Luke 3 commentary

The scope and design of John's ministry were, to bring the people from their sins, and to their Saviour. He came preaching, not a sect, or party, but a profession; the sign or ceremony was washing with water. By the words here used John preached the necessity of repentance, in order to the remission of sins, and that the baptism of water was an outward sign of that inward cleansing and renewal of heart, which attend, or are the effects of true repentance, as well as a profession of it. Here is the fulfilling of the Scriptures, Isa 40:3, in the ministry of John. When way is made for the gospel into the heart, by taking down high thoughts, and bringing them into obedience to Christ, by levelling the soul, and removing all that hinders us in the way of Christ and his grace, then preparation is made to welcome the salvation of God. Here are general warnings and exhortations which John gave. The guilty, corrupted race of mankind is become a generation of vipers; hateful to God, and hating one another. There is no way of fleeing from the wrath to come, but by repentance; and by the change of our way the change of our mind must be shown. If we are not really holy, both in heart and life, our profession of religion and relation to God and his church, will stand us in no stead at all; the sorer will our destruction be, if we do not bring forth fruits meet for repentance. John the Baptist gave instructions to several sorts of persons. Those that profess and promise repentance, must show it by reformation, according to their places and conditions. The gospel requires mercy, not sacrifice; and its design is, to engage us to do all the good we can, and to be just to all men. And the same principle which leads men to forego unjust gain, leads to restore that which is gained by wrong. John tells the soldiers their duty. Men should be cautioned against the temptations of their employments. These answers declared the present duty of the inquirers, and at once formed a test of their sincerity. As none can or will accept Christ's salvation without true repentance, so the evidence and effects of this repentance are here marked out.

John the Baptist disowned being himself the Christ, but confirmed the people in their expectations of the long-promised Messiah. He could only exhort them to repent, and assure them of forgiveness upon repentance; but he could not work repentance in them, nor confer remission on them. Thus highly does it become us to speak of Christ, and thus humbly of ourselves. John can do no more than baptize with water, in token that they ought to purify and cleanse themselves; but Christ can, and will baptize with the Holy Ghost; he can give the Spirit, to cleanse and purify the heart, not only as water washes off the dirt on the outside, but as fire clears out the dross that is within, and melts down the metal, that it may be cast into a new mould. John was an affectionate preacher; he was beseeching; he pressed things home upon his hearers. He was a practical preacher; quickening them to their duty, and directing them in it. He was a popular preacher; he addressed the people, according to their capacity. He was an evangelical preacher. In all his exhortations, he directed people to Christ. When we press duty upon people, we must direct them to Christ, both for righteousness and strength. He was a copious preacher; he shunned not to declare the whole counsel of God. But a full stop was put to John's preaching when he was in the midst of his usefulness. Herod being reproved by him for many evils, shut up John in prison. Those who injure the faithful servants of God, add still greater guilt to their other sins.

Christ did not confess sin, as others did, for he had none to confess; but he prayed, as others did, and kept up communion with his Father. Observe, all the three voices from heaven, by which the Father bare witness to the Son, were pronounced while he was praying, or soon after, Lu 9:35; Joh 12:28. The Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and there came a voice from heaven, from God the Father, from the excellent glory. Thus was a proof of the Holy Trinity, of the Three Persons in the Godhead, given at the baptism of Christ.

Matthew's list of the forefathers of Jesus showed that Christ was the son of Abraham, in whom all the families of the earth are blessed, and heir to the throne of David; but Luke shows that Jesus was the Seed of the woman that should break the serpent's head, and traces the line up to Adam, beginning with Eli, or Heli, the father, not of Joseph, but of Mary. The seeming differences between the two evangelists in these lists of names have been removed by learned men. But our salvation does not depend upon our being able to solve these difficulties, nor is the Divine authority of the Gospels at all weakened by them. The list of names ends thus, “Who was the son of Adam, the son of God;” that is, the offspring of God by creation. Christ was both the son of Adam and the Son of God, that he might be a proper Mediator between God and the sons of Adam, and might bring the sons of Adam to be, through him, the sons of God. All flesh, as descended from the first Adam, is as grass, and withers as the flower of the field; but he who partakes of the Holy Spirit of life from the Second Adam, has that eternal happiness, which by the gospel is preached unto us.

Luke 3:1. When Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea It is probable that this was the second year of Pilate’s government: for since Tiberius had held the reins of government, he had, as Josephus informs us, (xviii. 2:2,) appointed Valerius Gratus to be governor of Judea, in room of Annius Rufus. This change might take place in his second year. The same Josephus writes, that Valerius was governor of Judea for “eleven years, when Pontius Pilate came as his successor,” (Ant. 18:2:2.) Pilate, therefore, had governed the province for two years, when John began to preach the Gospel. This Herod, whom Luke makes tetrarch of Judea, was the second heir of Herod the Great, and succeeded to his father by will. Archelaus had received the ethnarchy of Judea, but, when he was banished to Vienna (Jos. Wars, 2, vii. 3) by Augustus, that portion fell into the hands of the Romans. Luke mentions here two sons of Herod, — Herod Antipas, who had been made tetrarch of Galilee, and governed Samaria and Peraea, — and Philip, who was tetrarch of Trachonitis and Iturea, and reigned from the sea of Tiberias, or Gennesareth, to the foot of Lebanon, which is the source of the river Jordan.

Lysanias has been falsely supposed to be the son of Ptolemy Mennaeus, King of Chalcis, who had been long before put to death by Cleopatra, about thirty years before the birth of Christ, as Josephus relates, (Ant. 15:4:1.) He could hardly even be the grandson of Ptolemy, who, as the same Josephus records, kindled the Parthian war, (Wars, 1, xiii. 1;) for then he must have been more than sixty years of age at the time of which Luke speaks. Besides, as it was under Antigonus that the Parthian war commenced, he must even then have been a full-grown man. Now Ptolemy Mennaeus died not long after the murder of Julius Caesar, during the triumvirate of Lepidus, Antony, and Octavius, (Jos. Wars, 1, xiii. 1.) But as this grandson of Ptolemy bore the name of Lysanias as well as his father, he might have left a son who had the same surname. Meanwhile, there can be no hesitation in rejecting the error of those who make Lysanias to live sixty years after he had been slain by Cleopatra.

The word Tetrarch is here used in a sense not quite accurate, as if the whole country had been divided into four parts. But as at first there was a fourfold division into districts, so afterwards, when other changes took place, the names Tetrarch and Tetrarchies were retained by way of honor. In this sense Pliny enumerates seventeen tetrarchies of one country.

Luke 3:2. Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests It is certain, that there never were two persons who held the office of high priest at the same time. Josephus states, that Valerius Gratus made Caiaphas high priest, a short time before he left the government. During the time that Pilate was governor of Judea, Josephus does not speak of him as having made any change in this respect; The whole passage is remarkable, and proves that the appointment to the sacred office of high priest was entirely at the disposal of the Roman Governor. “This man (Valerius Gratus) deprived Ananus of the high priesthood, and appointed Ishmael, the son of Phabi, to be high priest. He also deprived him in a little time, and ordained Eleazar, the son of Ananus, who had been high priest before, to be high priest: which office, when he had held for a year, Gratus deprived him of it, and gave the high priesthood to Simon, the son of Camithus; and, when he had possessed that dignity no longer than a year, Joseph Caiaphas was made his successor. When Gratus had done those things, he went back to Rome, after he had tarried in Judea eleven years, when Pontius Pilate came as his successor.” — (Ant. 18:2:2.) but, on the contrary, states that, when Pilate had been recalled from the government, and sent to plead his cause at Rome, Vitellius, who was at that time governor of Syria, reduced Caiaphas to a private rank, and transferred the high priesthood to Jonathan, the son of Ananus, (Ant. 18:4:3.) When Luke says that there were two high priests, we must not understand him to mean, that both held the same title, but that the honor of the priesthood was partly shared with him by Annas his father-in-law. Luke’s narrative indicates such a state of trouble and confusion, that, though there was not more than one person who was actually high priest, the sacred office was torn in pieces by ambition and tyranny.

The word of the Lord came upon John Before relating, as the other Evangelists do, that John began to exercise his office of teaching, Luke asserts that he was divinely called to that office: and he does so, in order to assure us, that the ministry of John carried undoubted authority. Why the interpreters have chosen to translate the word, ἐπὶ ᾿Ιωάννην, UPON John, instead of TO John, I do not see: but because there is no ambiguity as to the meaning, that this commission was entrusted to him, and that he received a command to preach, I have followed the received version. Hence infer, that there are no regular teachers, but those on whom God has conferred the office; and that it is not enough to have the word of God, if there be not likewise a special calling.

Matthew and Mark do not speak of the preaching of John as extending beyond the wilderness, while Luke says, that he came into all the country around Jordan These statements may be reconciled by observing, that John discharged the office of teaching among the neighbors, with whom he dwelt; but that his Gospel spread more widely, and became known in many places, so that the report of it, in a short time, reached Jerusalem. Indeed, the whole of that tract of the Jordan might be called a wilderness: for the word does not mean “a solitude,” but “a rough, and mountainous, and thinly inhabited district.”

Luke 3:3. Preaching the baptism of repentance This form of expression shows first, generally, what is the right use of the Sacraments; and next, why baptism was instituted, and in what it consists. A sacrament, then, is not a dumb ceremony, exhibiting some unmeaning pomp without doctrine; but the Word of God is joined to it, and gives life to the outward ceremony. By the Word I mean, not mutterings of a magical character, made by some exorcist between his teeth, but what is pronounced with a clear and distinct voice, and leads to the edification of faith. For we are not simply told, that John baptized unto repentance, as if the grace of God were contained in a visible sign; but that he explained, in his preaching, the advantage of baptism, that the sign, through the word preached, might produce its effect. This is the peculiarity of baptism, that it is said to be an outward representation of repentance for the forgiveness of sins Now, as the meaning, power, and nature of that baptism are the same as ours, if we judge of the figure from its true import, it is incorrect to say, that the baptism of John is different from the baptism of Christ. "Maintenant puis que le Baptesme de Jean a eu mesme signification, vertu et propriete que le nostre, si nous voulons juger de la figure et du signe selon la chose signifee, c'est 'a dire la verite, nous trouverons que le Baptesme administre par Christ, n'a point este autre que celuy que Jean a administre."—"Now, since the baptism of John had the same meaning, power, and nature as ours, if we wish to judge of the figure and of the sign according to the thing signified, that is to say the reality, we shall find that the Baptism administered by Christ was no other than that which John administered."

Luke 3:6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God That salvation will not be at all obscure, or experienced by a small number of persons, but will strike every eye, and will be common to all. Hence it follows that this prediction was far from being accomplished, when the people returned from Babylon: “In populi reditu;” — “quand le peuple est retourne de Babylone.” for though the Lord gave, at that time, a memorable display of his grace, yet he did not reveal his salvation to the whole world. On the contrary, the prophet’s design was, to present the uncommon excellence of the salvation which was to be manifested, in contrast with God’s former benefits, and thus to inform believers, that the dispensations of God towards his Church had never been so remarkable, nor his power so illustriously displayed in their deliverance. Flesh is here put for men, without being intended to denote their depravity. “Le mot de Chair n'est pas ice mis pour denoter la corruption de nature, mais il signifie simplement les hommes.” — “The word Flesh is not put here to denote the corruption of nature, but means simply men.”

As to the loud and open rebuke, which was administered to them in presence of all, it was for the sake of others; and that is the reason why Luke mentions, that it was addressed to multitudes, (Luke 3:7.) Though the persons whom John reproved were few in number, his design was to strike terror on all; as Paul enjoins us to regard it as the advantage of public rebukes, “that others also may fear,” (1 Timothy 5:20.) He addresses directly the Pharisees and Sadducees, and at the same time, addresses, through them, a warning to all, not to hold out a hypocritical appearance of repentance, instead of a true affection of the heart. Besides, it was of great importance to the whole nation to know “Davantage, tout le peuple avoit grand interest d'estre advertis quelles gens estoyent les Sadduciens et Pharisiens.” — “Besides, all the people had a deep interest in being warned what sort of people the Sadducees and Pharisees were.” what sort of people the Pharisees and Sadducees were, who had miserably corrupted the worship of God, wasted the church, and overturned the whole of religion; — in a word, who had extinguished the light of God by their corruptions, and infected every thing by their crimes.

It is probable, therefore, that John publicly attacked the Pharisees, for the benefit of the whole church of God, that they might no longer dazzle the eyes of simple men by empty show, or hold the body of the people under oppression by wicked tyranny. In this respect, it was a remarkable display of his firmness, that those, who were highly esteemed by others, were not spared on account of their reputation, but sternly reduced, as they deserved, to their proper rank. And thus ought all godly instructors to be zealous, not to dread any power of man, but boldly strive to “cast down every high thing that exalteth itself” against Christ, (2 Corinthians 10:5.)

If John, the organ of the Holy Spirit, employed such severity of language in his opening address to those who voluntarily came to be baptized, and to make a public profession of the gospel; how ought we now to act towards the avowed enemies of Christ, who not only reject obstinately all that belongs to sound doctrine, but whose efforts to extinguish the name of Christ are violently maintained by fire and sword? Most certainly, if you compare the Pope, and his abominable clergy, with the Pharisees and Sadducees, the mildest possible way of dealing with them will be, to throw them all into one bundle. Those, whose ears are so delicate, that they cannot endure to have any bitter thing said against the Pope, must argue, not with us, but with the Spirit of God. Yet let godly teachers beware, lest, while they are influenced by holy zeal against the tyrants of the Church, they mingle with it the affections of the flesh. And as no vehemence, which is not regulated by the wisdom of the Spirit, can obtain the divine approbation, let them not only restrain their feelings, but surrender themselves to the Holy Spirit, and implore his guidance, that nothing may escape them through inadvertency. “Afin qu'il ne leur eschappe aucun mot inconsiderement, et a la volee;” — “that no word may escape them inconsiderately, and at random.”

Offspring of vipers. He gives them this name, instead of simply calling them vipers, in order to expose the envenomed malice of the whole class: for he intended to condemn, not merely those few persons who were present, but the whole body, and to charge both sects with producing nothing but serpents. They had vehement disputes, no doubt, with each other: but all were agreed in despising God, in a wicked desire to rule, in hatred of sound doctrine, and in a disgusting mass of numerous crimes.

Who warned you? As he had suspicions of their repentance, he puts the question with doubt and wonder, if it be possible that they repent sincerely. In this way, he summons them to the inward tribunal of conscience, that they may thoroughly examine themselves, and, laying aside all flattery, may institute a severe investigation into their crimes. Wrath is put here, as in many other places, for the judgment of God: as when Paul says, “The law worketh wrath,” (Romans 4:15,) and “Give place to wraths “Il fait mention du temps avenir, parce que les hypocrites, tandis que Dieu les espargne, desprisent hardiment toutes ses menaces, et ne se resveillent jamais, sinon qu’il frappe dessus a grands coups.” — “He mentions the future, because hypocrites, so long as God spares them, despise boldly all his threatenings, and never awake, till he strikes them with heavy strokes.” ”, (Romans 12:19.) He calls it the wrath to come, which hangs over their heads, that they may not indulge in their wonted carelessness. For, though the wrath of God overflows, and his chastisements strike, the whole world, hypocrites always entertain the hope that they will escape. To flee from the wrath of God, is here taken in a good sense, that is, to seek the means of appeasing God, that he may no longer be angry with us. For a good part of men, in order to escape the wrath of God, withdraw themselves from his guidance and authority. But all that the sinner gains by fleeing from God, is to provoke more and more the wrath of God against him.

Luke 3:10 And the multitudes asked him. A true feeling of repentance produces in the mind of the poor sinner an eager desire to know what is the will or command of God. John’s reply explains, in a few words, the fruits worthy of repentance: for the world is always desirous to acquit itself of its duty to God by performing ceremonies; and there is nothing to which we are more prone, than to offer to God pretended worship, whenever he calls us to repentance. But what fruits does the Baptist here recommend? The duties of charity, and of the second Table of the Law: “Des ceuvres de charite comprises en la seconde Table de la Loy;” — “works of charity included in the second Table of the Law.” not that God disregards the outward profession of godliness, and of his worship; but that this is a surer mark of distinction, and less frequently leads to mistakes. “Non pas que Dieu ne requiere aussi une profession externe de son service et de la crainte de son nom, mais pource que l’autre partie est la marque la plus certaine pour cognoians, et, laquelle vrals on est le moins abuse.” — “Not that God does not require also an external profession of his service and of the fear of his name, but because the other part is the surest mark to know true penitents, and one in which there is less risk of deception.” For hypocrites labor strenuously to prove themselves worshippers of God by the performance of ceremonies, — paying no regard, however, to true righteousness: for they are either cruel to their neighbors, or addicted to falsehood and dishonesty.

It was therefore necessary to subject them to a more homely examination, “C'est a dire, ou ils ne peuvent pas si aisement tromper.” — “That is to say, in which they cannot so easily deceive.” if they are just in their dealings with men, if they relieve the poor, if they are generous to the wretched, if they give liberally what the Lord has bestowed upon them. This is the reason why our Lord pronounces “judgment, mercy, and faith,” to be “the weightier matters of the law,” (Matthew 23:23,) and Scripture everywhere recommends “justice and judgment.” We must particularly observe, that the duties of charity are here mentioned, not because they are of higher value than the worship of God, but because they testify the piety of men, “De la crainte de Dieu qui est en l'homme;” — “of the fear of God which is in man.” so as to detect the hypocrisy of those who boast with the mouth what is far distant from the heart.

