

9531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3039

9532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3040

9533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3041

9534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3042

9535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3043

9536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3044

9537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3045

9538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3046

9539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3047

9540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3048

9541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3049

9542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3050

9543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3051

9544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3052

9545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3053

9546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3054

9547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3055

9548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3056

9549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3057

9550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3058

9551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3059

9552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3060

9553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3061

9554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3062

9555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3063

9556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3064

9557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3065

9558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3066

9559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3067

9560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3068

9561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3069

9562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3070

9563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3071

9564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3072

9565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3073

9566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3074

9567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3075

9568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3076

9569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3077

9570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3078

9571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3079

9572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3080

9573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3081

9574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3082

9575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3083

9576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3084

9577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3085

9578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3086

9579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3087

9580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3088

9581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3089

9582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3090

9583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3091

9584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3092

9585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3093

9586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3094

9587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3095

9588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3096

9589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3097

9590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3098

9591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3099

9592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3100

9593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3101

9594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3102

9595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3103

9596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3104

9597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3105

9598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3106

9599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3107

9600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3108

9601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3109

9602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3110

9603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3111

9604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3112

9605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3113

9606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3114

9607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3115

9608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3116

9609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3117

9610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3118

9611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3119

9612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3120

9613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3121

9614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3122

9615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3123

9616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3124

9617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3125

9618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3126

9619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3127

9620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3128

9621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3129

9622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3130

9623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3131

9624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3132

9625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3133

9626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3134

9627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3135

9628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3136

9629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3137

9630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3138

9631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3139

9632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3140

9633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3141

9634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3142

9635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3143

9636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3144

9637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3145

9638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3146

9639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3147

9640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3148

9641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3149

9642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3150

9643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3151

9644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3152

9645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3153

9646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3154

9647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3155

9648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3156

9649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3157

9650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3158

9651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3159

9652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3160

9653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3161

9654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3162

9655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3163

9656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3164

9657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3165

9658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3166

9659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3167

9660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3168

9661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3169

9662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3170

9663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3171

9664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3172

9665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3173

9666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3174

9667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3175

9668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3176

9669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3177

9670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3178

9671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3179

9672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3180

9673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3181

9674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3182

9675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3183

9676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3184

9677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3185

9678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3186

9679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3187

9680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3188

9681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3189

9682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3190

9683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3191

9684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3192

9685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3193

9686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3194

9687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3195

9688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3196

9689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3197

9690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3198

9691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3199

9692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3200

9693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3201

9694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3202

9695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3203

9696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3204

9697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3205

9698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3206

9699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3207

9700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3208

9701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3209

9702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3210

9703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3211

9704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3212

9705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3213

9706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3214

9707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3215

9708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3216

9709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3217

9710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3218

9711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3219

9712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3220

9713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3221

9714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3222

9715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3223

9716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3224

9717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3225

9718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3226

9719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3227

9720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3228

9721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3229

9722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3230

9723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3231

9724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3232

9725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3233

9726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3234

9727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3235

9728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3236

9729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3237

9730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3238

9731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3239

9732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3240

9733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3241

9734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3242

9735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3243

9736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3244

9737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3245

9738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3246

9739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3247

9740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3248

9741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3249

9742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3250

9743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3251

9744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3252

9745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3253

9746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3254

9747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3255

9748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3256

9749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3257

9750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3258

9751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3259

9752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3260

9753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3261

9754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3262

9755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3263

9756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3264

9757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3265

9758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3266

9759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3267

9760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3268

9761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3269

9762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3270

9763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3271

9764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3272

9765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3273

9766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3274

9767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3275

9768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3276

9769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3277

9770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3278

9771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3279

9772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3280

9773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3281

9774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3282

9775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3283

9776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3284

9777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3285

9778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3286

9779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3287

9780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3288

9781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3289

9782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3290

9783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3291

9784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3292

9785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3293

9786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3294

9787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3295

9788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3296

9789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3297

9790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3298

9791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3299

9792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3300

9793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3301

9794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3302

9795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3303

9796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3304

9797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3305

9798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3306

9799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3307

9800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3308

9801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3309

9802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3310

9803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3311

9804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3312

9805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3313

9806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3314

9807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3315

9808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3316

9809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3317

9810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3318

9811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3319

9812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3320

9813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3321

9814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3322

9815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3323

9816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3324

9817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3325

9818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3326

9819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3327

9820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3328

9821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3329

9822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3330

9823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3331

9824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3332

9825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3333

9826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3334

9827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3335

9828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3336

9829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3337

9830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3338

9831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3339

9832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3340

9833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3341

9834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3342

9835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3343

9836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3344

9837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3345

9838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3346

9839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3347

9840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3348

9841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3349

9842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3350

9843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3351

9844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3352

9845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3353

9846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3354

9847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3355

9848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3356

9849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3357

9850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3358

9851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3359

9852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3360

9853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3361

9854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3362

9855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3363

9856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3364

9857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3365

9858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3366

9859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3367

9860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3368

9861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3369

9862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3370

9863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3371

9864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3372

9865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3373

9866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3374

9867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3375

9868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3376

9869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3377

9870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3378

9871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3379

9872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3380

9873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3381

9874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3382

9875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3383

9876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3384

9877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3385

9878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3386

9879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3387

9880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3388

9881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3389

9882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3390

9883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3391

9884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3392

9885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3393

9886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3394

9887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3395

9888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3396

9889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3397

9890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3398

9891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3399

9892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3400

9893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3401

9894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3402

9895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3403

9896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3404

9897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3405

9898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3406

9899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3407

9900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3408

9901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3409

9902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3410

9903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3411

9904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3412

9905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3413

9906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3414

9907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3415

9908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3416

9909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3417

9910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3418

9911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3419

9912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3420

9913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3421

9914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3422

9915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3423

9916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3424

9917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3425

9918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3426

9919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3427

9920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3428

9921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3429

9922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3430

9923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3431

9924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3432

9925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3433

9926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3434

9927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3435

9928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3436

9929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3437

9930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3438

9931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3439

9932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3440

9933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3441

9934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3442

9935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3443

9936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3444

9937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3445

9938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3446

9939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3447

9940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3448

9941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3449

9942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3450

9943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3451

9944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3452

9945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3453

9946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3454

9947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3455

9948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3456

9949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3457

9950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3458

9951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3459

9952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3460

9953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3461

9954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3462

9955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3463

9956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3464

9957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3465

9958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3466

9959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3467

9960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3468

9961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3469

9962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3470

9963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3471

9964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3472

9965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3473

9966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3474

9967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3475

9968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3476

9969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3477

9970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3478

9971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3479

9972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3480

9973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3481