But it is asked, did John lay this injunction, in a literal sense, on all whom he was preparing to be Christ’s disciples, that they should not have two coats? We must observe, first, that this is the figure of speech which is called a Synecdoche, for under one example it comprehends a general rule. Hence it follows, that we must draw from it a meaning, which corresponds to the law of charity, as it is laid down by God: and that law is, that each person should give out of his abundance to supply the wants of the poor. God does not extort a tax, to be paid “grudgingly or of necessity” by those who, but for that necessity, would have chosen not to pay it: “for the Lord loveth a” willing and “cheerful giver,” (2 Corinthians 9:7.) I make this observation, because it is of great consequence for men to be convinced, that the portion of their wealth which they bestow in this manner is a sacrifice pleasing and of good savor to God, — that “with such sacrifices God is well pleased,” (Hebrews 13:16.)

Those who lay it down as a law, that no man must have any property of his own, not only make consciences to tremble, but overwhelm them with despair. With fanatics of this sort, who obstinately adhere to the literal meaning, it is not necessary that we should spend much time in refutation. If we are not allowed to have two coats, the same rule will apply to dishes, to salt-cellars, to shirts, and, in short, to all the furniture of a house. But the context makes it evident, that nothing was farther from John’s intention than to overthrow the order of a state. Hence we infer, that all that he enjoined on the rich was, that they should bestow on the poor, according to their own ability, what their necessity required.

“Consider to what extent the necessaries of life, which you enjoy abundantly, are wanted by your neighbors, that your abundance may be a supply for their want,” (2 Corinthians 8:14.)

But the more liberty that God allows us, we ought to be the more careful not to allow ourselves undue liberty. “Cependant, tant plus Dieu nous traite doucement, et nous donne de liberte, tant plus faut-il que nous prenions garde a ne nous flatter ou lascher par trop la bride.” — “Yet the more gently God treats us, and the more liberty he gives us, so much the more ought we to take care not to flatter ourselves, or loose the bridle too much.” Let the necessity of our brethren affect us powerfully, and let the bounty of God, which is in our hands, stimulate us to acts of kindness and generosity.

Luke 3:12. And the publicans “Peagets;” — “tax-gatherers.” also came. The publicans are not only exhorted, in general terms, to repent, but the duties peculiar to their calling are demanded: for we know that, besides the general rule of the law, each person ought to consider what is required by the nature of the employment to which he has been called. All Christians, without distinction, “are taught of God to love one another,” (1 Thessalonians 4:9:) but then there follow particular duties, which a teacher, for example, is bound to perform towards the Church, — a magistrate or prince towards the people, and the people, on the other hand, towards the magistrate, — a husband towards his wife, and a wife towards her husband, — and finally, children and parents toward each other. The Publicans, viewed as a class, were covetous, rapacious, and cruel, and often oppressed the people by unjust exactions. In consequence of this, the Baptist reproves them for those offenses, with which that class was, for the most part, chargeable, when he commands them not to go beyond moderation in exacting tribute. At the same time, we draw this inference, that it is quite as lawful for a Christian man to receive or levy taxes, as for a magistrate to impose them.

In the same way we must judge about war. John does not order the soldiers to throw away their arms, and to relinquish their oath; but he forbids them to pillage the wretched people under the pretense of their duty as soldiers, to bring false accusations against the innocent, and to be guilty of extortions, — all of which crimes the greater part of them were accustomed to practice. These words obviously contain an approbation of civil government. It is a piece of idle sophistry to say, that John’s hearers were ignorant people, and that he gave them nothing more than elementary instructions, which fell very far short of Christian perfection. John’s office was, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord, (Luke 1:17) and there is no doubt that it was entirely and faithfully performed. Those men are guilty of calumny and sacrilege, who slander the Gospel, by declaring it to be opposed to human governments; “Qui veulent faire accroire qu'elle n'a rouve point les principautes, empires et gouvernements qui sont entre les hornroes; — “who wish to make it believed that it does not approve of the principalities, empires, and governments, which exist among men.” as if Christ destroyed what his heavenly Father sanctioned. But, without the sword, laws are dead, and legal judgments have no force or authority. Magistrates require not only an executioner, “Un bourreau;” — “a hangman.” but other attendants, among whom are the military, “Les gendarmes.” without whose assistance and agency it is impossible to maintain peace. Still, the object must be considered. Princes must not allow themselves to sport with human blood, nor must soldiers give themselves up to cruelty, from a desire of gain, as if slaughter were their chief business: but both must be drawn to it by necessity, and by a regard to public advantage.

MATTHEW 3:11-12; MARK 1:7-8; LUKE 3:15-18

Matthew 3:11-12

Mark 1:7-8

Luke 3:15-18

11. I indeed baptize you with water to repentance: but he who cometh after me is stronger than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to carry: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. 12. Whose winnowing-fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his thrashing-floor, and will collect the wheat into his barn: but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

7. And he preached, saying, One cometh after me, that latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and loose. 8. I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

15. And while the people were waiting, and while all were thinking in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ: 16. John answered to all, saying, I indeed baptize you with water, but there cometh one stronger than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to loose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. 17. Whose winnowing-fan is in his hand, and he will cleanse his thrashing-floor, and will collect the wheat into his barn: but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. 18. And exhorting also as to many other things, he preached the Gospel “Evangelizabat.” to the people.

Luke 3:19. Now Herod the tetrarch. Luke alone explains the reason why Herod threw John into prison: though we shall afterwards find it mentioned by Matthew 14:3, and Mark 6:17. Josephus says, (Ant. 18, v. 2,) that Herod, dreading a popular insurrection and a change of the government, shut up John in the castle of Macherus, (because he dreaded the man’s influence;) “Pource qu'il savoit que c'estoit un homme de grande authorite envers le peuple, et pourtant se dutoit de luy.” — “Because he knew that he was a man of great authority among the people, and therefore had doubts about him." and that Herodias was married, not to Philip, who was Salome’s husband, but to another Herod. But as his recollection appears to have failed him in this matter, and as he mentions also Philip’s death out of its proper place, the truth of the history will be obtained, with greater certainty, from the Evangelists, and we must abide by their testimony. The solution usually given, we believe, for this apparent discrepancy, is, that the name of the person in question was Herod-Philip. — Ed. It is well known, that Herod, though he had been married to a daughter of Aretas, King of Arabia, fell in love with Herodias, his niece, and carried her off by fraud. This injury might possibly enough remain unrevenged by his brother Philip, to whom the same Josephus bears testimony, that he was a person of a mild and gentle disposition, (18:4:6.)

This history shows clearly, what sort of reward awaits the faithful and honest ministers of the truth, particularly when they reprove vices: for scarcely one in a hundred bears reproof, and if it is at all severe, they break out into fury. If pride of this sort displays itself in some of the common people, we have no reason to wonder, that cruelty to reprovers assumes a more hideous form in tyrants, “Les rois, princes, et grans tyrans.” — “Kings, princes, and great tyrants.” who brook nothing worse than to be classed with other men. We behold in John an illustrious example of that moral courage, which all pious teachers ought to possess, not to hesitate to incur the wrath of the great and powerful, as often as it may be found necessary: for he, with whom there is acceptance of persons, does not honestly serve God. When Luke says, he added this to all the evil actions which he did, he means, that Herod’s malice is become desperate, and has reached its utmost height, when the sinner is enraged by remedies, and not only refuses correction, but takes vengeance on his adviser, as if he had been his enemy.

This was also the reason why he delayed his baptism till the thirtieth year of his age, (Luke 3:23.) Baptism was an appendage to the Gospel: and therefore it began at the same time with the preaching of the Gospel. When Christ was preparing to preach the Gospel, he was introduced by Baptism into his office; and at the same time was endued with the Holy Spirit. When John beholds the Holy Spirit descending upon Christ, it is to remind him, that nothing carnal or earthly must be expected in Christ, but that he comes as a godlike man, “Un homme rempli de Dieu;” — “a man filled with God.” descended from heaven, in whom the power of the Holy Spirit reigns. We know, indeed, that he is God manifested in the flesh, (1 Timothy 3:16:) but even in his character as a servant, and in his human nature, there is a heavenly power to be considered.

The second question is, why did the Holy Spirit appear in the shape of a dove, rather than in that of fire? The answer depends on the analogy, or resemblance between the figure and the thing represented. We know what the prophet Isaiah ascribes to Christ.

“He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench,” (Isaiah 42:2, 3.)

On account of this mildness of Christ, by which he kindly and gently called, and every day invites, sinners to the hope of salvation, the Holy Spirit descended upon him in the appearance of a dove And in this symbol has been held out to us an eminent token of the sweetest consolation, that we may not fear to approach to Christ, who meets us, not in the formidable power of the Spirit, but clothed with gentle and lovely grace.

He saw the Spirit of God That is, John saw: for it immediately follows, that the Spirit descended on Christ There now arises a third question, how could John see the Holy Spirit? I reply: As the Spirit of God is everywhere present, and fills heaven and earth, he is not said, in a literal sense, to descend, and the same observation may be made as to his appearance. Though he is in himself invisible, yet he is spoken of as beheld, when he exhibits any visible sign of his presence. John did not see the essence of the Spirit, which cannot be discerned by the senses of men; “A parler proprement, il ne descend point, et semblablement ne peut estre veu.” — “Strictly speaking, he does not descend, and in like manner he cannot be seen.” nor did he see his power, which is not beheld by human senses, but only by the understanding of faith: but he saw the appearance of a dove, under which God showed the presence of his Spirit. It is a figure of speech, “C'est une maniere de parler par Metonymie, (ainsi que parlent les gens de lettres.”)—”It is a way of speaking by Metonymy, (as learned people talk.”) by which the sign is put for the thing signified, the name of a spiritual object being applied to the visible sign.

While it is foolish and improper to press, as some do, the literal meaning, so as to include both the sign and the thing signified, we must observe, that the connection subsisting between the sign and the thing signified is denoted by these modes of expression. In this sense, the bread of the Lord’s Supper is called the body of Christ, (1 Corinthians 10:16:) not because it is so, but because it assures us, that the body of Christ is truly given to us for food. Meanwhile, let us bear in mind what I have just mentioned, that we must not imagine a descent of the thing signified, so as to seek it in the sign, as if it had a bodily place there, but ought to be abundantly satisfied with the assurance, that God grants, by his secret power, all that he holds out to us by figures.

Another question more curious than useful has been put. Was this dove a solid body, or the appearance of one? Though the words of Luke seem to intimate that it was not the substance of a body, but only a bodily appearance; yet, lest I should afford to any man an occasion of wrangling, I leave the matter unsettled.

CHAPTER 3

Lu 3:1-20. Preaching, Baptism, and Imprisonment of John.

(See on Mt 3:1-12; Mr 6:17, &c.).

1-2. Here the curtain of the New Testament is, as it were, drawn up, and the greatest of all epochs of the Church commences. Even our Lord's own age (Lu 3:23) is determined by it [Bengel]. No such elaborate chronological precision is to be found elsewhere in the New Testament, and it comes fitly from him who claims it as the peculiar recommendation of his Gospel, that he had "accurately traced down all things from the first" (Lu 1:3). Here, evidently, commences his proper narrative. Also see on Mt 3:1.

the fifteenth year of Tiberius--reckoning from the period when he was admitted, three years before Augustus' death, to a share of the empire [Webster and Wilkinson], about the end of the year of Rome 779, or about four years before the usual reckoning.

Pilate ... governor of Judea--His proper title was Procurator, but with more than the usual powers of that office. After holding it about ten years he was ordered to Rome, to answer to charges brought against him, but ere he arrived Tiberius died (A.D. 35), and soon after Pilate committed suicide.

Herod--(See on Mr 6:14).

Philip--a different and very superior Philip to the one whose wife Herodias went to live with Herod Antipas. (See Mr 6:17).

Iturea--to the northeast of Palestine; so called from Ishmael's son Itur or Jetur (1Ch 1:31), and anciently belonging to the half tribe of Manasseh.

Trachonitis--farther to the northeast, between Iturea and Damascus; a rocky district, infested by robbers, and committed by Augustus to Herod the Great to keep in order.

Abilene--still more to the northeast, so called from Abila, eighteen miles from Damascus [Robinson].

5. Every valley, &c.--levelling and smoothing, obvious figures, the sense of which is in the first words of the proclamation, "Prepare ye the way of the Lord."

6. all flesh, &c.--(quoted literally from the Septuagint of Is 40:5). The idea is that every obstruction shall be so removed as to reveal to the whole world the Salvation of God in Him whose name is the "Saviour" (compare Psa 98:3; Is 11:10; 49:6; 52:10; Lu 2:31, 32; Ac 13:47).

10-14. What shall we do then?--to show the sincerity of our repentance. (Also see on Mt 3:10.)

15-17. whether he were the Christ--showing both how successful he had been in awakening the expectation of Messiah's immediate appearing, and the high estimation, and even reverence, which his own character commanded. (Also see on Mt 3:10.)

18. many other things, &c.--such as we read in Joh 1:29, 33, 34; 3:27-36. (Also see on Mt 3:12.)

19-20. But Herod, &c.--See on Mr 6:14, &c. (Also see on Mt 3:12.)

and for all the evils which Herod had done--important fact here only mentioned, showing how thoroughgoing was the fidelity of the Baptist to his royal hearer, and how strong must have been the workings of conscience in that slave of passion when, notwithstanding such plainness, he "did many things and heard John gladly" (Mr 6:20, 26).

21. when all the people were baptized--that He might not seem to be merely one of the crowd. Thus, as He rode into Jerusalem upon an ass, "whereon yet never man sat" (Lu 19:30), and lay in a sepulchre "wherein was never man yet laid" (Joh 19:41), so in His baptism He would be "separate from sinners."

Lu 3:23-38. Genealogy of Jesus.

23. he began to be about thirty--that is, "was about entering on His thirtieth year." So our translators have taken the word (and so Calvin, Beza, Bloomfield, Webster and Wilkinson, &c.): but "was about thirty years of age when He began [His ministry]," makes better Greek, and is probably the true sense [Bengel, Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, Alford, &c.]. At this age the priests entered on their office (Nu 4:3).

being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, &c.--Have we in this genealogy, as well as in Matthew's, the line of Joseph? or is this the line of Mary?--a point on which there has been great difference of opinion and much acute discussion. Those who take the former opinion contend that it is the natural sense of this verse, and that no other would have been thought of but for its supposed improbability and the uncertainty which it seems to throw over our Lord's real descent. But it is liable to another difficulty; namely, that in this case Matthew makes Jacob, while Luke makes "Heli," to be Joseph's father; and though the same man had often more than one name, we ought not to resort to that supposition, in such a case as this, without necessity. And then, though the descent of Mary from David would be liable to no real doubt, even though we had no table of her line preserved to us (see, for example, Lu 1:2-32, and see on Lu 2:5), still it does seem unlikely--we say not incredible--that two genealogies of our Lord should be preserved to us, neither of which gives his real descent. Those who take the latter opinion, that we have here the line of Mary, as in Matthew that of Joseph--here His real, there His reputed line--explain the statement about Joseph, that he was "the son of Hell," to mean that he was his son-in-law, as the husband of his daughter Mary (as in Ru 1:11, 12), and believe that Joseph's name is only introduced instead of Mary's, in conformity with the Jewish custom in such tables. Perhaps this view is attended with fewest difficulties, as it certainly is the best supported. However we decide, it is a satisfaction to know that not a doubt was thrown out by the bitterest of the early enemies of Christianity as to our Lord's real descent from David. On comparing the two genealogies, it will be found that Matthew, writing more immediately for Jews, deemed it enough to show that the Saviour was sprung from Abraham and David; whereas Luke, writing more immediately for Gentiles, traces the descent back to Adam, the parent stock of the whole human family, thus showing Him to be the promised "Seed of the woman." "The possibility of constructing such a table, comprising a period of thousands of years, in an uninterrupted line from father to son, of a family that dwelt for a long time in the utmost retirement, would be inexplicable, had not the members of this line been endowed with a thread by which they could extricate themselves from the many families into which every tribe and branch was again subdivided, and thus hold fast and know the member that was destined to continue the lineage. This thread was the hope that Messiah would be born of the race of Abraham and David. The ardent desire to behold Him and be partakers of His mercy and glory suffered not the attention to be exhausted through a period embracing thousands of years. Thus the member destined to continue the lineage, whenever doubtful, became easily distinguishable, awakening the hope of a final fulfilment, and keeping it alive until it was consummated" [Olshausen].

24-30. son of Matthat, &c.--(See on Mt 1:13-15). In Lu 3:27, Salathiel is called the son, while in Mt 1:12, he is called the father of Zerubbabel. But they are probably different persons.

38. son of God--Compare Ac 17:28.

Fifteenth year - This was the fifteenth of his principality and thirteenth of his monarchy: for he was two years joint emperor, previously to the death of Augustus.

Tiberius Caesar - This emperor succeeded Augustus, in whose reign Christ was born. He began his reign August 19, a.d. 14, reigned twenty-three years, and died March 16, a.d. 37, aged seventy eight years. He was a most infamous character. During the latter part of his reign especially, he did all the mischief he possibly could; and that his tyranny might not end with his life, he chose Caius Caligula for his successor, merely on account of his bad qualities; and of whom he was accustomed to say, This young prince will be a Serpent to the Roman people, and a Phaethon to the rest of mankind.

Herod - This was Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great who murdered the innocents. It was the same Herod who beheaded John Baptist, and to whom our Lord was sent by Pilate. See the account of the Herod family in the notes on Mat 2:1 (note).

Iturea and Trachonitis - Two provinces of Syria, on the confines of Judea.

Abilene - Another province of Syria, which had its name from Abila, its chief city.

These estates were left to Herod Antipas and his brother Philip by the will of their father, Herod the Great; and were confirmed to them by the decree of Augustus.

That Philip was tetrarch of Trachonitis, in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, we are assured by Josephus, who says that Philip the brother of Herod died in the twentieth year of Tiberius, after he had governed Trachonitis, Batanea, and Gaulonitis thirty-seven years. Antiq. b. xviii. c. 5, s. 6. And Herod continued tetrarch of Galilee till he was removed by Caligula, the successor of Tiberius. Antiq. b. xviii. c. 8, s. 2.

That Lysanius was tetrarch of Abilene is also evident from Josephus. He continued in this government till the Emperor Claudius took it from him, a.d. 42, and made a present of it to Agrippa. See Antiq. b. xix. c. 5, s. 1.

Tetrarch signifies the ruler of the fourth part of a country. See the note on Mat 14:1.

Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests - Caiaphas was the son-in-law of Annas or Ananias, and it is supposed that they exercised the high priest's office by turns. It is likely that Annas only was considered as high priest; and that Caiaphas was what the Hebrews termed כהן משנה cohen mishneh, or סגן כהנים sagan cohanim, the high priest's deputy, or ruler of the temple. See the note on Mat 2:4, and on Joh 18:13.

The facts which St. Luke mentions here tend much to confirm the truth of the evangelical history. Christianity differs widely from philosophic system; it is founded in the goodness and authority of God; and attested by historic facts. It differs also from popular tradition, which either has had no pure origin, or which is lost in unknown or fabulous antiquity. It differs also from pagan and Mohammedan revelations, which were fabricated in a corner, and had no witnesses. In the above verses we find the persons, the places, and the times marked with the utmost exactness. It was under the first Caesars that the preaching of the Gospel took place; and in their time, the facts on which the whole of Christianity is founded made their appearance: an age the most enlightened, and best known from the multitude of its historic records. It was in Judea, where every thing that professed to come from God was scrutinized with the most exact and unmerciful criticism. In writing the history of Christianity, the evangelists appeal to certain facts which were publicly transacted in such places, under the government and inspection of such and such persons, and in such particular times. A thousand persons could have confronted the falsehood, had it been one! These appeals are made - a challenge is offered to the Roman government, and to the Jewish rulers and people - a new religion has been introduced in such a place, at such a time - this has been accompanied with such and such facts and miracles! Who can disprove this? All are silent. None appears to offer even an objection. The cause of infidelity and irreligion is at stake! If these facts cannot be disproved, the religion of Christ must triumph. None appears because none could appear. Now let it be observed, that the persons of that time, only, could confute these things had they been false; they never attempted it; therefore these facts are absolute and incontrovertible truths: this conclusion is necessary. Shall a man then give up his faith in such attested facts as these, because, more than a thousand years after, an infidel creeps out, and ventures publicly to sneer at what his iniquitous soul hopes is not true!

The word of God came unto John - That is, the Holy Spirit that revealed to him this doctrine of salvation. This came upon him in the desert, where he was living in such a state of austerity as gave him full right to preach all the rigours of penitence to others. Thus we find that the first preachers, historians, and followers of the doctrines of the Gospel were men eminent for the austerity of their lives, the simplicity of their manners, and the sanctity of their conduct; they were authorized by God, and filled with the most precious gifts of his Spirit. And what are the apostles which the new philosophy sends us? Philosophers full of themselves, not guided by the love of truth or wisdom, but ever seeking their own glory; in constant hostility among themselves, because of their separate pretensions to particular discoveries, of the honor of which they would almost as soon lose life as be deprived. Who are they? Men of a mortified life and unblamable conversation? No, they are poets and poetasters; composers of romances, novels, intrigues, farces, comedies, etc., full of extravagance and impurity. They are pretended moralists that preach up pleasure and sensual gratification, and dissolve, as far as they can, the sacred and civil ties that unite and support society. They are men whose guilt is heightened by their assuming the sacred name of philosophers, and dignifying their impure system with a name at which Philosophy herself blushes and bleeds.

The baptism of repentance - See on Mat 3:4-6 (note), and Mar 1:1 (note), etc., and Mark 16 (note) at the end.

Prepare ye the way - It was customary for the Hindoo kings, when on journeys, to send a certain class of the people two or three days before them, to command the inhabitants to clear the ways. A very necessary precaution where there are no public roads. - Ward.

Every they shall be filled - All hinderances shall be taken out of the way: a quotation from the Greek version of Isa 40:4, containing an allusion to the preparations made in rough countries to facilitate the march of mighty kings and conquerors. See the instance produced on Mat 3:3 (note).

On this account of the Baptist's mode of preaching, see the notes on Mat 3:7-11 (note).

What shall we do then? - The preaching of the Baptist had been accompanied with an uncommon effusion of that Spirit which convinces of sin, righteousness, and judgment. The people who heard him now earnestly begin to inquire what they must do to be saved? They are conscious that they are exposed to the judgments of the Lord, and they wish to escape from the coming wrath.

He that hath two coats, etc. - He first teaches the great mass of the people their duty to each other. They were uncharitable and oppressive, and he taught them not to expect any mercy from the hand of God, while they acted towards others in opposition to its dictates. If men be unkind and uncharitable towards each other, how can they expect the mercy of the Lord to be extended towards themselves?

Then came also publicans - He next instructs the tax-gatherers in the proper discharge of their duty: though it was an office detested by the Jews at large, yet the Baptist does not condemn it. It is only the abuse of it that he speaks against. If taxes be necessary for the support of a state, there must be collectors of them; and the collector, if he properly discharge his duty, is not only a useful, but also a respectable officer. But it seems the Jewish tax-gatherers exacted much more from the people than government authorized them to do, Luk 3:13, and the surplus they pocketed. See the conduct of many of our surveyors and assessors. They are oppressors of the people, and enrich themselves by unjust surcharges. This, I am inclined to think, is too common an evil; and the executive government is often the people's scape-goat, to bear the crimes of its officers, crimes in which it has no concern. For an account of the publicans, see the note on Mat 5:46.

The soldiers likewise demanded of him - He, thirdly, instructs those among the military. They were either Roman soldiers, or the soldiers of Herod or Philip. Use no violence to any, μηδενα διασεισητε, do not extort money or goods by force or violence from any. This is the import of the words neminein concutite, used here by the Vulgate, and points out a crime of which the Roman soldiers were notoriously guilty, their own writers being witnesses. Concussio has the above meaning in the Roman law. See Raphelius in loco.

Neither accuse any falsely - Or, on a frivolous pretense - μηδε συκοφαντησητε, be not sycophants, like those who are base flatterers of their masters, who to ingratiate themselves into their esteem, malign, accuse, and impeach the innocent. Bishop Pearce observes that, when the concussio above referred to did not produce the effect they wished, they often falsely accused the persons, which is the reason why this advice is added. See the note on Luk 19:7.

Be content with your wages - Οψωνιοις. The word signifies not only the money which was allotted to a Roman soldier, which was two oboli, about three halfpence per day, but also the necessary supply of wheat, barley, etc. See Raphelius.

Whether he were the Christ - So general was the reformation which was produced by the Baptist's preaching that the people were ready to consider him as the promised Messiah. Thus John came in the spirit and power of Elijah, and reformed all things; showed the people, the tax-gatherers, and the soldiers, their respective duties, and persuaded them to put away the evil of their doings. See the note on Mat 17:11.

On these verses see Mat 3:11, Mat 3:12, and Mar 1:7, Mar 1:8, and particularly the note on Joh 3:5 (note).

Herod the tetrarch - See this subject explained at large, Mat 14:1 (note), etc., and Mar 6:21, Mar 6:23 (note).

Jesus - being baptized - See on Mat 3:16, Mat 3:17 (note).

Thirty years of age - This was the age required by the law, to which the priests must arrive before they could be installed in their office: see Num 4:3.

Being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph - This same phrase is used by Herodotus to signify one who was only reputed to be the son of a particular person: τουτου παις νομιζεται he was Supposed to be this man's son. Much learned labor has been used to reconcile this genealogy with that in St. Matthew, Matthew 1:1-17, and there are several ways of doing it; the following, which appears to me to be the best, is also the most simple and easy. For a more elaborate discussion of the subject, the reader is referred to the additional observations at the end of the chapter. Matthew, in descending from Abraham to Joseph, the spouse of the blessed virgin, speaks of Sons properly such, by way of natural generation: Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, etc. But Luke, in ascending from the Savior of the world to God himself, speaks of sons either properly or improperly such: on this account he uses an indeterminate mode of expression, which may be applied to sons either putatively or really such. And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being, as was Supposed the son of Joseph - of Heli - of Matthat, etc. This receives considerable support from Raphelius's method of reading the original ων (ὡς ενομιζετο υἱος Ιωσηφ) του Ἡλι, being (when reputed the son of Joseph) the son of Heli, etc. That St. Luke does not always speak of sons properly such, is evident from the first and last person which he names: Jesus Christ was only the supposed son of Joseph, because Joseph was the husband of his mother Mary: and Adam, who is said to be the son of God, was such only by creation. After this observation it is next necessary to consider, that, in the genealogy described by St. Luke, there are two sons improperly such: i.e. two sons-in-law, instead of two sons. As the Hebrews never permitted women to enter into their genealogical tables, whenever a family happened to end with a daughter, instead of naming her in the genealogy, they inserted her husband, as the son of him who was, in reality, but his father-in-law. This import, bishop Pearce has fully shown, νομιζεσθαι bears, in a variety of places - Jesus was considered according to law, or allowed custom, to be the son of Joseph, as he was of Heli. The two sons-in-law who are to be noticed in this genealogy are Joseph the son-in-law of Heli, whose own father was Jacob, Mat 1:16; and Salathiel, the son-in-law of Neri, whose own father was Jechonias: 1Chr 3:17, and Mat 1:12. This remark alone is sufficient to remove every difficulty. Thus it appears that Joseph, son of Jacob, according to St. Matthew, was son-in-law of Heli, according to St. Luke. And Salathiel, son of Jechonias, according to the former, was son-in-law of Neri, according to the latter. Mary therefore appears to have been the daughter of Heli; so called by abbreviation for Heliachim, which is the same in Hebrew with Joachim. Joseph, son of Jacob, and Mary; daughter of Heli, were of the same family: both came from Zerubbabel; Joseph from Abiud, his eldest son, Mat 1:13, and Mary by Rhesa, the youngest. See Luk 3:27. Salathiel and Zorobabel, from whom St. Matthew and St. Luke cause Christ to proceed, were themselves descended from Solomon in a direct line: and though St. Luke says that Salathiel was son of Neri, who was descended from Nathan, Solomon's eldest brother, 1Chr 3:5, this is only to be understood of his having espoused Nathan's daughter, and that Neri dying, probably, without male issues the two branches of the family of David, that of Nathan and that of Solomon, were both united in the person of Zerubbabel, by the marriage of Salathiel, chief of the regal family of Solomon, with the daughter of Neri, chief and heretrix of the family of Nathan. Thus it appears that Jesus, son of Mary, reunited in himself all the blood, privileges, and rights of the whole family of David; in consequence of which he is emphatically called, The son of David. It is worthy of being remarked that St. Matthew, who wrote principally for the Jews, extends his genealogy to Abraham through whom the promise of the Messiah was given to the Jews; but St. Luke, who wrote his history for the instruction of the Gentiles, extends his genealogy to Adam, to whom the promise of the Redeemer was given in behalf of himself and of all his posterity. See the notes on Mat 1:1, etc.

Of Cainan - This Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, and father of Sala, is not found in any other Scripture genealogy. See Gen 10:24; Gen 11:12; 1Chr 1:18, 1Chr 1:24, where Arphaxad is made the father of Sala, and no mention at all made of Cainan. Some suppose that Cainan was a surname of Sala, and that the names should be read together thus, The son of Heber, the son of Salacainan, the son of Arphaxad, etc. If this does not untie the knot, it certainly cuts it; and the reader may pass on without any great scruple or embarrassment. There are many sensible observations on this genealogy in the notes at the end of Bishop Newcome's Harmony.

The fifteenth year of Tiberius - Reckoning from the time when Angustus made him his colleague in the empire. Herod being tetrarch of Galilee - The dominions of Herod the Great were, after his death, divided into four parts or tetrarchies. This Herod his son was tetrarch of Galilee, reigning over that fourth part of his dominions. His brother reigned over two other fourth parts, the region of Iturea, and that of Trachonitis (that tract of land on the other side Jordan, which had formerly belonged to the tribe of Manasseh.) And Lysanias (probably descended from a prince of that name, who was some years before governor of that country) was tetrarch of the remaining part of Abilene, which was a large city of Syria, whose territories reached to Lebanon and Damascus, and contained great numbers of Jews. Mt 3:1; Mr 1:1.

Annas being high priest, and Caiaphas - There could be but one high priest, strictly speaking, at once. Annas was the high priest at that time, and Caiaphas his sagan or deputy.

Isa 40:3.

Every valley shall be filled, &c. - That is, every hinderance shall be removed.

The salvation of God - The Saviour, the Messiah.

Say not within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father - That is, trust not in your being members of the visible Church, or in any external privileges whatsoever: for God now requires a change of heart; and that without delay.

He answereth - It is not properly John, but the Holy Ghost, who teaches us in the following answers, how to come ourselves, and how to instruct other penitent sinners to come to Christ, that he may give them rest. The sum of all this is, Cease to do evil, learn to do well. These are the fruits worthy of repentance.

He shut up John - This circumstance, though it happened after, is here mentioned before our Lord's baptism, that his history (that of John being concluded) may then follow without any interruption.

Jesus praying, the heaven was opened - It is observable, that the three voices from heaven, see Lu 9:29,35; John 12:28; by which the Father bore witness to Christ, were pronounced either while he was praying, or quickly after it. Mt 3:13; Mr 1:9.

And Jesus was - John's beginning was computed by the years of princes: our Saviour's by the years of his own life, as a more august era. About thirty years of age - He did not now enter upon his thirtieth year (as the common translation would induce one to think) but he now entered on his public ministry: being of such an age as the Mosaic law required. Our great Master attained not, as it seems, to the conclusion of his thirty - fourth year. Yet what glorious achievements did he accomplish within those narrow limits of time! Happy that servant, who, with any proportionable zeal, despatches the great business of life; and so much the more happy, if his sun go down at noon. For the space that is taken from the labours of time, shall be added to the rewards of eternity. The son of Heli - That is, the son - in - law: for Heli was the father of Mary. So St. Matthew writes the genealogy of Joseph, descended from David by Solomon; St. Luke that of Mary, descended from David by Nathan. In the genealogy of Joseph (recited by St. Matthew) that of Mary is implied, the Jews being accustomed to marry into their own families.

Adam the son of God - That is, whatever the sons of Adam receive from their human parents, Adam received immediately from God, except sin and misery.

2 Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.

The Evangelist having given us an account, both of the Birth of Iohn the Baptist, and of our Saviour, and of all the Prophesies preceeding and attending them both, leaving the History of our Saviour a little, cometh to give us an account of the History of Iohn [illegible: 1 word] Baptist, his entrance upon his publick Ministry, and fulfilling of it. Iohn the Baptist had Six Months Seniority of our Saviour, and probably did appear so long before him to the World, as a publick Minister, the time of his beginning was in the fifteenth Year of the Reign of Tiberius Cesar. Tiberius Cesar was he who next succeeded Augustus (for all the Roman Emperors after Iulius Cesar, were called Cesars, as all the Kings of Egypt were called Pharaohs) he was as wicked a Prince as most who ruled the Roman Empire. Herod the Great (in whose time Christ was Born) was some time since dead, Archelaus began to Rule in his stead as a King, but the Romans changing the Government from a Monarchy to a Tetrarchy (that is, a Government of four) Archelaus, had only the Government of Iudea, Herod Antipas (another Son of Herod the Great) had the Government of Galilee under the Title of Tetrarch, and Philip another Son of his, had the Government of I[illegible: 1 letter]urea, and Trachonitis, under the same Title of Tetrarch. And one Lysanids had the Government of Abilene (all four Strangers) So as at this time the Jews were all under the Government of Forreiners, the Scepter or Government was wholly departed from Iuda. Archelaus was soon after sent into France, and Pontius Pilate made Procurator or Governour of Iudea and Samaria. Annas and Caiaphas were the High Priests. By the Law of God, the eldest Son of the Family of Aaron was to be the High Priest. How there c[illegible: 1 letter]me to be at this time two High Priests, is not agreed amongst Interpreters. Those who are curious in this Inquiry, may see what Mr. Pool hath Collected for their satisfaction, in his Synopsis; we must know, that at this time the Jews were under the Power of the Romans, and all things amongst them were out of order. Some say the Iews had liberty to chuse their High Priest, but then their Conquerors would turn him out, and sell the place to another. Others say that the High Priest had his Deputy, who also obtained the same Title. Others think, that as they had made the High Priesthood an Office, to which they chose one Annually, (which was by Gods Law an Office for Life) so the High Priest of the former year, still retained his Title for another year. We are at no certainty in these things. It is certain that at this time there were two that bare the Title of the High Priest, upon what account we cannot tell. It appeareth from Iohn 18.13. that the same Men three or four years after bare this Title▪ of High Priest, whether chosen again or no we know not. But this was the time, when The Word of God came unto John the Son of Zacharias in the Wilderness. The same Iohn, of which we heard before, The Word of the Lord came to him, commanding him out to Preach the Gospel. It is a Phrase which is often used in the Old Testament, to signify the Influence of the Spirit of God upon the Prophets▪ quickning them to their Work. And signifyeth to us, That no Man ought to take this Honour unto himself, until he be called of God, nor to speak in the Name of the Lord until first the Word of God cometh to him.

Marginal references: Joh. 11.49.51. Acts 4.6.