9974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3482

9975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3483

9976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3484

9977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3485

9978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3486

9979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3487

9980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3488

9981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3489

9982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3490

9983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3491

9984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3492

9985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3493

9986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3494

9987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3495

9988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3496

9989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3497

9990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3498

9991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3499

9992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3500

9993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3501

9994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3502

9995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3503

9996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3504

9997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3505

9998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3506

9999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3507

10000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3508

10001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3509

10002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3510

10003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3511

10004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3512

10005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3513

10006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3514

10007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3515

10008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3516

10009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3517

10010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3518

10011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3519

10012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3520

10013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3521

10014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3522

10015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3523

10016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3524

10017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3525

10018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3526

10019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3527

10020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3528

10021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3529

10022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3530

10023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3531

10024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3532

10025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3533

10026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3534

10027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3535

10028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3536

10029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3537

10030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3538

10031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3539

10032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3540

10033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3541

10034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3542

10035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3543

10036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3544

10037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3545

10038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3546

10039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3547

10040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3548

10041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3549

10042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3550

10043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3551

10044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3552

10045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3553

10046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3554

10047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3555

10048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3556

10049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3557

10050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3558

10051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3559

10052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3560

10053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3561

10054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3562

10055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3563

10056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3564

10057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3565

10058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3566

10059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3567

10060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3568

10061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3569

10062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3570

10063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3571

10064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3572

10065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3573

10066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3574

10067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3575

10068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3576

10069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3577

10070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3578

10071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3579

10072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3580

10073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3581

10074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3582

10075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3583

10076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3584

10077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3585

10078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3586

10079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3587

10080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3588

10081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3589

10082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3590

10083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3591

10084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3592

10085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3593

10086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3594

10087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3595

10088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3596

10089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3597

10090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3598

10091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3599

10092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3600

10093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3601

10094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3602

10095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3603

10096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3604

10097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3605

10098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3606

10099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3607

10100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3608

10101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3609

10102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3610

10103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3611

10104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3612

10105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3613

10106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3614

10107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3615

10108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3616

10109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3617

10110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3618

10111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3619

10112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3620

10113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3621

10114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3622

10115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3623

10116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3624

10117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3625

10118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3626

10119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3627

10120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3628

10121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3629

10122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3630

10123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3631

10124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3632

10125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3633

10126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3634

10127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3635

10128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3636

10129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3637

10130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3638

10131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3639

10132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3640

10133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3641

10134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3642

10135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3643

10136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3644

10137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3645

10138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3646

10139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3647

10140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3648

10141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3649

10142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3650

10143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3651

10144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3652

10145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3653

10146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3654

10147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3655

10148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3656

10149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3657

10150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3658

10151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3659

10152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3660

10153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3661

10154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3662

10155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3663

10156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3664

10157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3665

10158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3666

10159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3667

10160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3668

10161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3669

10162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3670

10163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3671

10164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3672

10165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3673

10166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3674

10167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3675

10168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3676

10169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3677

10170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3678

10171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3679

10172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3680

10173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3681

10174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3682

10175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3683

10176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3684

10177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3685

10178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3686

10179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3687

10180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3688

10181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3689

10182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3690

10183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3691

10184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3692

10185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3693

10186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3694

10187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3695

10188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3696

10189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3697

10190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3698

10191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3699

10192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3700

10193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3701

10194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3702

10195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3703

10196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3704

10197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3705

10198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3706

10199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3707

10200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3708

10201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3709

10202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3710

10203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3711

10204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3712

10205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3713

10206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3714

10207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3715

10208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3716

10209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3717

10210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3718

10211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3719

10212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3720

10213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3721

10214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3722

10215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3723

10216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3724

10217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3725

10218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3726

10219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3727

10220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3728

10221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3729

10222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3730

10223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3731

10224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3732

10225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3733

10226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3734

10227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3735

10228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3736

10229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3737

10230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3738

10231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3739

10232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3740

10233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3741

10234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3742

10235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3743

10236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3744

10237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3745

10238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3746

10239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3747

10240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3748

10241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3749

10242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3750

10243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3751

10244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3752

10245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3753

10246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3754

10247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3755

10248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3756

10249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3757

10250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3758

10251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3759

10252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3760

10253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3761

10254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3762

10255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3763

10256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3764

10257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3765

10258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3766

10259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3767

10260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3768

10261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3769

10262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3770

10263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3771

10264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3772

10265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3773

10266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3774

10267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3775

10268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3776

10269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3777

10270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3778

10271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3779

10272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3780

10273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3781

10274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3782

10275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3783

10276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3784

10277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3785

10278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3786

10279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3787

10280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3788

10281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3789

10282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3790

10283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3791

10284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3792

10285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3793

10286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3794

10287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3795

10288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3796

10289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3797

10290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3798

10291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3799

10292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3800

10293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3801

10294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3802

10295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3803

10296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3804

10297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3805

10298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3806

10299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3807

10300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3808

10301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3809

10302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3810

10303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3811

10304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3812

10305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3813

10306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3814

10307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3815

10308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3816

10309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3817

10310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3818

10311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3819

10312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3820

10313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3821

10314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3822

10315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3823

10316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3824

10317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3825

10318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3826

10319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3827

10320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3828

10321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3829

10322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3830

10323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3831

10324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3832

10325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3833

10326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3834

10327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3835

10328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3836

10329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3837

10330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3838

10331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3839

10332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3840

10333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3841

10334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3842

10335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3843

10336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3844

10337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3845

10338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3846

10339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3847

10340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3848

10341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3849

10342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3850

10343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3851

10344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3852

10345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3853

10346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3854

10347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3855

10348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3856

10349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3857

10350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3858

10351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3859

10352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3860

10353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3861

10354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3862

10355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3863

10356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3864

10357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3865

10358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3866

10359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3867

10360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3868

10361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3869

10362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3870

10363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3871

10364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3872

10365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3873

10366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3874

10367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3875

10368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3876

10369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3877

10370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3878

10371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3879

10372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3880

10373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3881

10374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3882

10375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3883

10376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3884

10377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3885

10378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3886

10379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3887

10380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3888

10381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3889

10382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3890

10383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3891

10384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3892

10385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3893

10386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3894

10387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3895

10388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3896

10389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3897

10390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3898

10391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3899

10392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3900

10393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3901

10394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3902

10395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3903

10396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3904

10397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3905

10398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3906

10399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3907

10400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3908

10401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3909

10402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3910

10403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3911

10404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3912

10405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3913

10406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3914

10407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3915

10408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3916

10409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3917

10410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3918

10411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3919

10412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3920

10413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3921

10414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3922

10415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3923

10416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3924

10417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3925

10418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3926

10419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3927

10420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3928

10421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3929

10422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3930

10423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3931

10424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3932

10425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3933

10426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3934

10427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3935

10428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3936

10429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3937

10430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3938

10431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3939

10432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3940

10433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3941

10434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3942

10435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3943

10436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3944

10437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3945

10438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3946

10439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3947

10440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3948

10441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3949

10442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3950

10443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3951

10444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3952

10445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3953

10446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3954

10447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3955

10448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3956

10449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3957

10450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3958

10451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3959

10452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3960

10453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3961

10454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3962

10455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3963

10456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3964

10457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3965

10458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3966

10459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3967

10460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3968

10461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3969

10462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3970

10463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3971

10464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3972

10465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3973

10466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3974

10467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3975

10468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3976

10469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3977

10470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3978

10471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3979

10472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3980

10473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3981

10474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3982

10475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3983

10476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3984

10477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3985

10478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3986

10479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3987

10480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3988

10481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3989

10482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3990

10483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3991

10484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3992

10485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3993

10486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3994

10487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3995

10488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3996

10489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3997

10490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3998

10491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb3999

10492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4000

10493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4001

10494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4002

10495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4003

10496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4004

10497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4005

10498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4006

10499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4007

10500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4008

10501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4009

10502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4010

10503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4011

10504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4012

10505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4013

10506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4014

10507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4015

10508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4016

10509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4017

10510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4018

10511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4019

10512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4020

10513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4021

10514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4022

10515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4023

10516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4024

10517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4025

10518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4026

10519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4027

10520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4028

10521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4029

10522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4030

10523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4031

10524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4032

10525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4033

10526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4034

10527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4035

10528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4036

10529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4037

10530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4038

10531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4039

10532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4040

10533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4041

10534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4042

10535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4043

10536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4044

10537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4045

10538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4046

10539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4047

10540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4048

10541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4049

10542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4050

10543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4051

10544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4052

10545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4053

10546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4054

10547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4055

10548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4056

10549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4057

10550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4058

10551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4059

10552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4060

10553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4061

10554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4062

10555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4063

10556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4064

10557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4065

10558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4066

10559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4067

10560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4068

10561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4069

10562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4070

10563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4071

10564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4072

10565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4073

10566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4074

10567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4075

10568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4076

10569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4077

10570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4078

10571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4079

10572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4080

10573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4081

10574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4082

10575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4083

10576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4084

10577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4085

10578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4086

10579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4087

10580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4088

10581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4089

10582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4090

10583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4091

10584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4092

10585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4093

10586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4094

10587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4095

10588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4096

10589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4097

10590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4098

10591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4099

10592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4100

10593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4101

10594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4102

10595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4103

10596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4104

10597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4105

10598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4106

10599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4107

10600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4108

10601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4109

10602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4110

10603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4111

10604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4112

10605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4113

10606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4114

10607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4115

10608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4116

10609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4117

10610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4118

10611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4119

10612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4120

10613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4121

10614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4122

10615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4123

10616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4124

10617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4125

10618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4126

10619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4127

10620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4128

10621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4129

10622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4130

10623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4131

10624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4132

10625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4133

10626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4134

10627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4135

10628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4136

10629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4137

10630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4138

10631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4139

10632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4140

10633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4141

10634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4142

10635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4143

10636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4144

10637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4145

10638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4146

10639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4147

10640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4148

10641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4149

10642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4150

10643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4151

10644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4152

10645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4153

10646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4154

10647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4155

10648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4156

10649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4157

10650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4158

10651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4159

10652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4160

10653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4161

10654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4162

10655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4163

10656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4164

10657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4165

10658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4166

10659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4167

10660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4168

10661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4169

10662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4170

10663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4171

10664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4172

10665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4173

10666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4174

10667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4175

10668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4176

10669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4177

10670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4178

10671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4179

10672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4180

10673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4181

10674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4182

10675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4183

10676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4184

10677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4185

10678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4186

10679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4187

10680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4188

10681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4189

10682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4190

10683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4191

10684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4192

10685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4193

10686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4194

10687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4195

10688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4196

10689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4197

10690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4198

10691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4199

10692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4200

10693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4201

10694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4202

10695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4203

10696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4204

10697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4205

10698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4206

10699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4207

10700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4208

10701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4209

10702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4210

10703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4211

10704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4212

10705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4213

10706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4214

10707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4215

10708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4216

10709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4217

10710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4218

10711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4219

10712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4220

10713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4221

10714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4222

10715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4223

10716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4224

10717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4225

10718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4226

10719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4227

10720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4228

10721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4229

10722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4230

10723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4231

10724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4232

10725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4233

10726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4234

10727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4235

10728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4236

10729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4237

10730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4238

10731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4239

10732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4240

10733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4241

10734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4242

10735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4243

10736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4244

10737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4245

10738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4246

10739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4247

10740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4248

10741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4249

10742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4250

10743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4251

10744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4252

10745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4253

10746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4254

10747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4255

10748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4256

10749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4257

10750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4258

10751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4259

10752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4260

10753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4261

10754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4262

10755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4263

10756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4264

10757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4265

10758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4266

10759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4267

10760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4268

10761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4269

10762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4270

10763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4271

10764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4272

10765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4273

10766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4274

10767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4275

10768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4276

10769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4277

10770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4278

10771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4279

10772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4280

10773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4281

10774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4282

10775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4283

10776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4284

10777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4285

10778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4286

10779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4287

10780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4288

10781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4289

10782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4290

10783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4291

10784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4292

10785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4293

10786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4294

10787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4295

10788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4296

10789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4297

10790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4298

10791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4299

10792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4300

10793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4301

10794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4302

10795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4303

10796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4304

10797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4305

10798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4306

10799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4307

10800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4308

10801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4309

10802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4310

10803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4311

10804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4312

10805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4313

10806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4314

10807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4315

10808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4316

10809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4317

10810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4318

10811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4319

10812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4320

10813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4321

10814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4322

10815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4323

10816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4324

10817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4325

10818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4326

10819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4327

10820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4328

10821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4329

10822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4330

10823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4331

10824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4332

10825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4333

10826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4334

10827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4335

10828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4336

10829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4337

10830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4338

10831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4339

10832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4340

10833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4341

10834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4342

10835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4343

10836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4344

10837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4345

10838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4346

10839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4347

10840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4348

10841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4349

10842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4350

10843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4351

10844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4352

10845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4353

10846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4354