3 And he came into all the country about Jordan preaching the baptisme of repentance for the remission of sins.

How long the time of Iohn's Ministry was before that he was shut up by Herod in Prison, the holy Scriptures do not certainly tell us; but it must be very short, for our Saviours time was little more then three years, and we hear of his imprisonment in the beginning of our Saviour's Publick Ministry. All that we have of Iohn's Ministry is to be found either in this Chapter, or in Matth. 3. or in Mark 1. or in the first, and third Chapters of Iohn. From them all it appeareth, That the Sum of his Doctrine, was the necessity of Repentance, and Faith in Christ, in order to the Remission of Sins. His pressing Faith in Christ is most clearly declared by the Evangelist Iohn; Matthew, Mark and Luke insist more upon his Preaching the Doctrine of Repentance, for the Remission of Sins, and Baptisme as an Evidence of it. Which Doctrine of repentance he pressed, both from Evangelical Motives, the Kingdom of Heaven is at Hand, and from Legal Motives, or Arguments of Terror, The Axe is now laid to the Root of the Tree. In this setting an Example to all Ministers of the Gospel, shewing them what should be the main Subjects of their Discourses, for we shall find that our Saviour Preached the same Doctrine, and in the same Method. What is here said, we before opened in our Notes, on Matth. 3.2. and Mar. 1.4. Iohn did not Preach that Baptisme was Repentance, or that Remission of Sins was infallibly annexed to it, but that the way to obtain Remission of Sins was by Repentance, and that Baptisme was an External Sign and Symbol of it.

6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

All four of the Evangelists apply that Prophecy, Isaiah 40.3, 4, 5. to Iohn the Baptist. Luke only repeats what is v. 5. and 6. and in Isaiah, Chap. 40.4.5. and he doth but shortly repeat what is in the Prophet, v. 5. the Prophet saith, And the Glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all Flesh shall see it together, for the Mouth of the Lord hath spok[illegible: 1 letter] it. But there is nothing more usual, than for the Writers in th[illegible: 1 letter] New Testament, in their Quotations out of the Old Testament, to repeat the sum of the Sense, not the Words strictly. For the understanding of that Prophecy, we must know, that there the Prophet Isaiah was sent to Comfort those amongst the Jews, who feared God partly with the assurance of them that they should return from Babylon, their warefare should have an end, Cyrus should deliver them, partly with the assurance of them, of a far greater deliverance, in and by the coming of the Messiah (of whom Cyrus was but a Type) to this purpose the Prophet sets out both Cyrus, and in that Type Christ's coming, as if both were present, and at Hand. Kings and great Princes coming (especially with Armies) have usually some co[illegible: 1 letter]ing before them, as Pioneers, to prepare their way, by Levelling Rough places, and removing whatsoever is in the way of their Motions, and filling up Holes and Ditches, &c. nor are they far off when once their Harbingers, and Pioneers are arrived, or are seen coming, Iohn is here set out as an Harbinger to Christ, to prepare his way, or a Pioneer to fill up Ditches, throw down Hills, to make Rough-ways smooth, and every way to prepare the way for him. That all Flesh might see the Salvation of God. And as Princes that have Wildernesses to pass through, have more need of their Pioneers to prepare, and smooth their ways: So the State of the Jews being now confused, as a Wilderness, and Corrupt above Measure▪ Iohn the Baptist was sent before to cry in the Wilderness, &c. This I take to be the true Sense of the Prophecy, and that it is mighty Vain to s[illegible: 1 letter]rain these Metaphorical Phrases, and inquire what is meant by Valleys; Mountains, and Crooked-ways, they all most certainly signify the same thing, viz. whatsoever might be an hindrance to Peoples receiving of Christ, and to Philosophise further about them, is but to shew the Luxuriancy of our Wit, rather than any Solidity of Judgment. The whole Scope of these three Verses, is but to shew, That as Kings, and Princes▪ and Governours of Armies, have used to have Harbingers, and Pioneers▪ or other Officers to go before them, to remove things out of the way of them and their Retinue, and to prepare their way: So had Christ, and Iohn the Baptist was the Man whom the Lord pitched upon for that purpose, by his Preaching to bring Men to a Sense of their Sins, and off from their wicked Courses, and to shew them their need of a Saviour, that so when Christ came himself forth to Preach, People might not be wholly ignorant, but in some measure prepared to receive the joyful Tidings of the Gospel, which he brought unto them.

9 And now also the ax is laid unto the root of the tree, every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire.

See the Notes on Matth. 3.7, 8, 9▪ 10. where we met with all this with no Alteration, save that Matthew saith that he spoke this to the Pharisees and Sadducees, seeing them come to his Baptisme, tho he did especially intend them, yet he spake in the hearing of the Multitude, amongst whom they were.

Marginal references: Mat. 7.19.

11 He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none, and he that hath meat▪ let him do likewise.

Altho the Preaching of the Law, doth not immediately Conduce to work in us Faith in Christ, yet mediately it doth, as it brings Men to cry out as those, Acts 2.37. Men and Brethren what sha[illegible: 1 letter]l we do? Or as the Jaylor, Acts 16: Sirs what shall we do [illegible: 1 letter]o be saved? Iohn Preaching Gods Terrors, hath this effect upon the People, they ask him, what shall we do then? t[illegible: 2 letters] Baptists Answer may seem a little strange to those who do not consider, that it amounts to the same with Daniels Counsel to Nebuchadnezar, Dan. 4.27. Wherefore O King let my Counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy Sins by Righteousness, and thine Iniquities by shewing mercy to the Poor, and what Iohn had said, v. 8. Bring therefore Fruits worthy of Repentance. Our Saviour said much the same, Ch. 11.41. Give Alms of such things as you have, and Peter commandeth, 1 Pet. 4.8. Above all things have fervent Charity amongst your selves, for Charity shall cover a Multitude of Sins. Solomon saith it covereth all Sins, Prov. 10.12. The Peoples question was, What shall we do? What are the Fruits meet for Repentance, that is, truly indicative of Repentance? To this now Iohn answereth. He that hath two Coats, let him impart to him that hath none. Which must not be interpretted, as obliging every one that had two Coats, to give away one, but as Instructive of us, that Ceremonies, and Ritual performances, in which that Age aboundeth, would not serve their turn, but true, and real good Works, relieving the Poor to their Ability, out of their Superfluities, out of Obedience and Love to God, not meerly pitying them, and saying to them▪ Go ye and be ye Cloathed, or be ye warmed, not saying Corban, and thinking that would excuse them from relieving their Parents, or other poor People, but according to their Ability relieving them. Iohn doth not here Countenance Anabaptistical Levelling, he only Cautions them against Pharisaical Hypocrisy, trusting to External Priviledges, such as having Abraham to their Father, or some Ritual, and Ceremonial Performances, whiles in the mean time they neglected the weighty things of the Law, of which Christ hath taught us that Mercy is one.

Marginal references: Jam. 2.16. 1 Joh. 3.17. & 4.20.

13 And he said unto them, Exact no more then that which is appointed you.

We have shewed often before that the Publicanes were Men, that Collected the Publick Revenue; in all times, that sort of Men have been charged with Exactions of what was more than their due. The Baptist, as a Fruit or Indication of the Truth of their Repentance, cautioneth them against Exaction, thereby declaring, That Acts of Justice as well as Mercy are true Fruits of Repentance, and that Repentance is vainly pretended, while Men go on in the same Sinful Courses, wherein they have formerly walked. Our Lord here doth not disapprove of the Office of Publicanes, nor certainly was that to be Condemned, if Magistrates may impose Taxes, and Payments, which without question they may for the support of the Government for our Protection, there is no question, but they may appoint Officers under what Titles they please to Collect it. But both those that impose, and those that Collect such Payments, are obliged to the Rule of Justice. The former to impose no more then is necessary for the end, and in a just Proportion; The others to exact no more than what is appointed them.

14 And the souldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsly, and be content with your wages.

A good, and faithful Minister of Christ, should be one able to bring out of his Store-house, things New and Old, to give every one their Portion in their Season, and so Courageous, and Faithful, as not to be afraid to do it, nor for any reason decline the doing of it. Such was Iohn the Baptist. These were the Roman Souldiers, kept by them to maintain their Conquest of Iudea. Some of these also come to hear Iohn the Baptist preach, hearing him press Repentance, and bringing forth Fruits that might testify the truth of it. They ask what they should do to them. Iohn saith, Do Violence to no Man, &c. experience hath taught all People, that Souldiers, (especially imployed to keep Garrisons amongst a Conquered People) are often very insolent, and for their own gain prone to accuse Innocent Persons, and the jealousy of Conquerours often allows them too easie an Ear, as also how apt they are by Oppression to mend their short Commons, or to exact upon others, that they may spend Luxuriously. All these are Acts, or Species of Injustice, which the Baptist lets them know must be left, if they would bring forth Fruits fit for Repentance. He doth not blame the Employment of a Souldier, but only regulates their behaviour in that imployment. Wars in just causes, are undoubtedly lawful under the Gospel, and Consequently so is the imployment of a Souldier, we read of several good Centurions or Captains of hundreds. But the Souldier stands highly concerned to look, that the cause be good, in which he draweth his Sword. 2. That he behaveth himself in it lawfully, not using any needless Violence, not accusing any wrongfully, not indeavouring to mend his Pay by any Rapine, or injustly taking away what is anothers, either to spend in Luxury, or to uphold himself in his Station. From this Instruction of Iohn the Baptist, we may learn several things concerning the Nature of Repentance. 1. That where there is a true Root of Repentance, it will bring forth Fruits worthy of it. 2. That Acts of Mercy and Iustice, are true and proper Fruits of a true Repentance, without which there can be nothing of it in Truth. 3. That true Repentance is best discovered by our abhorrence of, and declining such Sinful Courses as we have formerly been addicted to, and have daily Temptations to from the Circumstances of our Lives, and those callings, and places, and Courses of Life, wherein the Providences of God hath fixe[illegible: 1 letter] us. 4. That these things Repentance and Faith, are such proper effects of both▪ as discover the truth of those Gracious Habits in the Soul, and without which there can be no true Evidence of them.

Marginal references: Or, put no man in fe[illegible: 1 letter].; Or, allowance.

15 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not?

It being known to many what the Angel had told Zacharias concerning Iohn, thirty years since, and what had Miraculously happened at his Circumcision, as also what Zacharias his Father had Prophesied concerning him, and there having been many who had observed, the Holiness, and Severity of his Life all along, until he came to Mans E[illegible: 1 letter]tate, and knowing that the time was fulfilled for the coming of the Messias, the Scepter being now departed from Iudah, and Daniels Weeks being accomplished, and hearing him Preach with that Life▪ and Power, which attended his Ministry, as also considering his Doctrine, (not new in it self, being Consonant to the Divine Law, and the Doctrine of the Prophets but) new to them, who had used to hear of Rites and Ceremonies, and the Traditions of the Elders, but little or nothing of Repentance, or bringing forth Fruits worthy of it, they began to Reason and Debate with themselves, whether Iohn the Baptist were not the Messiah promised, and in great suspence they were about it. But Iohn quickly satisfyed them as to that, not desirous to Arrogate to himself his Honour, whose Menssenger only he was.

Marginal references: Or, in sus [illegible: 2 letters]nce.; Or, rea[illegible: 2 letters]ned or debated.

18 And many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people.

See the Notes upon Matth. 3.11, 12. and on Mar. 1.7, 8. Iohn the Baptist in these Verses doth not only assure them, that he was not the Christ, but also lets them know, that Christ was coming amongst them, and that he was more excellent than he, and should Baptize them with the Holy Ghost, and with Fire. with Fire as the Symbol of the holy Ghost; so some understand it, expounding it as a Prophecy of the descent of the holy Ghost, Acts 2.3. others possibly better expound it of the holy Ghost, working in the Souls of Believers as Fire, Purging them, and Burning up their Lusts, and Corruptions. And many other things in his Exhortation he Preached unto the People. By which Words the Evangelist lets us know, that what he and the other Evangelists have Reported concerning Iohns Preaching, was but the Sum of it.

20 Added yet this above all, that he shut up John in prison.

These two Verses sufficiently Confirm to us, that we are not to expect to find the several passages in the Gospel concerning Iohn the Baptist, set down according to the order of time, in which they happened, for the Evangelist sets down the imprisonment of Iohn, before the Baptisme of Christ mentioned in the two next Verses, which we know could not be as to the order of time, our Saviour being Baptized by Iohn. Iohn was in so great Repute, that Herod himself heard him, did many things, and heard him gladly, Mar. 6.20. But Iohn was a faithful Preacher, and could not but reprove him for his wicked Courses, particularly for his Incestuous taking of his Brother Philips Wife; for he was alive when he took her, if it be true which Historians tells us that Iohn was imprisoned in the sixteenth Year of Tiberius Caesar, and Philip died not till the twentieth, however, his Brother leaving issue (for we read Herodias had a Daughter, Matth. 14.) it was unlawful for him to have Married her, especially to turn away his own Wife to take her. Matthew reporteth this History more fully, Chap. 14.3, 4. &c. see the Notes there. It is said, that Herod, addeth yet this above all, that is, above all his former or other Wickedness, that he shut up John in Prison. This spake him incorrigible in his wicked Courses, resisting the Remedy, or means to reduce him. An Hypocrite may hear the Word, and do many things, but he hath always some particular Lust, as to which he must be spared, being neither willing to part with it, nor able to bear any reproof for it.

22 And the holy Ghost descended in a [illegible: 1 letter]odily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice cam[illegible: 1 letter] from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I am well pleased,

This History of our Saviours Baptisme, is reported both by Matthew and Mark, much, most largely by Matthew, see the Notes on Matth. 3.13. &c. Luke only addeth those Words, And Praying, which teacheth us that Prayers ought to be joyned with Baptisme. What was the matter of his Prayer, we are not told, tho the following Words incline, some not improbably to judge that he Prayed for some Testimony from Heaven concerning him.

23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

Here is amongst Criticks a little dispute, whether our blessed Lord at his Baptisme (after which he soon began his Publick Ministry) was full thirty years of Age [non-Latin text not transcribed] and [non-Latin text not transcribed] in the Greek, give occasion to the doubt. Those who judge that he was thirty compleat, conceive that the Age before which the Priests and Levites, did no Service in the Tabernacle of God, Num. 4.3. commanded the number of them to be taken from thirty years old to fifty, and it was done accordingly, v. 34, 35. &c. David in the latter end of his Life so numbred them, 1 Chron. 23.3. when their number (of that Age) was thirty eight thousand, yet in that Chapter, v. 24. and 27. we find them numbred from twenty years Old and upward (but possibly, that was for some more inferiour Service, in Conformity to this, most think that both Iohn the Baptist, and Christ entred not upon their Publick Ministry, till they were of that Age, but whether they were thirty years of Age, Compleat, or Current, is a question, but so little a one, as deserves no great Study to resolve, the two qualifying Words [non-Latin text not transcribed] and [non-Latin text not transcribed], would incline one to think Christ was but thirty years of Age Current, which is advantaged, by what others tell us, that the Iews ordinarily called a Child two, or three years Old, as soon as it did but enter upon its second or third year. Some think our Saviour was Ten Months above twenty nine years of Age, when he was Baptized, after which he was tempted of the Devil forty Days, before he entred the Publick Ministry, but these are little things. [Being (as was supposed) the Son of Ioseph.] Ioseph was not his Natural Father, tho so supposed by the Jews, Ioseph being indeed his Legal Father, being Married to the Virgin, when our Saviour was Born, Matth. 1.20.

Marginal references: Mat. 13.55. Joh. 6.42.

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God,

There have been great Disputes, about the Genealogy of our Saviour, as recorded both by Matthew and Luke. The Adversaries of Christian Religion have taken no small advantage, from the seeming difference betwixt them, which even many Sober Writers▪ have thought it no easie matter to Reconcile. The Apostle hath cautioned us against giving too much heed to endless Genealogies, which minister Questions rather then Godly Edif[illegible: 1 letter]ing, [illegible: 2 letters]ich is in Faith, 1 Tim. 1.4. yet certainly it is our Duty, as well for the stopping the Mouths of such as would Clamour against the truth of the whole Scripture (if not of the whole Christian Religion) [illegible: 1 letter]s so far as we can to Vindicate holy Writ from their little Cavils, and thereby also to confirm those who are Weak in Faith. To make these things as clear as we can: It is plain that both the Evangelists agree in their Design▪ by setting down the Genealogy of our Saviour, to prove him Leneally descended both from Abraham, and David, the two Persons to whom was made the promise of the Messiah, and the Stability of his Kingdom, and also in the Names of the first fourteen Generations, mentioned by Matthew and here by Luke, v. 32, 33. and to Abraham, v. 34. Their disagreement lyeth in four things 1. In the form of the Pedegree. Matthew, beginning with those who were first, Luke with those that were last in order of time. But this is no valuable Exception, one Evangelist counts forward, another backward. 2. Matthew counts by three Periods, each consisting of fourteen Generations, Luke doth not, but neither is this of any Moment. 3. Matthew sets down our Saviours Genealogy, before he tells us any thing of his Concept[illegible: 1 letter]on or Birth. Luke after his Relation of his Conception, Birth, and Baptisme. 4. Matthew deriveth our Saviours Genealogy but from Abraham, Luke from Adam. All these differences, lay no Foundation for any Exception. Several accounts are given, why Luke carrieth up the Genealogy to Adam, the best seemeth to be this: That Matthew intending his History Primarily for the Jews, judged it enough to prove Christ, the Son of Abraham, and the Son of David; but Luke designing the in[illegible: 1 letter]ormation of the whole World, deriveth him from the common Father of Mankind By which means he also sheweth, the Antiquity of the Gospel, and lets us know that Christ was he who was promised to Adam, before Abrahams time, and that the Grace of the Gospel is not limited to the Seed of Abraham. Thus also Luke supplyeth what was wanting in Matthew, and truly deriveth both the first, and second Act from God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of us all. But besides these differences (hardly worth the taking notice of under that notion) there are some seeming contradictions in the Genealogies, yet not such, but I think a fair account may be given of, to any who will but first consider, 1. That they all lye, in what Luke hath from v. 23. to v. 32 and from the latter end of v. 34. to the end. So that in v. 32.33. and part of 34. we have nothing to reconcile. 2. That these Words [the Son] is in the Greek only v. 23. where Christ is said to be the Son of Ioseph, but ever after it is supplyed by the Translators. So as the Greek runs thus. The Son of Joseph, which was of Heli, which was of Matthat, which was of Levi, which was of Melchi, &c. Which consideration cuts off the first cavil how Ioseph could be the Son of Iacob ▪ (as Matthew saith) and the Son of Heli, as Luke saith; for indeed Luke saith no more than, v. 23. And Iesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed the Son of Joseph,) which was the Son of Heli. That is, Christ was of Heli, the supposed Son of Ioseph, but truly of Heli, the Father of Mary, his Mother. I know that some think that Iacob was also called Heli, (as it was ordinary with the Jews to have two Names,) others think that Ioseph is called the Son, because he was the Son-in-Law of Heli, by the Marriage of the Virgin Mary his Daughter, (Naomi calleth those her Daughters, which were but her legal Daughters Ruth 1.11.) in this the most agree, but I must confess I think it is Christ, who is here said to be of Heli, (tho he was reputed, and generally taken to be the Son of Ioseph.) 3. That Luke is here deriving our Saviour, not from his supposed Father Ioseph, but from Mary his true Mother. It is not to be conceived that Luke after such a narration of the predictions of his conception as he had given us in the first Chap. should go to derive Christ from Ioseph, and this gives us a fair account why the Names are so different from Davids time to the Birth of Christ. Ioseph (whose pedigree Matthew relates) deriving from Solomon who was the Son of David succeeding him in the Kingdom. Mary (whose pedigree Luke relates) descending from Nathan v. 31. 1 Chron. 3.5. tells us he was another Son of David. So as after Davids time, the Persons named which before were the same in our Saviours Pedigree became diverse, some the Progenitors of Ioseph, whom▪ Matthew reckons, others the Progenitors of Mary, whom Luke nameth. This answereth the objection, from the differing number of the Persons from Ioseph to Zorobabel, (excluding them both) Matthew reckoneth but nine, Luke here reckoneth 18▪ in v. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. From Zorobabel to David Luke reckons 22 Progenitors, Matthew but 14. (leaving out three Kings o[illegible: 1 letter] the hal[illegible: 1 letter] Blood of A[illegible: 3 letters], of which we gave an account in our Notes o[illegible: 1 letter] Matthew 1.) so as the Scripture nameth 17. tho Matthew leaves out 3. in two different Lines; it is not impossible that one person in so many years might have so many more Progenitors than another, supposing Matthew designed to reckon all, which it is plain from his leaving out three Kings named in Scripture that he did not. 4. That ordinarily the Jews had two Names, sometimes three, all Iosiahs Sons had each of them two at least. Matthew had also the Name of Levi, &c. This solves the difference from v. 27. where Rhesa is said to be the Son of Zorobabel, when as Matthew saith ch. 1.13. Zorobabel begat Abiud. That Abraham was the Son of Terah or Thara, and Terah the Son of Nachor, appeareth from Gen. 11.24. 26. That Saruch or Sarug, was the Son of Reu or Ragau, appeareth from Gen. 11.20. 1 Chron. 1.25. that Reu was the Son of Peleg, (here called Phalec) and Peleg the Son of Eber, and Eber the Son of Sala appears from Gen. 11.18. 1 Chron. 1.25. But in Genesis 11. we read, that Sala was the Son of Arphaxad v. 12. whereas he is here said to be the Son of Cainan, and Cainan is made the Son of Arphaxed. So as Luke maketh Sala Grandchild to Arphaxad, Moses makes no mention of Cainan at all, but mentions Salah, as begotten by Arphaxad. Those who are curious to know what is said for the resolution of this difficulty, may read it largely both in Spanheims dubia Evangelica, and Mr. Pools Synopsis Criticorum. It is a difficulty which hath exercised many very learned Men, and I doubt whether ever any yet satisfied himself in the resolution of it. It is not probable that Luke should correct what Moses said, the best account I can give of it is, the Septuagint in Gen. 11, 12. have it just as Luke here hath it, and it is certain, that Luke in his quotations out of the old Testament, doth generally follow the Septuagint, (being the translation most in use among them) Beza tells us of an ancient Copy of the Gospel he had, which mentioneth no Cainan. The best of it is, that it is a matter of no great moment, for the Question is not, whether Sala was the Son of Arphaxad, (for so he was, tho Arphaxad was his Grandfather, in the same sense that Christ is called the Son of Abraham, and the Son of David, and Elizabeth the Daughter of Aaron ch. 1.1.) but whether he was the immediate Son of Arphaxad, or Cainan, whether Moses omitted Cainan, or some transcriber of Luke added Cainan out of the Septuagint (being then the current Translation among them) the last is most probable. For the other part of the Genealogy v. 36, 37, 38. it plainly agreeth with Gen. 5, 6, &c. & 6.10. So that I must profess I see no great difficulty to reconcile the Genealogies, admitting the one to give the Genealogy of Ioseph, and the other, to give the Genealogy of Mary; that indeed Mary was the Daughter of Heli, is not to be proved by Scripture, nor yet contradicted, but it is very probably judged so. And tho we cannot prove that Cainan, mentioned v. 36. was added out of some latter Copies of the Septuagint, yet it is more than probable it was so; which two things if we admit, I see no great difficulty remaining, but a fair agreement betwixt both the Evangelists. For I presume none will stumble at the alteration of some letter, or omission of some letter in a Name, or addition to it in the end; there is nothing more ordinary than that, when Names are mentioned in several Languages.

Ministry of John the Baptist.

1 Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judæa, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituræa and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene, 2 Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. 3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Esaias the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; 6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God. 7 Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 9 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 10 And the people asked him, saying, What shall we do then? 11 He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise. 12 Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do? 13 And he said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you. 14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.

John's baptism introducing a new dispensation, it was requisite that we should have a particular account of it. Glorious things were said of John, what a distinguished favourite of Heaven he should be, and what a great blessing to this earth (ch. i. 15, 17); but we lost him in the deserts, and there he remains until the day of his showing unto Israel, ch. i. 80. And now at last that day dawns, and a welcome day it was to them that waited for it more than they that waited for the morning. Observe here,

I. The date of the beginning of John's baptism, when it was that he appeared; this is here taken notice of, which was not by the other evangelists, that the truth of the thing might be confirmed by the exact fixing of the time. And it is dated,

1. By the government of the heathen, which the Jews were under, to show that they were a conquered people, and therefore it was time for the Messiah to come to set up a spiritual kingdom, and an eternal one, upon the ruins of all the temporal dignity and dominion of David and Judah.

(1.) It is dated by the reign of the Roman emperor; it was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Cæsar, the third of the twelve Cæsars, a very bad man, given to covetousness, drunkenness, and cruelty; such a man is mentioned first (saith Dr. Lightfoot), as it were, to teach us what to look for from that cruel and abominable city wherein Satan reigned in all ages and successions. The people of the Jews, after a long struggle, were of late made a province of the empire, and were under the dominion of this Tiberius; and that country which once had made so great a figure, and had many nations tributaries to it, in the reigns of David and Solomon, is now itself an inconsiderable despicable part of the Roman empire, and rather trampled upon than triumphed in. ——En quo discordia cives, Perduxit miseros—— What dire effects from civil discord flow! The lawgiver was now departed from between Judah's feet; and, as an evidence of that, their public acts are dated by the reign of the Roman emperor, and therefore now Shiloh must come.

(2.) It is dated by the governments of the viceroys that ruled in the several parts of the Holy Land under the Roman emperor, which was another badge of their servitude, for they were all foreigners, which bespeaks a sad change with that people whose governors used to be of themselves (Jer. xxx. 21), and it was their glory. How is the gold become dim! [1.] Pilate is here said to be the governor, president, or procurator, of Judea. This character is given of him by some other writers, that he was a wicked man, and one that made no conscience of a lie. He reigned ill, and at last was displaced by Vitellius, president of Syria, and sent to Rome, to answer for his mal-administrations. [2.] The other three are called tetrarchs, some think from the countries which they had the command of, each of them being over a fourth part of that which had been entirely under the government of Herod the Great. Others think that they are so called from the post of honour they held in the government; they had the fourth place, or were fourth-rate governors: the emperor was the first, the pro-consul, who governed a province, the second, a king the third, and a tetrarch the fourth. So Dr. Lightfoot.

2. By the government of the Jews among themselves, to show that they were a corrupt people, and that therefore it was time that the Messiah should come, to reform them, v. 2. Annas and Caiaphas were the high priests. God had appointed that there should be but one high priest at a time, but here were two, to serve some ill turn or other: one served one year and the other the other year; so some. One was the high priest, and the other the sagan, as the Jews called him, to officiate for him when he was disabled; or, as others say, one was high priest, and represented Aaron, and that was Caiaphas; Annas, the other, was nasi, or head of the sanhedrim, and represented Moses. But to us there is but one high priest, one Lord of all, to whom all judgment is committed.

II. The origin and tendency of John's baptism.

1. The origin of it was from heaven: The word of God came unto John, v. 2. He received full commission and full instructions from God to do what he did. It is the same expression that is used concerning the Old-Testament prophets (Jer. i. 2); for John was a prophet, yea, more than a prophet, and in him prophecy revived, which had been long suspended. We are not told how the word of the Lord came to John, whether by an angel, as to his father, or by dream, or vision, or voice, but it was to his satisfaction, and ought to be to ours. John is here called the son of Zacharias, to refer us to what the angel said to his father, when he assured him that he should have this son. The word of the Lord came to him in the wilderness; for those whom God fits he will find out, wherever they are. As the word of the Lord is not bound in a prison, so it is not lost in a wilderness. The word of the Lord made its way to Ezekiel among the captives by the river of Chebar, and to John in the isle of Patmos. John was the son of a priest, now entering upon the thirtieth year of his age; and therefore, according to the custom of the temple, he was now to be admitted into the temple-service, where he should have attended as a candidate five years before. But God had called him to a more honourable ministry, and therefore the Holy Ghost enrols him here, since he was not enrolled in the archives of the temple: John the son of Zacharias began his ministration such a time.

2. The scope and design of it were to bring all the people of his country off from their sins and home to their God, v. 3. He came first into all the country about Jordan, the neighbourhood wherein he resided, that part of the country which Israel took possession of first, when they entered the land of promise under Joshua's conduct; there was the banner of the gospel first displayed. John resided in the most solitary part of the country: but, when the word of the Lord came to him, he quitted his deserts, and came into the inhabited country. Those that are best pleased in their retirements must cheerfully exchange them, when God calls them into places of concourse. He came out of the wilderness into all the country, with some marks of distinction, preaching a new baptism; not a sect, or party, but a profession, or distinguishing badge. The sign, or ceremony, was such as was ordinarily used among the Jews, washing with water, by which proselytes were sometimes admitted, or disciples to some great master; but the meaning of it was, repentance for the remission of sins: that is, all that submitted to his baptism,

(1.) Were thereby obliged to repent of their sins, to be sorry for what they had done amiss, and to do so no more. The former they professed, and were concerned to be sincere in their professions; the latter they promised, and were concerned to make good what they promised. He bound them, not to such ceremonious observances as were imposed by the tradition of the elders, but to change their mind, and change their way, to cast away from them all their transgressions, and to make them new hearts and to live new lives. The design of the gospel, which now began, was to make men devout and pious, holy and heavenly, humble and meek, sober and chaste, just and honest, charitable and kind, and good in every relation, who had been much otherwise; and this is to repent.

(2.) They were thereby assured of the pardon of their sins, upon their repentance. As the baptism he administered bound them not to submit to the power of sin, so it sealed to them a gracious and pleadable discharge from the guilt of sin. Turn yourselves from all your transgressions, so iniquity shall not be your ruin; agreeing with the word of the Lord, by the Old-Testament prophets, Ezek. xviii. 30.

III. The fulfilling of the scriptures in the ministry of John. The other evangelists had referred us to the same text that is here referred to, that of Esaias, ch. xl. 3. It is written in the book of the words of Esaias the prophet, which he heard from God, which he spoke for God, those words of his which were written for the generations to come. Among them it is found that there should be the voice of one crying in the wilderness; and John is that voice, a clear distinct voice, a loud voice, an articulate one; he cries, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight. John's business is to make way for the entertainment of the gospel in the hearts of the people, to bring them into such a frame and temper as that Christ might be welcome to them, and they welcome to Christ. Luke goes further on with the quotation than Matthew and Mark had done, and applies the following words likewise to John's ministry (v. 5, 6), Every valley shall be filled. Dr. Hammond understands this as a prediction of the desolation coming upon the people of the Jews for their infidelity: the land should be made plain by the pioneers for the Roman army, and should be laid waste by it, and there should then be a visible distinction made between the impenitent on the one side and the receivers of the gospel on the other side. But it seems rather to be meant of the gospel of Christ, of which that was the introduction. 1. The humble shall by it be enriched with grace: Every valley that lies low and moist shall be filled and be exalted. 2. The proud shall by it be humbled; the self-confident that stand upon their own bottom, and the self-conceited that lift up their own top, shall have contempt put upon them: Every mountain and hill shall be brought low. If they repent, they are brought to the dust; if not, to the lowest hell. 3. Sinners shall be converted to God: The crooked ways and the crooked spirits shall be made straight; for, though none can make that straight which God hath made crooked (Eccl. vii. 13), yet God by his grace can make that straight which sin hath made crooked. 4. Difficulties that were hindering and discouraging in the way to heaven shall be removed: The rough ways shall be made smooth; and they that love God's law shall have great peace, and nothing shall offend them. The gospel has made the way to heaven plain and easy to be found, smooth and easy to be walked in. 5. The great salvation shall be more fully discovered than ever, and the discovery of it shall spread further (v. 6): All flesh shall see the salvation of God; not the Jews only, but the Gentiles. All shall see it; they shall have it set before them and offered to them, and some of all sorts shall see it, enjoy it, and have the benefit of it. When way is made for the gospel into the heart, by the captivation of high thoughts and bringing them into obedience to Christ, by the leveling of the soul and the removing of all obstructions that stand in the way of Christ and his grace, then prepare to bid the salvation of God welcome.

IV. The general warnings and exhortations which he gave to those who submitted to his baptism, v. 7-9. In Matthew he is said to have preached these same things to many of the Pharisees and Sadducees, that came to his baptism (Matt. iii. 7-10); but here he is said to have spoken them to the multitude, that came forth to be baptized of him, v. 7. This was the purport of his preaching to all that came to him, and he did not alter it in compliment to the Pharisees and Sadducees, when they came, but dealt as plainly with them as with any other of his hearers. And as he did not flatter the great, so neither did he compliment the many, or make his court to them, but gave the same reproofs of sin and warnings of wrath to the multitude that he did to the Sadducees and Pharisees; for, if they had not the same faults, they had others as bad. Now observe here,

1. That the guilty corrupted race of mankind is become a generation of vipers; not only poisoned, but poisonous; hateful to God, hating one another. This magnifies the patience of God, in continuing the race of mankind upon the earth, and not destroying that nest of vipers. He did it once by water, and will again by fire.

2. This generation of vipers is fairly warned to flee from the wrath to come, which is certainly before them if they continue such; and their being a multitude will not be at all their security, for it will be neither reproach nor loss to God to cut them off. We are not only warned of this wrath, but are put into a way to escape it, if we look about us in time.

3. There is no way of fleeing from the wrath to come, but by repentance. They that submitted to the baptism of repentance thereby evidenced that they were warned to flee from the wrath to come and took the warning; and we by our baptism profess to have fled out of Sodom, for fear of what is coming upon it.

4. Those that profess repentance are highly concerned to live like penitents (v. 8): "Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance, else, notwithstanding your professions of repentance, you cannot escape the wrath to come." By the fruits of repentance it will be known whether it be sincere or no. By the change of our way must be evidenced the change of our mind.

5. If we be not really holy, both in heart and life, our profession of religion and relation to God and his church will stand us in no stead at all: Begin not now to frame excuses from this great duty of repentance, by saying within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father. What will it avail us to be the children of godly parents if we be not godly, to be within the pale of the Church if we be not brought into the bond of the covenant?

6. We have therefore no reason to depend upon our external privileges and professions of religion, because God has no need of us or of our services, but can effectually secure by his own honour and interest without us. If we were cut off and ruined, he could raise up to himself a church out of the most unlikely,—children to Abraham even out of stones.

7. The greater professions we make of repentance, and the greater assistances and encouragements are given us to repentance, the nearer and the sorer will our destruction be if we do not bring forth fruits meet for repentance. Now that the gospel begins to be preached, now that the kingdom of heaven is at hand, now that the axe is laid to the root of the tree, threatenings to the wicked and impenitent are now more terrible than before, as encouragements to the penitent are now more comfortable. "Now that you are upon your behaviour, look to yourselves."

8. Barren trees will be cast into the fire at length; it is the fittest place for them: Every tree that doth not bring forth fruit, good fruit, is hewn down, and cast into the fire. If it serve not for fruit, to the honour of God's grace, let it serve for fuel, to the honour of his justice.

V. The particular instructions he gave to several sorts of persons, that enquired of him concerning their duty: the people, the publicans, and the soldiers. Some of the Pharisees and Sadducees came to his baptism; but we do not find them asking, What shall we do? They thought they knew what they had to do as well as he could tell them, or were determined to do what they pleased, whatever he told them. But the people, the publicans, and the soldiers, who knew that they had done amiss, and that they ought to do better, and were conscious to themselves of great ignorance and unacquaintedness with the divine law, were particularly inquisitive: What shall we do? Note, 1. Those that are baptized must be taught, and those that have baptized them are concerned, as they have opportunity, to teach them, Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. 2. Those that profess and promise repentance in general must evidence it by particular instances of reformation, according as their place and condition are. 3. They that would do their duty must desire to know their duty, and enquire concerning it. The first good word Paul said, when he was converted, was, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? These here enquire, not, What shall this man do? but, What shall we do? What fruits meet for repentance shall we bring forth? Now John gives answer to each, according to their place and station.