10847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4355

10848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4356

10849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4357

10850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4358

10851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4359

10852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4360

10853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4361

10854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4362

10855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4363

10856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4364

10857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4365

10858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4366

10859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4367

10860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4368

10861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4369

10862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4370

10863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4371

10864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4372

10865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4373

10866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4374

10867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4375

10868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4376

10869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4377

10870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4378

10871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4379

10872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4380

10873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4381

10874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4382

10875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4383

10876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4384

10877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4385

10878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4386

10879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4387

10880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4388

10881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4389

10882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4390

10883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4391

10884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4392

10885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4393

10886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4394

10887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4395

10888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4396

10889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4397

10890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4398

10891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4399

10892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4400

10893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4401

10894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4402

10895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4403

10896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4404

10897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4405

10898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4406

10899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4407

10900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4408

10901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4409

10902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4410

10903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4411

10904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4412

10905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4413

10906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4414

10907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4415

10908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4416

10909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4417

10910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4418

10911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4419

10912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4420

10913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4421

10914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4422

10915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4423

10916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4424

10917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4425

10918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4426

10919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4427

10920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4428

10921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4429

10922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4430

10923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4431

10924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4432

10925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4433

10926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4434

10927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4435

10928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4436

10929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4437

10930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4438

10931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4439

10932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4440

10933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4441

10934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4442

10935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4443

10936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4444

10937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4445

10938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4446

10939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4447

10940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4448

10941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4449

10942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4450

10943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4451

10944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4452

10945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4453

10946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4454

10947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4455

10948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4456

10949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4457

10950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4458

10951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4459

10952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4460

10953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4461

10954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4462

10955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4463

10956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4464

10957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4465

10958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4466

10959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4467

10960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4468

10961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4469

10962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4470

10963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4471

10964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4472

10965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4473

10966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4474

10967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4475

10968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4476

10969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4477

10970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4478

10971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4479

10972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4480

10973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4481

10974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4482

10975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4483

10976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4484

10977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4485

10978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4486

10979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4487

10980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4488

10981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4489

10982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4490

10983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4491

10984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4492

10985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4493

10986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4494

10987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4495

10988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4496

10989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4497

10990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4498

10991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4499

10992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4500

10993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4501

10994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4502

10995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4503

10996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4504

10997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4505

10998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4506

10999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4507

11000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4508

11001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4509

11002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4510

11003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4511

11004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4512

11005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4513

11006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4514

11007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4515

11008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4516

11009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4517

11010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4518

11011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4519

11012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4520

11013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4521

11014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4522

11015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4523

11016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4524

11017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4525

11018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4526

11019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4527

11020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4528

11021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4529

11022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4530

11023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4531

11024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4532

11025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4533

11026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4534

11027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4535

11028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4536

11029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4537

11030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4538

11031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4539

11032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4540

11033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4541

11034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4542

11035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4543

11036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4544

11037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4545

11038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4546

11039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4547

11040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4548

11041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4549

11042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4550

11043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4551

11044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4552

11045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4553

11046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4554

11047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4555

11048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4556

11049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4557

11050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4558

11051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4559

11052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4560

11053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4561

11054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4562

11055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4563

11056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4564

11057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4565

11058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4566

11059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4567

11060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4568

11061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4569

11062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4570

11063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4571

11064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4572

11065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4573

11066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4574

11067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4575

11068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4576

11069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4577

11070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4578

11071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4579

11072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4580

11073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4581

11074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4582

11075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4583

11076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4584

11077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4585

11078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4586

11079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4587

11080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4588

11081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4589

11082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4590

11083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4591

11084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4592

11085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4593

11086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4594

11087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4595

11088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4596

11089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4597

11090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4598

11091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4599

11092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4600

11093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4601

11094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4602

11095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4603

11096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4604

11097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4605

11098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4606

11099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4607

11100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4608

11101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4609

11102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4610

11103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4611

11104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4612

11105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4613

11106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4614

11107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4615

11108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4616

11109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4617

11110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4618

11111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4619

11112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4620

11113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4621

11114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4622

11115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4623

11116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4624

11117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4625

11118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4626

11119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4627

11120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4628

11121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4629

11122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4630

11123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4631

11124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4632

11125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4633

11126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4634

11127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4635

11128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4636

11129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4637

11130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4638

11131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4639

11132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4640

11133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4641

11134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4642

11135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4643

11136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4644

11137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4645

11138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4646

11139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4647

11140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4648

11141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4649

11142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4650

11143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4651

11144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4652

11145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4653

11146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4654

11147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4655

11148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4656

11149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4657

11150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4658

11151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4659

11152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4660

11153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4661

11154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4662

11155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4663

11156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4664

11157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4665

11158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4666

11159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4667

11160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4668

11161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4669

11162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4670

11163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4671

11164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4672

11165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4673

11166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4674

11167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4675

11168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4676

11169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4677

11170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4678

11171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4679

11172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4680

11173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4681

11174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4682

11175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4683

11176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4684

11177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4685

11178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4686

11179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4687

11180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4688

11181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4689

11182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4690

11183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4691

11184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4692

11185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4693

11186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4694

11187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4695

11188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4696

11189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4697

11190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4698

11191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4699

11192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4700

11193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4701

11194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4702

11195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4703

11196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4704

11197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4705

11198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4706

11199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4707

11200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4708

11201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4709

11202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4710

11203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4711

11204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4712

11205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4713

11206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4714

11207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4715

11208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4716

11209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4717

11210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4718

11211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4719

11212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4720

11213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4721

11214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4722

11215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4723

11216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4724

11217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4725

11218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4726

11219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4727

11220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4728

11221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4729

11222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4730

11223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4731

11224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4732

11225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4733

11226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4734

11227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4735

11228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4736

11229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4737

11230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4738

11231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4739

11232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4740

11233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4741

11234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4742

11235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4743

11236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4744

11237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4745

11238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4746

11239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4747

11240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4748

11241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4749

11242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4750

11243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4751

11244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4752

11245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4753

11246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4754

11247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4755

11248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4756

11249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4757

11250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4758

11251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4759

11252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4760

11253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4761

11254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4762

11255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4763

11256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4764

11257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4765

11258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4766

11259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4767

11260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4768

11261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4769

11262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4770

11263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4771

11264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4772

11265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4773

11266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4774

11267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4775

11268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4776

11269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4777

11270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4778

11271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4779

11272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4780

11273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4781

11274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4782

11275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4783

11276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4784

11277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4785

11278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4786

11279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4787

11280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4788

11281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4789

11282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4790