(1.) He tells the people their duty, and that is to be charitable (v. 11): He that has two coats, and, consequently, one to spare, let him give, or lend at least, to him that has none, to keep him warm. Perhaps he saw among his hearers some that were overloaded with clothes, while others were ready to perish in rags, and he puts those who had superfluities upon contributing to the relief of those that had not necessaries. The gospel requires mercy, and not sacrifice; and the design of it is to engage us to do all the good we can. Food and raiment are the two supports of life; he that hath meat to spare, let him give to him that is destitute of daily food, as well as he that hath clothes to spare: what we have we are but stewards of, and must use it, accordingly, as our Master directs.

(2.) He tells the publicans their duty, the collectors of the emperor's revenue (v. 13): Exact no more than that which is appointed you. They must do justice between the government and the merchant, and not oppress the people in levying the taxes, nor any way make them heavier or more burdensome than the law had made them. They must not think that because it was their office to take care that the people did not defraud the prince they might therefore, by the power they had, bear hard upon the people; as those that have ever so little a branch of power are apt to abuse it: "No, keep to your book of rates, and reckon it enough that you collect for Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and do not enrich yourselves by taking more." The public revenues must be applied to the public service, and not to gratify the avarice of private persons. Observe, He does not direct the publicans to quit their places, and to go no more to the receipt of custom; the employment is in itself lawful and necessary, but let them be just and honest in it.

(3.) He tells the soldiers their duty, v. 14. Some think that these soldiers were of the Jewish nation and religion: others think that they were Romans; for it was not likely either that the Jews would serve the Romans or that the Romans would trust the Jews in their garrisons in their own nation; and then it is an early instance of Gentiles embracing the gospel and submitting to it. Military men seldom seem inclined to religion; yet these submitted even to the Baptist's strict profession, and desired to receive the word of command from him: What must we do? Those who more than other men have their lives in their hands, and are in deaths often, are concerned to enquire what they shall do that they may be found in peace. In answer to this enquiry, John does not bid them lay down their arms, and desert the service, but cautions them against the sins that soldiers were commonly guilty of; for this is fruit meet for repentance, to keep ourselves from our iniquity. [1.] They must not be injurious to the people among whom they were quartered, and over whom indeed they were set: "Do violence to no man. Your business is to keep the peace, and prevent men's doing violence to one another; but do not you do violence to any. Shake no man" (so the word signifies); "do not put people into fear; for the sword of war, as well as that of justice, is to be a terror only to evil doers, but a protection to those that do well. Be not rude in your quarters; force not money from people by frightening them. Shed not the blood of war in peace; offer no incivility either to man or woman, nor have any hand in the barbarous devastations that armies sometimes make." Nor must they accuse any falsely to the government, thereby to make themselves formidable, and get bribes. [2.] They must not be injurious to their fellow-soldiers; for some think that caution, not to accuse falsely, has special reference to them: "Be not forward to complain one of another to your superior officers, that you may be revenged on those whom you have a pique against, or undermine those above you, and get into their places." Do not oppress any; so some think the word here signifies as used by the LXX. in several passages of the Old Testament. [3.] They must not be given to mutiny, or contend with their generals about their pay: "Be content with your wages. While you have what you agreed for, do not murmur that it is not more." It is discontent with what they have that makes men oppressive and injurious; they that never think they have enough themselves will not scruple at any the most irregular practices to make it more, by defrauding others. It is a rule to all servants that they be content with their wages; for they that indulge themselves in discontents expose themselves to many temptations, and it is wisdom to make the best of that which is.

Imprisonment of John the Baptist.

15 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not; 16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: 17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable. 18 And many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people. 19 But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias his brother Philip's wife, and for all the evils which Herod had done, 20 Added yet this above all, that he shut up John in prison.

We are now drawing near to the appearance of our Lord Jesus publicly; the Sun will not be long after the morning-star. We are here told,

I. How the people took occasion, from the ministry and baptism of John, to think of the Messiah, and to think of him as at the door, as now come. Thus the way of the Lord was prepared, and people were prepared to bid Christ welcome; for, when men's expectations are raised, that which they are in expectation of becomes doubly acceptable. Now when they observed what an excellent doctrine John Baptist preached, what a divine power went along with it, and what a tendency it had to reform the world, 1. They began presently to consider that now was the time for the Messiah to appear. The sceptre was departed from Judah, for they had no king but Cæsar; nay, and the law-giver too was gone from between his feet, for Herod had lately slain the sanhedrim. Daniel's seventy weeks were now expiring; and therefore it was but three or four years after this that they looked that the kingdom of heaven should appear immediately, Luke xix. 11. Never did the corrupt state of the Jews more need a reformation, nor their distressed state more need a deliverance, than now. 2. Their next thought was, "Is not his he that should come?" All thinking men mused, or reasoned, in their hearts, concerning John, whether he were the Christ or not. He had indeed none of the external pomp and grandeur in which they generally expected the Messiah to appear; but his life was holy and strict, his preaching powerful and with authority, and therefore "why may we not think that he is the Messiah, and that he will shortly throw off this disguise, and appear in more glory?" Note, That which puts people upon considering, reasoning with themselves, prepares the way for Christ.

II. How John disowned all pretensions to the honour of being himself the Messiah, but confirmed them in their expectations of him that really was the Messiah, v. 16, 17. John's office, as a crier or herald, was to give notice that the kingdom of God and the King of that kingdom were at hand; and therefore, when he had told all manner of people severally what they must do ("You must do this, and you must do that"), he tells them one thing more which they must all do: they must expect the Messiah now shortly to appear. And this serves as an answer to their musings and debates concerning himself. Though he knew not their thoughts, yet, in declaring this, he answered them.

1. He declares that the utmost he could do was to baptize them with water. He had no access to the Spirit, nor could command that or work upon that; he could only exhort them to repent, and assure them of forgiveness, upon repentance; he could not work repentance in them, nor confer remission on them.

2. He consigns them, and turns them over, as it were, to Jesus Christ, for whom he was sent to prepare the way, and to whom he was ready to transfer all the interest he had in the affections of the people, and would have them no longer to debate whether John was the Messiah or no, but to look for him that was really so.

(1.) John owns the Messiah to have a greater excellency than he had, and that he was in all things preferable to him; he is one the latchet of whose shoe he does not think himself worthy to loose; he does not think himself worthy to be the meanest of his servants, to help him on and off with his shoes. John was a prophet, yea more than a prophet, more so than any of the Old-Testament prophets; but Christ was a prophet more than John, for it was both by the Spirit of Christ, and of the grace of Christ, that all the prophets prophesied, and John among the rest, 1 Pet. i. 10, 11. This was a great truth which John came to preach; but the manner of his expressing it bespeaks his humility, and in it he not only does justice to the Lord Jesus, but does him honour too: "He is one whom I am not worthy to approach, or draw nigh to, no not as a servant." Thus highly does it become us to speak of Christ, and thus humbly of ourselves.

(2.) He owns him to have a greater energy than he had: "He is mightier than I, and does that which I cannot do, both for the comfort of the faithful and for the terror of hypocrites and dissemblers." They thought that a wonderful power went along with John; but what was that compared with the power which Jesus would come clothed with? [1.] John can do no more than baptize with water, in token of this, that they ought to purify and cleanse themselves; but Christ can, and will, baptize with the Holy Ghost; he can give the Spirit to cleanse and purify the heart, not only as water washes off the dirt on the outside, but as fire purges out the dross that is within, and melts down the metal, that it may be cast into a new mould. [2.] John can only preach a distinguishing doctrine, and by word and sign separate between the precious and the vile; but Christ hath his fan in his hand, with which he can, and will, perfectly separate between the wheat and the chaff. He will thoroughly purge his floor; it is his own, and therefore he will purge it, and will cast out of his church the unbelieving impenitent Jews, and confirm in his church all that faithfully follow him. [3.] John can only speak comfort to those that receive the gospel, and, like other prophets, say to the righteous that it shall be well with them; but Jesus Christ will give them comfort. John can only promise them that they shall be safe; but Christ will make them so: he will gather the wheat into his garner; good, serious, solid people he will gather now into his church on earth, which shall be made up of such, and he will shortly gather them into his church in heaven, where they shall be for ever sheltered. [4.] John can only threaten hypocrites, and tell the barren trees that they shall be hewn down and cast into the fire; but Christ can execute that threatening; those that are as chaff, light, and vain, and worthless, he will burn with fire unquenchable. John refers here to Mal. iii. 18; iv. 1, 2. Then, when the floor is purged, ye shall return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, for the day comes that shall burn as an oven.

The evangelist concludes his account of John's preaching with an et cætera (v. 18): Many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people, which are not recorded. First, John was an affectionate preacher. He was parakalon—exhorting, beseeching; he pressed things home upon his hearers, followed his doctrine close, as one in earnest. Secondly, He was a practical preacher. Much of his preaching was exhortation, quickening them to their duty, directing them in it, and not amusing them with matters of nice speculation. Thirdly, He was a popular preacher. Though he had scribes and Pharisees, men of polite learning, attending his ministry, and Sadducees, men of free thought, as they pretended, yet he addressed himself to the people, pros ton laon—to the laity, and accommodated himself to their capacity, as promising himself best success among them. Fourthly, He was an evangelical preacher, for so the word here used signifies, euengelizeto—he preached the gospel to the people; in all his exhortations, he directed people to Christ, and excited and encouraged their expectations of him. When we press duty upon people, we must direct them to Christ, both for righteousness and strength. Fifthly, He was a copious preacher: Many other things he preached, polla men kai hetera—many things, and different. He preached a great deal, shunned not to declare the whole counsel of God; and he varied in his preaching, that those who were not reached, and touched, and wrought upon, by one truth, might be by another.

III. How full a stop was put to John's preaching. When he was in the midst of his usefulness, going on thus successfully, he was imprisoned by the malice of Herod (v. 19, 20): Herod the tetrarch being reproved by him, not only for living in incest with his brother Philip's wife, but for the many other evils which Herod had done (for those that are wicked in one instance are commonly so in many others), he could not bear it, but contracted an antipathy to him for his plain dealing, and added this wickedness to all the rest, which was indeed above all, that he shut up John in prison, put that burning and shining light under a bushel. Because he could not bear his reproofs, others should be deprived of the benefit of his instructions and counsels. Some little good he might do to those who had access to him, when he was in prison; but nothing to what he might have done if he had had liberty to go about all the country, as he had done. We cannot think of Herod's doing this without the greatest compassion and lamentation, nor of God's permitting it without admiring the depth of the divine counsels, which we cannot account for. Must he be silenced who is the voice of one crying in the wilderness? Must such a preacher be shut up in prison who ought to have been set up in the courts of the temple? But thus the faith of his disciples must be tried; thus the unbelief of those who rejected him must be punished; thus he must be Christ's forerunner in suffering as well as preaching; and thus, having been for about a year and a half preparing people for Christ, he must now give way to him, and, the Sun being risen, the morning-star must of course disappear.

The Genealogy of Christ.

21 Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, 22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. 23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, 24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, 25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge, 26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda, 27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri, 28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er, 29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, 30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim, 31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David, 32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson, 33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda, 34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor, 35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala, 36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, 37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

The evangelist mentioned John's imprisonment before Christ's being baptized, though it was nearly a year after it, because he would finish the story of John's ministry, and then introduce that of Christ. Now here we have,

I. A short account of Christ's baptism, which had been more fully related by St. Matthew. Jesus came, to be baptized of John, and he was so, v. 21, 22.

1. It is here said that, when all the people were baptized, then Jesus was baptized: all that were then present. Christ would be baptized last, among the common people, and in the rear of them; thus he humbled himself, and made himself of no reputation, as one of the least, nay, as less than the least. He saw what multitudes were hereby prepared to receive him, and then he appeared.

2. Notice is here taken of Christ's praying when he was baptized, which was not in Matthew: being baptized, and praying. He did not confess sin, as others did, for he had none to confess; but he prayed, as others did, for he would thus keep up communion with his Father. Note, The inward and spiritual grace of which sacraments are the outward and visible signs must be fetched in by prayer; and therefore prayer must always accompany them. We have reason to think that Christ now prayed for this manifestation of God's favour to him which immediately followed; he prayed for the discovery of his Father's favour to him, and the descent of the Spirit. What was promised to Christ, he must obtain by prayer: Ask of me and I will give thee, &c. Thus he would put an honour upon prayer, would tie us to it, and encourage us in it.

3. When he prayed, the heaven was opened. He that by his power parted the waters, to make a way through them to Canaan, now by his power parted the air, another fluid element, to open a correspondence with the heavenly Canaan. Thus was there opened to Christ, and by him to us, a new and living way into the holiest; sin had shut up heaven, but Christ's prayer opened it again. Prayer is an ordinance that opens heaven: Knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

4. The Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him; our Lord Jesus was now to receive greater measures of the Spirit than before, to qualify him for his prophetical office, Isa. lxi. 1. When he begins to preach, the Spirit of the Lord is upon him. Now this is here expressed by a sensible evidence for his encouragement in his work, and for the satisfaction of John the Baptist; for he was told before that by this sign it should be notified to him which was the Christ. Dr. Lightfoot suggests that the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape, that he might be revealed to be a personal substance, and not merely an operation of the Godhead: and thus (saith he) was made a full, clear, and sensible demonstration of the Trinity, at the beginning of the gospel; and very fitly is this done at Christ's baptism, who was to make the ordinance of baptism a badge of the profession of that faith in the doctrine of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

5. There came a voice from heaven, from God the Father, from the excellent glory (so it is expressed, 2 Pet. i. 17), Thou art my beloved Son. Here, and in Mark, it is expressed as spoken to Christ; in Matthew as spoken of him: This is my beloved Son. It comes all to one; it was intended to be a notification to John, and as such was properly expressed by, This is my beloved Son; and likewise an answer to his prayer, and so it is most fitly expressed by. Thou art. It was foretold concerning the Messiah, I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son, 2 Sam. vii. 14. I will make him my First-born, Ps. lxxxix. 27. It was also foretold that he should be God's elect, in whom his soul delighted (Isa. xlii. 1); and, accordingly, it is here declared, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

II. A long account of Christ's pedigree, which had been more briefly related by St. Matthew. Here is,

1. His age: He now began to be about thirty years of age. So old Joseph was when he stood before Pharaoh (Gen. xli. 46), David when he began to reign (2 Sam. v. 4), and at this age the priests were to enter upon the full execution of their office, Num. iv. 3. Dr. Lightfoot thinks that it is plain, by the manner of expression here, that he was just twenty-nine years old complete, and entering upon his thirtieth year, in the month Tisri; that, after this, he lived three years and a half, and died when he was thirty-two years and a half old. Three years and a half, the time of Christ's ministry, is a period of time very remarkable in scripture. Three years and six months the heavens were shut up in Elijah's time, Luke iv. 25; Jam. v. 17. This was the half week in which the Messiah was to confirm the covenant, Dan. ix. 27. This period is expressed in the prophetical writings by a time, times, and half a time (Dan. xii. 7; Rev. xii. 14); and by forty-two months, and a thousand two hundred and threescore days, Rev. xi. 2, 3. It is the time fixed for the witnesses' prophesying in sackcloth, in conformity to Christ's preaching in his humiliation just so long.

2. His pedigree, v. 23, &c. Matthew had given us somewhat of this. He goes no higher than Abraham, but Luke brings it as high as Adam. Matthew designed to show that Christ was the son of Abraham, in whom all the families of the earth are blessed, and that he was heir to the throne of David; and therefore he begins with Abraham, and brings the genealogy down to Jacob, who was the father of Joseph, and heir-male of the house of David: but Luke, designing to show that Christ was the seed of the woman, that should break the serpent's head, traces his pedigree upward as high as Adam, and begins it with Ei, or Heli, who was the father, not of Joseph, but of the virgin Mary. And some suggest that the supply which our translators all along insert here is not right, and that it should not be read which, that is, which Joseph was the son of Heli, but which Jesus; he was the son of Joseph, of Eli, of Matthat, &c., and he, that is, Jesus, was the son of Seth, of Adam, of God, v. 38. The difference between the two evangelists in the genealogy of Christ has been a stumbling-block to infidels that cavil at the word, but such a one as has been removed by the labours of learned men, both in the early ages of the church and in latter times, to which we refer ourselves. Matthew draws the pedigree from Solomon, whose natural line ending in Jechonias, the legal right was transferred to Salathiel, who was of the house of Nathan, another son of David, which line Luke here pursues, and so leaves out all the kings of Judah. It is well for us that our salvation doth not depend upon our being able to solve all these difficulties, nor is the divine authority of the gospels at all weakened by them; for the evangelists are not supposed to write these genealogies either of their own knowledge or by divine inspiration, but to have copied them out of the authentic records of the genealogies among the Jews, the heralds' books, which therefore they were obliged to follow; and in them they found the pedigree of Jacob, the father of Joseph, to be as it is set down in Matthew; and the pedigree of Heli, the father of Mary, to be as it is set down here in Luke. And this is the meaning of hos enomizeto (v. 23), not, as it was supposed, referring only to Joseph, but uti sancitum est lege—as it is entered into the books, as we find it upon record; by which is appeared that Jesus was both by father and mother's side the Son of David, witness this extract out of their own records, which any one might at that time have liberty to compare with the original, and further the evangelists needed not to go; nay, had they varied from that, they had not gained their point. Its not being contradicted at that time is satisfaction enough to us now that it is a true copy, as it is further worthy of observation, that, when those records of the Jewish genealogies had continued thirty or forty years after these extracts out of them, long enough to justify the evangelists therein, they were all lost and destroyed with the Jewish state and nation; for now there was no more occasion for them.

One difficulty occurs between Abraham and Noah, which gives us some perplexity, v. 35, 36. Sala is said to be the son of Cainan, and he the son of Arphaxad, whereas Sala was the son of Arphaxad (Gen. x. 24; xi. 12), and there is no such man as Cainan found there. But, as to that, it is sufficient to say that the Seventy Interpreters, who, before our Saviour's time, translated the Old Testament into Greek, for reasons best known to themselves inserted that Cainan; and St. Luke, writing among the Hellenist Jews, was obliged to make use of that translation, and therefore to take it as he found it.

The genealogy concludes with this, who was the son of Adam, the son of God. (1.) Some refer it to Adam; he was in a peculiar manner the son of God, being, more immediately than any of his offspring, the offspring of God by creation. (2.) Others refer it to Christ, and so make the last words of this genealogy to denote his divine and human nature. He was both the Son of Adam and the Son of God that he might be a proper Mediator between God and the sons of Adam, and might bring the sons of Adam to be, through him, the sons of God.

CHAP. III.

Verse 1. Pontius Pilate being governour] TAcitus calleth him Procurator only of Judea. But Saint Luke [non-Latin text not transcribed] here makes little difference betwixt his office and the Imperiall honour of his Master Tiberius: for he useth the same word to expresse both. The Earle of Flanders counts it a great prerogative, that he writes himself Comes Dei gratiâ. Others only Dei clementiâ. The Duke of Millain, that he is the prime Duke of Europe. The Deputy of Ireland, that there commeth no Vicegerent in Europe more neer the Majesty and prerogative of a King then he, &c.

Verse 2. Annas and Caiaphas being high Priests] By turnes, Joh. 11. 44. Act. 4. 6. contrary to the old order. Throughout the whole Turkish Territories, there is but one Mufta or HighPriest, and he is the supream Judge and rectifier of all actions, as well Civil as Ecclesiastical.

Verse 3. Preaching the Baptisme of Repentance] Johns note was still, Repentance. Christ comes not, where this Herald hath not been before him. Yet now it is come to that passe, that many men scorn to hear a Sermon of Repentance. Its a sign, say some; that the Minister hath been idle that week, or that his stock is spent when he comes to preach of such a common theame as Repentance. If God be not mercifull, we shall quickly dispute away all our Repentance, as a famous preacher justly complaineth.

Verse 4. In the book of the words of Esaias] Called a great [non-Latin text not transcribed] Barathrum. roule, Esay 8. 1. (because it treates of great things, Maxima in minimo) and said to be written with the Pen of a man, that is cleerly that the simplest of men may understand it, Deuteronomie 30. 11.

Verse 5. Every vally shall be filled] Every hole, or hollow. Fainting of heart unfits the way for Christ, as well as the swelling hills of pride. Plain things will joyn in every point one with another; not so, rough and hollow things: so plain spirits close with Gods Truths; not so those that are swolne, and uneven.

Verse 6. All flesh shall see] Viz. All that order their conversation aright, Psal. 50. 23. which is the life of thankfulnesse. ib.

Verse 7, 8, 9.] See the Notes on Matthew 3. 7, 8, 9, 10.

Verse 10. What shall we doe?] q. d. What are those fruits worthy of Repentance, that we in our places must bring forth?

Verse 11. He that hath two coates] Thus Tyrus evidenced her repentance, Isa. 23. 18. by feeding and cloathing Gods Saints with her merchandize. Thus Zacheus, Dorcas, &c. This is all the lesson that for the present he sets them, being but young scholars in the schoole of Christ.

Verse 13. Exact no more] Make no more of your places, then [non-Latin text not transcribed] ye may with a good conscience. Shun that mystery of iniquity that is crept into most callings. A great part of the Turks Civil Justice Sands his Travels. at this day is grounded upon Christs words, Thou shalt not do what thou wouldst not have done to thee.

Verse 14. Do violence to no man] Shake no man by the shoulders, [non-Latin text not transcribed] tosse no man to and fro, to put him into a fright, smite no man with the fist of wickednesse. Tamerlaine took such order with his Souldiers that none were injuried by them: If any souldier of his had but taken an apple or the like from any man, he died for it. One of his souldiers having taken a little milk from a country woman, and she thereof complaining, he caused the said souldier to be presently killed, and his stomack to be ript, where the milkTurk. hist f. 213 that he had of late drunk being found, he contented the woman and so sent her away: who had otherwise undoubtedly dyed for her false accusation, had it not so appeared. Neither accuse any falsely] Get nothing by sycophancie. Oppresse [non-Latin text not transcribed] no man either by force or fraud, and forged cavilation, as it is rendred, Luke 19. 8.

Verse 15. Whether he were the Christ] Yet John did no miracle, but he was a burning and a shining light, he thundered in his doctrine, and lightened in his life. Hence was he so much admired.

Verse 16. The latchet of whose shooes, &c.] By this expression the Baptist acknowledgeth Christs Godhead, as did also Mary by washing his feet. But what doth the Pope that holds forth his feet to be kissed? Is not this he that sits as God in the Temple of God? Is not this Dominus Deus noster Papa? Learned he not this abominable insolency of Dioclesian that bloudy Persecutor? who as he was the first Roman Emperour that would be worshippedEatrop. as God, so he was the first that wore shooes embellished with precious stones, and held forth his feet to be kissed of his prostrate suitors.

Verse 17. Whose fanne] Viz. The preaching of the Gospel.

Verse 19. For Herodias his brother Philips wife] Whom it was not lawfull for Herod to have, though Philip were dead, as Josephus saith he was. This was the case so much controvertedJoseph. Antiq. lib. [illegible: 1 word]. cap. 7. here and beyond Seas in Henry the eighths time, touching his marriage with his brother Arthurs widow, by Papall dispensation. The King had first a scruple cast into his mind about it by the Bishop of Baion the French Embassadour, who came to him to consult of a Marriage between the Lady Mary, and the Duke of Orleans, whether Mary were legitimate, &c. This gave occasion to the casting the Popes authority out of England. Mary was forced, for fear of death, to renounce the Bishop of Rome, and to acknowledgeCamdens Elisab. Introd. her Mothers marriage to have bin incestuous and unjust, &c. Though afterwards, she set up the Pope here again: and it was her policy, so to get, and keep the Crown upon [illegible: 1 word] head. And for all the evills, which Herod, &c.] John reproved him with the same liberty that Herod committed them. So did John Chrysostome, [illegible: 1 word]. Hist. [illegible: 1 word]. Cent. 5. [illegible: 1 word]. 1. cap. 6. the great ones of his time. Ità quidem ut etiam Ducum, Eutropii & Gainae, imò ipsius Imperatoris errata reprehenderet: He spared not Dukes, Princes, nay not the Emperour himself.

Verse 20. Added yet this] There is no stint in sin: but as one wedge makes way for another: so here. As after Jonathan and [illegible: 1 word] Armour-bearer, came the whole host: So.

Verse 21. And praying, the heaven was opened] Prayer is the key of Gods Kingdom: And must be used, as at other times, so especially when we or ours receive the Sacraments: though the most, if urged hereto, must say, if they say truely as 1 Sam. 17. 39. I cannot go with these accoutrements: for I am not accustomed to them.

Verse 23. Being (as was supposed)] But falsly: for Joseph was no more then his Pater politicus, as Postellus calleth him his foster-father, reputed father. Which was the sonne of Heli] That is, his son in law. For Heli was Maries naturall father: and it is Maries genealogy that is hereSo Ruth 1. 11, 12, 13. described: but put upon Joseph, because the Hebrewes reckon not their genealogies by women, but by men only.

Verse 27. Which was the sonne of Neri] Salathiel was naturally the son of Neri, but legally, and by succession the son of Jechoniah, Matt. 4. 12. for he succeeded him in the Kingdom. Neri which signifieth My candle, seemeth to have bin so named from the candle which the Lord reserved for David and his house, 2 Chron. 21. 7.

Verse 30. Which was the son of Simeon] Our Saviours genealogy is here the more accurately described, because there were that would have substituted and put false Christs upon the Church Ezek. 2. 62. The Preists that could not produce their genealogies were outed.

Verse 36. Which was the son of Cainan] This name crept byBez. in loc. Pareus in Gen. 11 some meanes, into the Greek copies after Jeromies time, saith Beza and [illegible: 1 word]. Others say, that Saint Luke herein followed the Septuagints translation, out of wisdom and charity to the HellenistsAlsted. Chron. or Greek-Jewes, that had received it, and read it. 2. That M. Lightfoots [illegible: 1 word]. p. 312. writing for heathens, he followed the heathens Bible in his quotations. 3. That in his genealogies he was to be a Coppier, not a Corector.

Verse 38. Which was the son of God] Not by generation, but creation. Therefore the Syriack translatour hath it Demen Elaba, A Deo, Of God, not Bar Elaha, the son of God.

Now in the fifteenth year. This was the thirteenth year of his being sole emperor. He was two years joint emperor with Augustus, and Luke reckons from the time when he was admitted to share the empire with Augustus Caesar. See Lardner's Credibility, vol. i.

Tiberius Caesar. Tiberius succeeded Augustus in the empire, and began his sole reign Aug. 19, A.D. 14. He was a most infamous character -- a scourge to the Roman people. He reigned twenty-three years, and was succeeded by Caius Caligula, whom he appointed his successor on account of his notorious wickedness, and that he might be, as he expressed it, a serpent to the Romans.

Pontius Pilate. Herod the Great left his kingdom to three sons. Mt 2:22. To Archelaus he left Judea. Archelaus reigned nine years, when, on account of his crimes, he was banished into Vienne, and Judea was made a Roman province, and placed entirely under Roman governors or procurators, and became completely tributary to Rome. Pontius Pilate was the fifth governor that had been sent, and of course had been in Judea but a short time. See the chronological table at the end of the volume.

Herod being tetrarch of Galilee. This was Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, to whom Galilee had been left as his part of his father's kingdom. The word tetrarch properly denotes one who presides over a fourth part of a country or province; but it also came to be a general title, denoting one who reigned over any part--a, third, a half, &c. In this case Herod had a third of the dominions of his father, but he was called tetrarch. It was this Herod who imprisoned John the Baptist, and to whom our Saviour, when arraigned, was sent by Pilate.

And his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea. Iturea was so called from Jetur, one of the sons of Ishmael, Gen 25:15, 1Chr 1:31. It was situated on the east side of the Jordan, and was taken from the descendants of Jetur by the tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh, 1Chr 5:19.

Region of Trachonitis. This region was also on the east of the Jordan, and extended northward to the district of Damascus and eastward to the deserts of Arabia. It was bounded on the west by Gaulonitis and south by the city of Bostra. Philip had obtained this region from the Romans on condition that he would extirpate the robbers.

Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene. Abilene was so called from Abila, its chief city. It was situated in Syria, north-west of Damascus and south-east of Mount Lebanon, and was adjacent to Galilee.

Annas (a) and Caiaphas being high-priests. There was, properly speaking, but one high-priest of the Jews; yet the name of high-priest continued to be given to those who had been in that office, and especially when they still possessed some civil office after they had left the high-priesthood. In this case it appears that Caiaphas was high-priest, and Annas had been, but had been dismissed from the office. It is highly probable that he still held an office under the Romans, and was perhaps president of the Sanhedrim. He is mentioned before Caiaphas because he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, and probably was the eldest, and had been longest in office. Instances similar to this may be found in Josephus.

There is one remark to be made here about the manner in which the gospels are written. They have every mark of openness and honesty. An impostor does not mention names, and times, and places particularly. If he did, it would be easy to ascertain that he was an impostor. But the sacred writers describe objects and men as if they were perfectly familiar with them. They never appear to be guarding themselves. They speak of things most minutely. If, therefore, they had been impostors, it would have been easy to detect them. If, for example, John did not begin to preach in the fifteenth year of Tiberius--if Philip was not tetrarch of Iturea--if Pontius Pilate was not governor of Judea, how easy would it have been to detect them in falsehood! Yet it was never done. Nay, we have evidence of that age, in Josephus, that these descriptions are strictly true; and, consequently, the gospels must have been written by men who were personally acquainted with what they wrote, who were not impostors, and who were honest men. If they were honest, then the Christian religion is true.

(a) Jn 11:49,51, 18:13, Acts 4:6

On the baptism of John, Mt 3:1.

(b) "And" Mt 3:1, Mk 1:4 (c) "baptism of repentance" Lk 1:77

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(d) "The voice of one crying in the wilderness" Isa 40:3

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(e) "And all flesh" Ps 98:2, Isa 40:5, 52:10, Rom 10:12,18

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(f) "O generation of vipers" Mt 3:7

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(1) "fruits worthy of repentance", or "meet for"

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(g) "every tree" Mt 7:19, Lk 13:7,9

What shall we do, then? John had told them to bring forth fruits appropriate to repentance, or to lead a life which showed that their repentance was genuine. They very properly, therefore, asked how it should be done, or what would be such a life.

He (h) that hath two coats, &c. Or, in other words, aid the poor according to your ability; be benevolent, and you will thus show that your repentance is genuine. It is remarkable that one of the first demands of religion is to do good, and it is in this way that it may be shown that the repentance is not feigned.

For 1st. The nature of religion is to do good.

2nd. This requires self-denial, and none will deny themselves who are not attached to God. And

3rd. This is to imitate Jesus Christ, who, though he was rich, yet for our sakes became poor.

Coats Mt 5:40. Meat. Provision of any kind.

(h) Lk 11:41, 2Cor 8:14, 1Jn 3:17

The publicans (i) .

Mt 5:47.

There is reason to think that the publicans or tax-gatherers were peculiarly oppressive and hard in their dealings with the people; and that, as they had every opportunity of exacting more than they ought, so they often did it, and thus enriched themselves. The evidence of repentance in them would be to break off their sins in this respect, and to deal justly.

(i) Mt 21:32, Lk 7:29

Exact (k). Demand, or take, no more.

Than that which is appointed. That is, by the government. John does not condemn the office, or say that the employment should be forsaken. Though it was hated by the people--though often abused and therefore unpopular --yet the office itself was not dishonourable. If there is a government, it must be supported; and of course there must be men whose duty it is to collect taxes, as the means of the proper support of the government; and as such a support of the government is necessary, so the people should pay cheerfully the just apportionment of their rulers, and regard favourably those who are authorized to collect it. See Rom 13:1-6.

(k) Lk 19:8, 1Cor 6:10

The soldiers likewise. It seems that they also came to his baptism. Whether these were Jews or Romans cannot be ascertained. It is not improbable that, as Judea was a Roman province, they were Jews or Jewish proselytes in the service of Herod Antipas or Philip, and so were really in the Roman service.

Do violence (2), &c. Do not take the property of any by unlawful force, or do not use unjust force against the person or property of any individual. It is probable that many of them were oppressive, or prone to violence, rapine, or theft, and burdensome even in times of peace to the inhabitants.

Neither accuse any falsely. It is probable that when they wished the property of others and could not obtain it by violence, or when there was no pretext for violence, they often attempted the same-thing in another way, and falsely accused the persons of crime. The word rendered falsely accused is the one from which our word sycophant is derived. The proper meaning of the word sycophant was this: There was a law in Athens which prohibited the importation of figs. The sycophant (literally the man who made figs to appear, or who showed them) was one who made complaint to the magistrate of persons who had imported figs contrary to law, or who was an informer; and then the word came to be used in a general sense to denote any complainer -- a calumniator--an accuser --an informer. As such persons were usually cringing and fawning, and looked for a reward, the word came to be used also to denote a fawner or flatterer. It is always used in a bad sense. It is correctly rendered here, "do not accuse any falsely."

Be content, &c. Do not murmur or complain, or take unlawful means to increase your wages.

Wages. This word means not only the money which was paid them, but also their rations or daily allowance of food. By this they were to show that their repentance was genuine; that it had a practical influence; that it produced a real reformation of life; and it is clear that no other repentance would be genuine. Every profession of repentance which is not attended with a change of life is mere hypocrisy. It did not condemn their profession, or say that it was unlawful to be a soldier, or that they must abandon the business in order to be true penitents. It was possible to be a good man and yet a soldier. What was required was that in their profession they should show that they were really upright, and did not commit the crimes which were often practised in that calling. It is lawful to defend one's self, one's family, or one's country, and hence it is lawful to be a soldier. Man everywhere, in all professions, should be a Christian, and then he will do honour to his profession, and his profession, if it is not a direct violation of the law of God, will be honourable.

(2) "Do violence" or "Put no man in fear"

In expectation. Expecting the Messiah. Marg. suspense. That is, they were not certain whether John was not himself the Messiah. They confidently expected his appearing, and there minds were in suspense, or they were in a state of doubt whether he had not already come, and whether John was not the Messiah.

Mused in their hearts of John. Thought of his character, his preaching, and his success, and anxiously inquired whether he did not do the things which were expected of the Messiah.

(4) "in expectation" or "in suspense" (5) "mused" or "reasoned" or "debated"

Mt 11:11 Mt 11:12

(n) "fan" Jer 15:7 (o) "will gather" Mic 4:12, Mt 13:30 (p) "chaff" Ps 1:4 (q) "burn with fire unquenchable" Ps 21:9, Mk 9:44,48

Mt 14:1 Mt 14:2 Mt 14:3; Mt 14:4 Mt 14:5; Mt 14:6 Mt 14:7; Mt 14:8 Mt 14:9; Mt 14:10 Mt 14:11; Mt 14:12 Mt 14:13

Added this above all, To all his former crimes he added this; not implying that this was the worst of his acts, but that this was one of his deeds, of like character as the others. The event here mentioned did not take place until some time after this, but it is mentioned here to show what was the end of John's preaching, or to fill out the account concerning him.