11283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4791

11284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4792

11285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4793

11286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4794

11287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4795

11288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4796

11289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4797

11290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4798

11291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4799

11292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4800

11293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4801

11294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4802

11295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4803

11296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4804

11297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4805

11298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4806

11299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4807

11300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4808

11301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4809

11302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4810

11303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4811

11304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4812

11305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4813

11306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4814

11307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4815

11308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4816

11309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4817

11310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4818

11311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4819

11312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4820

11313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4821

11314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4822

11315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4823

11316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4824

11317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4825

11318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4826

11319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4827

11320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4828

11321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4829

11322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4830

11323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4831

11324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4832

11325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4833

11326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4834

11327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4835

11328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4836

11329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4837

11330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4838

11331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4839

11332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4840

11333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4841

11334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4842

11335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4843

11336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4844

11337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4845

11338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4846

11339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4847

11340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4848

11341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4849

11342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4850

11343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4851

11344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4852

11345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4853

11346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4854

11347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4855

11348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4856

11349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4857

11350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4858

11351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4859

11352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4860

11353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4861

11354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4862

11355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4863

11356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4864

11357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4865

11358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4866

11359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4867

11360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4868

11361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4869

11362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4870

11363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4871

11364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4872

11365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4873

11366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4874

11367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4875

11368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4876

11369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4877

11370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4878

11371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4879

11372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4880

11373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4881

11374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4882

11375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4883

11376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4884

11377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4885

11378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4886

11379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4887

11380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4888

11381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4889

11382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4890

11383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4891

11384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4892

11385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4893

11386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4894

11387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4895

11388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4896

11389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4897

11390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4898

11391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4899

11392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4900

11393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4901

11394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4902

11395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4903

11396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4904

11397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4905

11398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4906

11399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4907

11400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4908

11401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4909

11402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4910

11403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4911

11404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4912

11405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4913

11406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4914

11407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4915

11408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4916

11409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4917

11410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4918

11411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4919

11412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4920

11413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4921

11414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4922

11415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4923

11416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4924

11417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4925

11418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4926

11419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4927

11420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4928

11421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4929

11422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4930

11423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4931

11424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4932

11425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4933

11426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4934

11427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4935

11428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4936

11429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4937

11430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4938

11431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4939

11432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4940

11433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4941

11434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4942

11435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4943

11436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4944

11437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4945

11438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4946

11439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4947

11440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4948

11441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4949

11442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4950

11443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4951

11444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4952

11445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4953

11446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4954

11447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4955

11448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4956

11449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4957

11450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4958

11451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4959

11452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4960

11453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4961

11454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4962

11455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4963

11456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4964

11457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4965

11458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4966

11459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4967

11460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4968

11461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4969

11462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4970

11463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4971

11464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4972

11465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4973

11466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4974

11467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4975

11468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4976

11469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4977

11470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4978

11471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4979

11472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4980

11473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4981

11474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4982

11475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4983

11476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4984

11477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4985

11478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4986

11479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4987

11480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4988

11481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4989

11482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4990

11483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4991

11484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4992

11485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4993

11486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4994

11487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4995

11488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4996

11489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4997

11490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4998

11491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb4999

11492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5000

11493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5001

11494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5002

11495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5003

11496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5004

11497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5005

11498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5006

11499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5007

11500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5008

11501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5009

11502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5010

11503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5011

11504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5012

11505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5013

11506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5014

11507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5015

11508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5016

11509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5017

11510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5018

11511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5019

11512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5020

11513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5021

11514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5022

11515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5023

11516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5024

11517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5025

11518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5026

11519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5027

11520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5028

11521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5029

11522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5030

11523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5031

11524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5032

11525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5033

11526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5034

11527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5035

11528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5036

11529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5037

11530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5038

11531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5039

11532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5040

11533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5041

11534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5042

11535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5043

11536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5044

11537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5045

11538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5046

11539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5047

11540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5048

11541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5049

11542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5050

11543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5051

11544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5052

11545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5053

11546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5054

11547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5055

11548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5056

11549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5057

11550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5058

11551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5059

11552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5060

11553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5061

11554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5062

11555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5063

11556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5064

11557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5065

11558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5066

11559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5067

11560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5068

11561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5069

11562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5070

11563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5071

11564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5072

11565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5073

11566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5074

11567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5075

11568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5076

11569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5077

11570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5078

11571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5079

11572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5080

11573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5081

11574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5082

11575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5083

11576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5084

11577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5085

11578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5086

11579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5087

11580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5088

11581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5089

11582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5090

11583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5091

11584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5092

11585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5093

11586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5094

11587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5095

11588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5096

11589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5097

11590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5098

11591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5099

11592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5100

11593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5101

11594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5102

11595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5103

11596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5104

11597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5105

11598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5106

11599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5107

11600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5108

11601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5109

11602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5110

11603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5111

11604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5112

11605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5113

11606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5114

11607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5115

11608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5116

11609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5117

11610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5118

11611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5119

11612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5120

11613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5121

11614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5122

11615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5123

11616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5124

11617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5125

11618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5126

11619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5127

11620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5128

11621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5129

11622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5130

11623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5131

11624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5132

11625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5133

11626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5134

11627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5135

11628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5136

11629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5137

11630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5138

11631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5139

11632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5140

11633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5141

11634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5142

11635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5143

11636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5144

11637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5145

11638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5146

11639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5147

11640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5148

11641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5149

11642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5150

11643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5151

11644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5152

11645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5153

11646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5154

11647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5155

11648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5156

11649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5157

11650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5158

11651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5159

11652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5160

11653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5161

11654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5162

11655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5163

11656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5164

11657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5165

11658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5166

11659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5167

11660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5168

11661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5169

11662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5170

11663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5171

11664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5172

11665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5173

11666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5174

11667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5175

11668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5176

11669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5177

11670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5178

11671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5179

11672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5180

11673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5181

11674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5182

11675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5183

11676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5184

11677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5185

11678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5186

11679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5187

11680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5188

11681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5189

11682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5190

11683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5191

11684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5192

11685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5193

11686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5194

11687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5195

11688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5196

11689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5197

11690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5198

11691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5199

11692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5200

11693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5201

11694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5202

11695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5203

11696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5204

11697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5205

11698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5206

11699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5207

11700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5208

11701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5209

11702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5210

11703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5211

11704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5212

11705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5213

11706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5214

11707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5215

11708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5216

11709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5217

11710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5218

11711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5219

11712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5220

11713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5221

11714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5222

11715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5223

11716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5224

11717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5225

11718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5226

11719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5227

11720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5228

11721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5229

11722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5230

11723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5231

11724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5232

11725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5233

11726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5234

11727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5235

11728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5236

11729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5237

11730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5238

11731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5239

11732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5240

11733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5241

11734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5242

11735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5243

11736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5244

11737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5245

11738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5246

11739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5247

11740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5248

11741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5249

11742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5250

11743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5251

11744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5252

11745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5253

11746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5254

11747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5255

11748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5256

11749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5257

11750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5258

11751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5259

11752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5260

11753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5261

11754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5262

11755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5263

11756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5264

11757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5265

11758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5266

11759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5267

11760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5268

11761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5269

11762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5270

11763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5271

11764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5272

11765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5273

11766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5274

11767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5275

11768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5276

11769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5277

11770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5278

11771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5279

11772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5280

11773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5281

11774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5282

11775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5283

11776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5284

11777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5285

11778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5286

11779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5287

11780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5288

11781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5289

11782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5290

11783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5291

11784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5292

11785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5293

11786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5294

11787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5295

11788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5296

11789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5297

11790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5298

11791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5299

11792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5300

11793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5301

11794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5302

11795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5303

11796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5304

11797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5305

11798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5306

11799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5307

11800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5308

11801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5309

11802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5310

11803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5311

11804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5312

11805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5313

11806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5314

11807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5315

11808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5316

11809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5317

11810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5318

11811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5319

11812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5320

11813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5321

11814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5322

11815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5323

11816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5324

11817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5325

11818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5326

11819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5327

11820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5328

11821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5329

11822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5330

11823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5331

11824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5332

11825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5333

11826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5334

11827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5335

11828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5336

11829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5337

11830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5338

11831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5339

11832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5340

11833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5341

11834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5342

11835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5343

11836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5344

11837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5345

11838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5346

11839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5347

11840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5348

11841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5349

11842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5350

11843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5351

11844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5352

11845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5353

11846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5354

11847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5355

11848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5356

11849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5357

11850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5358

11851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5359

11852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5360

11853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5361

11854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5362

11855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5363

11856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5364

11857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5365

11858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5366

11859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5367

11860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5368

11861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5369

11862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5370

11863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5371

11864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5372

11865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5373

11866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5374

11867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5375

11868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5376

11869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5377

11870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5378

11871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5379

11872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5380

11873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5381

11874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5382

11875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5383

11876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5384

11877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5385

11878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5386

11879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5387

11880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5388

11881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5389

11882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5390

11883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5391

11884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5392

11885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5393

11886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5394

11887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5395

11888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5396

11889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5397

11890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5398

11891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5399

11892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5400

11893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5401

11894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5402

11895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5403

11896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5404

11897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5405

11898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5406

11899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5407

11900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5408

11901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5409

11902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5410

11903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5411

11904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5412

11905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5413

11906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5414

11907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5415

11908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5416

11909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5417

11910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5418

11911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5419

11912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5420

11913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5421

11914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5422

11915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5423

11916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5424

11917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5425

11918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5426

11919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5427

11920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5428

11921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5429

11922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5430

11923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5431

11924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5432

11925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5433

11926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5434

11927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5435

11928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5436

11929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5437

11930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5438

11931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5439

11932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5440

11933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5441

11934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5442

11935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5443

11936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5444

11937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5445

11938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5446

11939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5447

11940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5448

11941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5449

11942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5450

11943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5451

11944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5452

11945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5453

11946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5454

11947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5455

11948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5456

11949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5457

11950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5458

11951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5459

11952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5460

11953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5461

11954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5462

11955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5463

11956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5464

11957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5465

11958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5466

11959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5467

11960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5468

11961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5469

11962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5470

11963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5471

11964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5472

11965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5473

11966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5474

11967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5475

11968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5476

11969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5477

11970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5478

11971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5479

11972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5480

11973. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5481

11974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5482

11975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5483

11976. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5484

11977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5485

11978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5486

11979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5487

11980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5488

11981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5489

11982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5490

11983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5491

11984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5492

11985. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5493

11986. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5494

11987. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5495

11988. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5496

11989. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5497

11990. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5498

11991. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5499

11992. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5500

11993. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5501

11994. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5502

11995. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5503

11996. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5504

11997. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5505

11998. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5506

11999. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5507

12000. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5508

12001. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5509

12002. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5510

12003. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5511

12004. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5512

12005. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5513

12006. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5514

12007. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5515

12008. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5516

12009. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5517

12010. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5518

12011. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5519

12012. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5520

12013. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5521

12014. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5522

12015. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5523

12016. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5524

12017. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5525

12018. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5526

12019. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5527

12020. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5528

12021. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5529

12022. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5530

12023. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5531

12024. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5532

12025. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5533

12026. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5534

12027. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5535

12028. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5536

12029. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5537

12030. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5538

12031. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5539

12032. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5540

12033. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5541

12034. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5542

12035. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5543

12036. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5544

12037. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5545

12038. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5546

12039. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5547

12040. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5548

12041. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5549

12042. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5550

12043. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5551

12044. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5552

12045. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5553

12046. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5554

12047. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5555

12048. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5556

12049. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5557

12050. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5558

12051. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5559

12052. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5560

12053. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5561

12054. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5562

12055. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5563

12056. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5564

12057. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5565

12058. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5566

12059. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5567

12060. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5568

12061. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5569

12062. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5570

12063. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5571

12064. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5572

12065. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5573

12066. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5574

12067. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5575

12068. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5576

12069. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5577

12070. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5578

12071. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5579

12072. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5580

12073. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5581

12074. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5582

12075. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5583

12076. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5584

12077. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5585

12078. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5586

12079. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5587

12080. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5588

12081. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5589

12082. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5590

12083. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5591

12084. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5592

12085. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5593

12086. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5594

12087. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5595

12088. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5596

12089. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5597

12090. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5598

12091. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5599

12092. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5600

12093. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5601

12094. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5602

12095. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5603

12096. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5604

12097. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5605

12098. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5606

12099. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5607

12100. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5608

12101. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5609

12102. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5610

12103. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5611

12104. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5612

12105. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5613

12106. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5614

12107. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5615

12108. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5616

12109. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5617

12110. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5618

12111. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5619

12112. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5620

12113. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5621

12114. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5622

12115. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5623

12116. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5624

12117. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5625

12118. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5626

12119. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5627

12120. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5628

12121. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5629

12122. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5630

12123. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5631

12124. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5632

12125. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5633

12126. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5634

12127. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5635

12128. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5636

12129. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5637

12130. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5638

12131. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5639

12132. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5640

12133. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5641

12134. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5642

12135. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5643

12136. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5644

12137. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5645

12138. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5646

12139. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5647

12140. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5648

12141. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5649

12142. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5650

12143. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5651

12144. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5652

12145. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5653

12146. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5654

12147. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5655

12148. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5656

12149. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5657

12150. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5658

12151. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5659

12152. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5660

12153. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5661

12154. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5662

12155. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5663

12156. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5664

12157. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5665

12158. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5666

12159. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5667

12160. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5668

12161. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5669

12162. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5670

12163. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5671

12164. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5672

12165. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5673

12166. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5674

12167. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5675

12168. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5676

12169. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5677

12170. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5678

12171. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5679

12172. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5680

12173. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5681

12174. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5682

12175. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5683

12176. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5684

12177. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5685

12178. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5686

12179. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5687

12180. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5688

12181. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5689

12182. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5690

12183. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5691

12184. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5692

12185. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5693

12186. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5694

12187. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5695

12188. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5696

12189. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5697

12190. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5698

12191. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5699

12192. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5700

12193. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5701

12194. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5702

12195. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5703

12196. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5704

12197. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5705

12198. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5706

12199. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5707

12200. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5708

12201. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5709

12202. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5710

12203. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5711

12204. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5712

12205. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5713

12206. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5714

12207. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5715

12208. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5716

12209. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5717

12210. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5718

12211. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5719

12212. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5720

12213. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5721

12214. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5722

12215. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5723

12216. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5724

12217. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5725

12218. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5726

12219. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5727

12220. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5728

12221. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5729

12222. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5730

12223. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5731

12224. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5732

12225. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5733

12226. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5734

12227. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5735

12228. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5736

12229. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5737

12230. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5738

12231. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5739

12232. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5740

12233. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5741

12234. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5742

12235. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5743

12236. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5744

12237. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5745

12238. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5746

12239. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5747

12240. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5748

12241. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5749

12242. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5750

12243. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5751

12244. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5752

12245. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5753

12246. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5754

12247. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5755

12248. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5756

12249. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5757

12250. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5758

12251. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5759

12252. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5760

12253. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5761

12254. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5762

12255. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5763

12256. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5764

12257. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5765

12258. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5766

12259. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5767

12260. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5768

12261. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5769

12262. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5770

12263. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5771

12264. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5772

12265. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5773

12266. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5774

12267. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5775

12268. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5776

12269. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5777

12270. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5778

12271. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5779

12272. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5780

12273. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5781

12274. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5782

12275. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5783

12276. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5784

12277. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5785

12278. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5786

12279. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5787

12280. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5788

12281. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5789

12282. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5790

12283. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5791

12284. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5792

12285. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5793

12286. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5794

12287. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5795

12288. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5796

12289. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5797

12290. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5798

12291. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5799

12292. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5800

12293. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5801

12294. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5802

12295. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5803

12296. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5804

12297. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5805

12298. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5806

12299. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5807

12300. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5808

12301. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5809

12302. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5810

12303. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5811

12304. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5812

12305. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5813

12306. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5814

12307. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5815

12308. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5816

12309. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5817

12310. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5818

12311. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5819

12312. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5820

12313. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5821

12314. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5822

12315. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5823

12316. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5824

12317. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5825

12318. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5826

12319. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5827

12320. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5828

12321. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5829

12322. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5830

12323. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5831

12324. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5832

12325. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5833

12326. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5834

12327. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5835

12328. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5836

12329. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5837

12330. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5838

12331. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5839

12332. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5840

12333. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5841

12334. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5842

12335. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5843

12336. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5844

12337. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5845

12338. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5846

12339. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5847

12340. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5848

12341. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5849

12342. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5850

12343. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5851

12344. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5852

12345. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5853

12346. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5854

12347. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5855

12348. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5856

12349. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5857

12350. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5858

12351. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5859

12352. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5860

12353. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5861

12354. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5862

12355. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5863

12356. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5864

12357. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5865

12358. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5866

12359. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5867

12360. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5868

12361. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5869

12362. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5870

12363. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5871

12364. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5872

12365. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5873

12366. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5874

12367. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5875

12368. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5876

12369. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5877

12370. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5878

12371. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5879

12372. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5880

12373. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5881

12374. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5882

12375. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5883

12376. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5884

12377. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5885

12378. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5886

12379. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5887

12380. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5888

12381. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5889

12382. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5890

12383. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5891

12384. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5892

12385. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5893

12386. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5894

12387. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5895

12388. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5896

12389. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5897

12390. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5898

12391. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5899

12392. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5900

12393. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5901

12394. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5902

12395. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5903

12396. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5904

12397. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5905

12398. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5906

12399. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5907

12400. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5908

12401. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5909

12402. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5910

12403. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5911

12404. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5912

12405. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5913

12406. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5914

12407. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5915

12408. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5916

12409. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5917

12410. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5918

12411. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5919

12412. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5920

12413. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5921

12414. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5922

12415. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5923

12416. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5924

12417. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5925

12418. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5926

12419. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5927

12420. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5928

12421. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5929

12422. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5930

12423. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5931

12424. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5932

12425. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5933

12426. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5934

12427. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5935

12428. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5936

12429. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5937

12430. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5938

12431. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5939

12432. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5940

12433. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5941

12434. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5942

12435. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5943

12436. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5944

12437. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5945

12438. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5946

12439. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5947

12440. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5948

12441. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5949

12442. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5950

12443. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5951

12444. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5952

12445. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5953

12446. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5954

12447. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5955

12448. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5956

12449. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5957

12450. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5958

12451. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5959

12452. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5960

12453. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5961

12454. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5962

12455. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5963

12456. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5964

12457. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5965

12458. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5966

12459. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5967

12460. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5968

12461. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5969

12462. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5970

12463. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5971

12464. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5972

12465. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5973

12466. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5974

12467. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5975

12468. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5976

12469. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5977

12470. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5978

12471. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5979

12472. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5980

12473. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5981

12474. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5982

12475. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5983

12476. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5984

12477. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5985

12478. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5986

12479. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5987

12480. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5988

12481. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5989

12482. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5990

12483. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5991

12484. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5992

12485. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5993

12486. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5994

12487. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5995

12488. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5996

12489. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5997

12490. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5998

12491. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb5999

12492. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6000

12493. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6001

12494. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6002

12495. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6003

12496. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6004

12497. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6005

12498. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6006

12499. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6007

12500. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6008

12501. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6009

12502. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6010

12503. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6011

12504. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6012

12505. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6013

12506. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6014

12507. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6015

12508. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6016

12509. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6017

12510. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6018

12511. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6019

12512. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6020

12513. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6021

12514. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6022

12515. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6023

12516. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6024

12517. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6025

12518. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6026

12519. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6027

12520. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6028

12521. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6029

12522. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6030

12523. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6031

12524. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6032

12525. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6033

12526. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6034

12527. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6035

12528. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6036

12529. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6037

12530. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6038

12531. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6039

12532. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6040

12533. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6041

12534. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6042

12535. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6043

12536. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6044

12537. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6045

12538. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6046

12539. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6047

12540. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6048

12541. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6049

12542. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6050

12543. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6051

12544. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6052

12545. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6053

12546. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6054

12547. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6055

12548. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6056

12549. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6057

12550. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6058

12551. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6059

12552. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6060

12553. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6061

12554. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6062

12555. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6063

12556. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6064

12557. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6065

12558. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6066

12559. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6067

12560. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6068

12561. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6069

12562. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6070

12563. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6071

12564. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6072

12565. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6073

12566. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6074

12567. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6075

12568. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6076

12569. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6077

12570. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6078

12571. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6079

12572. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6080

12573. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6081

12574. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6082

12575. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6083

12576. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6084

12577. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6085

12578. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6086

12579. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6087

12580. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6088

12581. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6089

12582. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6090

12583. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6091

12584. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6092

12585. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6093

12586. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6094

12587. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6095

12588. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6096

12589. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6097

12590. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6098

12591. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6099

12592. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6100

12593. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6101

12594. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6102

12595. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6103

12596. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6104

12597. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6105

12598. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6106

12599. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6107

12600. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6108

12601. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6109

12602. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6110

12603. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6111

12604. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6112

12605. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6113

12606. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6114

12607. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6115

12608. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6116

12609. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6117

12610. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6118

12611. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6119

12612. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6120

12613. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6121

12614. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6122

12615. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6123

12616. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6124

12617. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6125

12618. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6126

12619. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6127

12620. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6128

12621. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6129

12622. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6130

12623. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6131

12624. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6132

12625. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6133

12626. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6134

12627. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6135

12628. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6136

12629. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6137

12630. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6138

12631. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6139

12632. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6140

12633. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6141

12634. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6142

12635. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6143

12636. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6144

12637. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6145

12638. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6146

12639. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6147

12640. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6148

12641. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6149

12642. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6150

12643. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6151

12644. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6152

12645. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6153

12646. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6154

12647. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6155

12648. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6156

12649. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6157

12650. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6158

12651. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6159

12652. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6160

12653. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6161

12654. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6162

12655. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6163

12656. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6164

12657. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6165

12658. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6166

12659. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6167

12660. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6168

12661. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6169

12662. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6170

12663. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6171

12664. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6172

12665. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6173

12666. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6174

12667. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6175

12668. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6176

12669. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6177

12670. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6178

12671. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6179

12672. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6180

12673. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6181

12674. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6182

12675. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6183

12676. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6184

12677. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6185

12678. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6186

12679. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6187

12680. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6188

12681. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6189

12682. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6190

12683. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6191

12684. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6192

12685. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6193

12686. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6194

12687. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6195

12688. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6196

12689. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6197

12690. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6198

12691. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6199

12692. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6200

12693. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6201

12694. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6202

12695. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6203

12696. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6204

12697. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6205

12698. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6206

12699. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6207

12700. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6208

12701. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6209

12702. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6210

12703. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6211

12704. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6212

12705. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6213

12706. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6214

12707. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6215

12708. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6216

12709. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6217

12710. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6218

12711. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6219

12712. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6220

12713. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6221

12714. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6222

12715. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6223

12716. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6224

12717. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6225

12718. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6226

12719. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6227

12720. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6228

12721. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6229

12722. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6230

12723. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6231

12724. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6232

12725. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6233

12726. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6234

12727. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6235

12728. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6236

12729. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6237

12730. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6238

12731. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6239

12732. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6240

12733. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6241

12734. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6242

12735. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6243

12736. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6244

12737. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6245

12738. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6246

12739. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6247

12740. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6248

12741. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6249

12742. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6250

12743. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6251

12744. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6252

12745. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6253

12746. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6254

12747. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6255

12748. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6256

12749. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6257

12750. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6258

12751. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6259

12752. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6260

12753. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6261

12754. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6262

12755. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6263

12756. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6264

12757. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6265

12758. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6266

12759. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6267

12760. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6268

12761. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6269

12762. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6270

12763. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6271

12764. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6272

12765. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6273

12766. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6274

12767. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6275

12768. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6276

12769. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6277

12770. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6278

12771. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6279

12772. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6280

12773. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6281

12774. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6282

12775. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6283

12776. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6284

12777. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6285

12778. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6286

12779. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6287

12780. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6288

12781. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6289

12782. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6290

12783. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6291

12784. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6292

12785. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6293

12786. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6294

12787. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6295

12788. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6296

12789. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6297

12790. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6298

12791. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6299

12792. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6300

12793. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6301

12794. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6302

12795. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6303

12796. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6304

12797. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6305

12798. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6306

12799. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6307

12800. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6308

12801. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6309

12802. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6310

12803. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6311

12804. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6312

12805. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6313

12806. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6314

12807. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6315

12808. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6316

12809. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6317

12810. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6318

12811. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6319

12812. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6320

12813. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6321

12814. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6322

12815. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6323

12816. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6324

12817. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6325

12818. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6326

12819. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6327

12820. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6328

12821. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6329

12822. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6330

12823. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6331

12824. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6332

12825. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6333

12826. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6334

12827. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6335

12828. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6336

12829. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6337

12830. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6338

12831. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6339

12832. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6340

12833. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6341

12834. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6342

12835. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6343

12836. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6344

12837. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6345

12838. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6346

12839. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6347

12840. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6348

12841. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6349

12842. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6350

12843. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6351

12844. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6352

12845. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6353

12846. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6354

12847. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6355

12848. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6356

12849. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6357

12850. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6358

12851. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6359

12852. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6360

12853. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6361

12854. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6362

12855. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6363

12856. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6364

12857. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6365

12858. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6366

12859. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6367

12860. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6368

12861. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6369

12862. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6370

12863. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6371

12864. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6372

12865. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6373

12866. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6374

12867. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6375

12868. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6376

12869. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6377

12870. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6378

12871. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6379

12872. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6380

12873. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6381

12874. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6382

12875. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6383

12876. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6384

12877. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6385

12878. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6386

12879. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6387

12880. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6388

12881. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6389

12882. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6390

12883. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6391

12884. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6392

12885. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6393

12886. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6394

12887. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6395

12888. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6396

12889. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6397

12890. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6398

12891. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6399

12892. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6400

12893. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6401

12894. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6402

12895. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6403

12896. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6404

12897. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6405

12898. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6406

12899. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6407

12900. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6408

12901. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6409

12902. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6410

12903. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6411

12904. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6412

12905. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6413

12906. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6414

12907. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6415

12908. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6416

12909. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6417

12910. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6418

12911. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6419

12912. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6420

12913. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6421

12914. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6422

12915. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6423

12916. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6424

12917. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6425

12918. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6426

12919. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6427

12920. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6428

12921. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6429

12922. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6430

12923. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6431

12924. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6432

12925. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6433

12926. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6434

12927. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6435

12928. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6436

12929. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6437

12930. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6438

12931. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6439

12932. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6440

12933. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6441

12934. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6442

12935. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6443

12936. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6444

12937. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6445

12938. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6446

12939. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6447

12940. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6448

12941. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6449

12942. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6450

12943. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6451

12944. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6452

12945. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6453

12946. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6454

12947. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6455

12948. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6456

12949. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6457

12950. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6458

12951. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6459

12952. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6460

12953. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6461

12954. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6462

12955. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6463

12956. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6464

12957. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6465

12958. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6466

12959. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6467

12960. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6468

12961. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6469

12962. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6470

12963. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6471

12964. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6472

12965. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6473

12966. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6474

12967. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6475

12968. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6476

12969. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6477

12970. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6478

12971. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6479

12972. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6480

12973. file://localhost/usr/local2/s/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6483

12976.

file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimhtdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm

#_fnb6481

12974. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6482

12975. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimees/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6484

12977. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6485

12978. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6486

12979. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6487

12980. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6488

12981. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6489

12982. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6490

12983. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6491

12984. file://localhost/usr/local2/htdocs/e/edersheim/lifetimes/oeb/i.htm#_fnb6492

Livros Grátis
( http://www.livrosgratis.com.br )
 
Milhares de Livros para Download:
 
Baixar livros de Administração
Baixar livros de Agronomia
Baixar livros de Arquitetura
Baixar livros de Artes
Baixar livros de Astronomia
Baixar livros de Biologia Geral
Baixar livros de Ciência da Computação
Baixar livros de Ciência da Informação
Baixar livros de Ciência Política
Baixar livros de Ciências da Saúde
Baixar livros de Comunicação
Baixar livros do Conselho Nacional de Educação - CNE
Baixar livros de Defesa civil
Baixar livros de Direito
Baixar livros de Direitos humanos
Baixar livros de Economia
Baixar livros de Economia Doméstica
Baixar livros de Educação
Baixar livros de Educação - Trânsito
Baixar livros de Educação Física
Baixar livros de Engenharia Aeroespacial
Baixar livros de Farmácia
Baixar livros de Filosofia
Baixar livros de Física
Baixar livros de Geociências
Baixar livros de Geografia
Baixar livros de História
Baixar livros de Línguas

Baixar livros de Literatura
Baixar livros de Literatura de Cordel
Baixar livros de Literatura Infantil
Baixar livros de Matemática
Baixar livros de Medicina
Baixar livros de Medicina Veterinária
Baixar livros de Meio Ambiente
Baixar livros de Meteorologia
Baixar Monografias e TCC
Baixar livros Multidisciplinar
Baixar livros de Música
Baixar livros de Psicologia
Baixar livros de Química
Baixar livros de Saúde Coletiva
Baixar livros de Serviço Social
Baixar livros de Sociologia
Baixar livros de Teologia
Baixar livros de Trabalho
Baixar livros de Turismo
 
 