(r) "Herod the tetrarch" Mt 14:3, Mk 6:17

Mt 14:1 Mt 14:2 Mt 14:3; Mt 14:4 Mt 14:5; Mt 14:6 Mt 14:7; Mt 14:8 Mt 14:9; Mt 14:10 Mt 14:11; Mt 14:12 Mt 14:13

Mt 3:13; Mt 3:14 Mt 3:15; Mt 3:16 Mt 3:17

Jesus being baptized; or, Jesus having been baptized. This took place after the baptism, and not during its administration, Mt 3:16.

Praying. This circumstance is omitted by the other evangelists; and it shows,

1st. That Jesus was in the habit of prayer.

2nd. That it is proper to offer up special prayer at the administration of the ordinances of religion.

3rd. That it is possible to pray in the midst of a great multitude, yet in secret. The prayer consisted, doubtless, in lifting up the heart silently to God. So we may do it anywhere--about our daily toil--in the midst of multitudes, and thus may pray always.

(s) "it came to pass" Mt 3:13, Jn 1:32

In a bodily shape. This was a real visible appearance, and was doubtless seen by the people. The dove is an emblem of purity and harmlessness, and the form of the dove was assumed on this occasion to signify, probably, that the spirit with which Jesus would be endowed would be one of purity and innocence. The Holy Spirit, when he assumes a visible form, assumes that which will be emblematic of the thing to be represented. Thus he assumed the form of tongues, to signify the miraculous powers of language with which the apostles would be endowed; the appearance of fire, to denote their power, &c., Acts 2:3.

Jesus began to be, &c. This was the age at which the priests entered on their office, Nu 4:3,47; but it is not evident that Jesus had any reference to that in delaying his work to his thirtieth year. He was not subjected to the Levitical law in regard to the priesthood, and it does not appear that prophets and teachers did not commence their work before that age.

As was supposed. As was commonly thought, or perhaps being levitically reckoned as his son.

(t) "son of Joseph" Mt 13:55, Jn 6:42

Mt 1:1-16

See, on this genealogy, Mt 1:1 also Mt 1:2-16.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(u) "Nathan" Zech 12:12, 2Sam 5:14

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(v) "Jesse" Ruth 4:18,22

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(w) "Abraham" Gen 11:24-26

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(x) "Arphaxad" Gen 11:12 (y) "Lamech" Gen 5:25

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

No entry from BARNES for this verse.

(z) "the son of God" Gen 1:26, 2:7, Isa 64:8, 1Cor 15:45,47

[Annas and Caiaphas being high priests.] They do constitute two high priests at one time. True indeed: but they promoted a sagan, together with a high priest.

The 'sagan,' as to his degree, was the same to the high priest, as he that was next or second to the king.

They substituted, indeed, on the vespers of the day of expiation, another priest to the high priest, that should be in readiness to perform the office for the day, if any uncleanness should by chance have befallen the high priest.

"It is storied of Ben Elam of Zipporim, that when a gonorrhea had seized the high priest on the day of expiation, he went in and performed the office for that day. And another story of Simeon Ben Kamith, that as he was walking with the king on the vespers of the day of expiation, his garments were touched with another's spittle, so that Judah his brother went in and ministered. On that day the mother of them saw her two sons high priests."

It is not without reason controverted, whether the sagan were the same with this deputed priest: the Jews themselves dispute it. I would be on the negative part: for the sagan was not so much the vice high priest, as (if I may so speak) one set over the priests. The same with the ruler of the temple; of whom we have such frequent mention among the doctors: upon him chiefly did the care and charge of the service of the temple lie.

"The ruler of the temple saith to them, Go out and see if it be time to slay the sacrifice." "The ruler saith, Come and cast your lots who shall slay the sacrifice, who shall sprinkle the blood," &c. The Gloss is, the ruler is the 'sagan.'

He is commonly called the 'sagan' of the priests: which argues his supremacy among the priests, rather than his vicegerency under the high priest.

"When the high priest stands in the circle of those that are to comfort the mourners, the sagan and he that is anointed for the battle, stand on his right hand, and the head of the father's house, those that mourn, and all the people stand on his left hand."

Mark here the order of the sagan; he is below the high priest, but above the heads of all the courses.

2 Kings 23:4, the priests of the second order: Targum, the 'sagan' of the priests. And chapter 25:18, Zephaniah the second priest: Targum, Zephaniah 'the sagan' of the priests.

Caiaphas therefore was the high priest, and Annas the sagan or ruler of the temple; who, for his independent dignity, is called high priest as well as Caiaphas; and seems therefore to be named first, because he was the other's father-in-law.

There was a dissension between Hanan and the sons of the chief priests, &c. It was in a judicial cause, about a wife requiring her dower, &c. Where the scruple is, who should these chief priests be? whether the fathers and heads of the courses, or the high priest only and the sagan. It was a council of priests: which we have already spoken to at Matthew 26:3. Now the question is, whether by the "sons of the chief priests," be meant the sons of the fathers of courses, or the fathers of courses themselves, or the sons of the high priest and the sagan; where the high priest in that court was like the prince in the Sanhedrim, and the sagan the father of the Sanhedrim.

"Moses was made a sagan to Aaron. He put on his garments, and took them off [viz. on the day of his consecration]. And as he was his sagan in life, so he was in death too."

[Every valley shall be filled.] The Jews have a tradition, that some such thing was done by the cloud that led Israel in the wilderness. Instead of many instances, take the Targumist upon Canticles 2:6: "There was a cloud went before them, three days' journey, to take down the hills and raise the valleys: it slew all fiery serpents in the wilderness, and all scorpions; and found out for them a fit place to lodge in."

What the meaning of the prophet in this passage was, Christians well enough understand. The Jews apply it to levelling and making the ways plain for Israel's return out of captivity: for this was the main thing they expected from the Messiah, viz. to bring back the captivity of Israel.

"R. Chanan saith, Israel shall have no need of the doctrine of Messiah the King in time to come; for it is said, To him shall the Gentiles seek (Isa 11:10), but not Israel. If so, why then is Messiah to come? and what is he to do when he doth come? He shall gather together the captivity of Israel," &c.

[Of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.] We do not say the Baptist played with the sound of those two words banaia and abanaia: he does certainly, with great scorn, deride the vain confidence and glorying of that nation (amongst whom nothing was more ready and usual in their mouths than to boast that they were the children of Abraham), when he tells them, That they were such children of Abraham, that God could raise as good as they from those very stones.

[He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none.] It would be no sense to say, He that hath two coats, let him give to him that hath not two; but to him that hath none: for it was esteemed for religion by some to wear but one single coat or garment: of which, more elsewhere.

[Exact no more than that which is appointed you.] When the Rabbins saw that the publicans exacted too much, they rejected them, as not being fit to give their testimony in any case. Where the Gloss hath it, too much, that is more than that which is appointed them. And the father of R. Zeirah is commended in the same place, that he gently and honestly executed that trust: "He discharged the office of a publican for thirteen years: when the prince of the city came, and this publican saw the Rabbins, he was wont to say to them, Go, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, Isaiah 26:20." The Gloss is, "Lest the prince of the city should see you; and, taking notice what numbers you are, should increase his tax yearly."

[Neither accuse any falsely.] "The manner of sycophants is, first to load a person with reproaches, and whisper some secret, that the other hearing it may, by telling something like it, become obnoxious himself."

[With your wages.] A word used also by the Rabbins: The king distributeth wages to his legions. "The king is not admitted to the intercalation of the year, because of the 'opsonia'": that is, lest he should favour himself in laying out the years with respect to the soldiers' pay.

[Like a dove.] If you will believe the Jews, there sat a golden dove upon the top of Solomon's sceptre. "As Solomon sat in his throne, his sceptre was hung up behind him: at the top of which there was a dove, and a golden crown in the mouth of it."

[Being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph.] "A parable. There was a certain orphaness brought up by a certain epitropus, or foster-father, an honest good man. At length he would place her in marriage. A scribe is called to write a bill of her dower: saith he to the girl, 'What is thy name?' 'N.' saith she. 'What the name of thy father?' She held her peace. To whom her foster-father, 'Why dost thou not speak?' 'Because,' saith she, 'I know no other father but thee.' He that educateth the child is called a father, not he that begets it." Note that: Joseph, having been taught by the angel, and well satisfied in Mary, whom he had espoused, had owned Jesus for his son from his first birth; he had redeemed him as his first-born, had cherished him in his childhood, educated him in his youth: and therefore, no wonder if Joseph be called his father, and he was supposed to be his son.

II. Let us consider what might have been the judgment of the Sanhedrim in this case only from this story: "There came a certain woman to Jerusalem with a child, brought thither upon shoulders. She brought this child up; and he afterward had the carnal knowledge of her. They are brought before the Sanhedrim, and the Sanhedrim judged them to be stoned to death: not because he was undoubtedly her son, but because he had wholly adhered to her."

Now suppose we that the blessed Jesus had come to the Sanhedrim upon the decease of Joseph, requiring his stock and goods as his heir; had he not, in all equity, obtained them as his son? Not that he was, beyond all doubt and question, his son, but that he had adhered to him wholly from his cradle, was brought up by him as his son, and always so acknowledged.

III. The doctors speak of one Joseph a carpenter: "Abnimus Gardieus asked the Rabbins of blessed memory, whence the earth was first created: they answer him, 'There is no one skilled in these matters; but go thou to Joseph the architect.' He went, and found him standing upon the rafters."

It is equally obscure, who this Joseph the carpenter, and who this Abnimus was; although, as to this last, he is very frequently mentioned in those authors. They say, that "Abnimus and Balaam were two the greatest philosophers in the whole world." Only this we read of him, That there was a very great familiarity betwixt him and R. Meir.

[Which was the son of Heli.] I. There is neither need nor reason, nor indeed any foundation at all, for us to frame I know not what marriages, and the taking of brothers' wives, to remove a scruple in this place, wherein there is really no scruple in the least. For,

1. Joseph is not here called the son of Heli, but Jesus is so: for the word Jesus must be understood, and must be always added in the reader's mind to every race in this genealogy, after this manner: "Jesus (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, and so the son of Heli, and of Matthat, yea and, at length, the son of Adam, and the Son of God." For it was very little the business of the evangelist either to draw Joseph's pedigree from Adam, or, indeed, to shew that Adam was the son of God: which not only sounds something harshly, but in this place very enormously, I may almost add, blasphemously too. For when St. Luke, verse 22, had made a voice from heaven, declaring that Jesus was the Son of God, do we think the same evangelist would, in the same breath, pronounce Adam 'the son of God' too? So that this very thing teacheth us what the evangelist propounded to himself in the framing of this genealogy; which was to shew that this Jesus, who had newly received that great testimony from heaven, "This is my Son," was the very same that had been promised to Adam by the seed of the woman. And for this reason hath he drawn his pedigree on the mother's side, who was the daughter of Heli, and this too as high as Adam, to whom this Jesus was promised. In the close of the genealogy, he teacheth in what sense the former part of it should be taken; viz. that Jesus, not Joseph, should be called the son of Heli, and consequently, that the same Jesus, not Adam, should be called the Son of God. Indeed, in every link of this chain this still should be understood, "Jesus the son of Matthat, Jesus the son of Levi, Jesus the son of Melchi"; and so of the rest...

2. Suppose it could be granted that Joseph might be called the son of Heli (which yet ought not to be), yet would not this be any great solecism, that his son-in-law should become the husband of Mary, his own daughter. He was but his son by law, by the marriage of Joseph's mother, not by nature and generation.

There is a discourse of a certain person who in his sleep saw the punishment of the damned. Amongst the rest which I would render thus, but shall willingly stand corrected if under a mistake; He saw Mary the daughter of Heli amongst the shades. R. Lazar Ben Josah saith, that she hung by the glandules of her breasts. R. Josah Bar Haninah saith, that the great bar of hell's gate hung at her ear.

If this be the true rendering of the words, which I have reason to believe it is, then thus far, at least, it agrees with our evangelist, that Mary was the daughter of Heli: and questionless all the rest is added in reproach of the blessed Virgin, the mother of our Lord: whom they often vilify elsewhere under the name of Sardah.

Please see Genealogies of the Bible: A Neglected Subject (111k) at the Arthur Custance Doorway Papers Library site for more info.]

[The son of Rhesa, the son of Zorobabel, the son of Salathiel, the son of Neri.] I. That Pedaiah, the father of Zorobabel, 1 Chronicles 3:19, is omitted here, is agreeable with Ezra 5:2; Haggai 1:1, &c.; but why it should be omitted, either here or there, is not so easy to guess.

II. As to the variation of the names both here and 1 Chronicles 3, this is not unworthy our observation: that Zorobabel and his sons were carried out of Babylon into Judea; and, possibly, they might change their names when they changed the place of their dwelling. It was not very safe for him to be known commonly in Babylon by the name of Zorobabel, when the import of that name was the winnowing of Babel; so that he was there more generally called Sheshbazzar. But he might securely resume the name in Judea, when Cyrus and Darius had now fanned and sifted Babylon. So his two sons, Meshullam and Hananiah, could not properly be called, one of them Abiud, the glory of my father, and the other Rhesa, a prince, while they were in Babylon; but in Judea they were names fit and suitable enough.

III. Of the variation of names here, and in Matthew 1, I have already spoken in that place: to wit, that Neri was indeed the father of Salathiel; though St. Matthew saith Jechoniah (who died childless, Jer 22:30) begat him: not that he was his son by nature, but was his heir in succession.

[The son of Cainan.] I will not launch widely out into a controversy that hath been sufficiently bandied already. I shall despatch, as briefly as I may, what may seem most satisfactory in this matter:

I. There is no doubt, and indeed there are none but will grant that St. Luke hath herein followed the Greek version. This, in Genesis 11:12,13, relates it in this manner: "Arphaxad lived a hundred and five and thirty years, and begat Cainan; and Cainan lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat Salah: and Cainan lived after he had begot Salah three hundred and thirty years."

Consulting Theophilus about this matter, I cannot but observe of this author, that he partly follows the Greek version, in adding to Arphaxad a hundred years, and partly not, when he omits Cainan: for so he; Arphaxad, when he was a hundred and thirty-five years of age, begat Salah. Nor can I but wonder at him that translates him, that he should of his own head insert, "Arphaxad was a hundred and thirty-five years old, and begat a son named Cainan. Cainan was a hundred and thirty years old, and begat Salah": when there is not one syllable of Cainan in Theophilus. A very faithful interpreter indeed!

1. I cannot be persuaded by any arguments that this passage concerning Cainan was in Moses' text, or indeed in any Hebrew copies which the Seventy used; but that it was certainly added by the interpreters themselves, partly because no reason can be given how it should ever come to be left out of the Hebrew text, and partly because there may be a probable reason given why it should be added in the Greek; especially when nothing was more usual with them than to add of their own, according to their own will and pleasure.

I might, perhaps, acknowledge this one slip, and be apt to believe that Cainan had once a place in the original, but, by I know not what fate or misfortune, left now out; but that I find a hundred such kind of additions in the Greek version, which the Hebrew text will by no means own, nor any probable reason given to bear with it. Let us take our instances only from proper names, because our business at present is with a proper name.

Genesis 10:2: Elisa is added among the sons of Japhet: and, verse 22, another Cainan among the sons of Shem.

Genesis 46:20: Five grandchildren added to the sons of Joseph; Malachi 4:5, the Tishbite.

Exodus 1:11: the city On, is added to Pithom and Raamses.

2 Samuel 20:18: the city Dan is added to Abel. Not to mention several other names of places in the Book of Joshua.

Now can I believe that these names ever were in the Hebrew copy, since some of them are put there without any reason, some of the against all reason (particularly Dan being joined with Abel, and the grandchildren of Joseph), and all of them with no foundation at all?

II. I question not but the interpreters, whoever they were, engaged themselves in this undertaking with something of a partial mind; and as they made no great conscience of imposing upon the Gentiles, so they made it their religion to favour their own side. And according to this ill temperament and disposition of mind, so did they manage their version; either adding or curtailing at pleasure, blindly, lazily, and audaciously enough: sometimes giving a very foreign sense, sometimes a contrary, oftentimes none: and this frequently to patronise their own traditions, or to avoid some offence they think might be in the original, or for the credit and safety of their own nation. The tokens of all which it would not be difficult to instance in very great numbers, would I apply myself to it, but it is the last only that is my business at this time.

III. It is a known story of the thirteen places which the Talmudists tell us were altered by the LXXII elders when they wrote out the law (I would suppose in Hebrew) for Ptolemy. They are reckoned up, and we have the mention of them sprinkled up and down; as also, where it is intimated as if eighteen places had been altered.

Now if we will consult the Glossers upon those places, they will tell us that these alterations were made, some of them, lest the sacred text should be cavilled at; others that the honour and peace of the nation might be secured. It is easy, therefore, to imagine that the same things were done by those that turned the whole Bible. The thing itself speaks it.

Let us add, for example's sake, those five souls which they add to the family of Jacob; numbering up five grandchildren of Joseph, who, as yet, were not in being,--nay, seven, according to their account, Genesis 46:27. Children that were born to Joseph in the land of Egypt, even nine souls.

Now, which copy do we think it most reasonable to believe, the Greek or the Hebrew? and as to the question, whether these five added in the Greek were anciently in Moses' text, but either since lost by the carelessness of the transcribers or rased out by the bold hand of the Jews, let reason and the nature of the thing judge. For if Machir, Gilead, Shuthelah, Tahan, and Eran, were with Joseph when Jacob with his family went down into Egypt, (and if they were not, why are they numbered amongst those that went down?) then must Manasseh at the age of nine years, or ten at most, be a grandfather; and Ephraim at eight or nine. Can I believe that Moses would relate such things as these? I rather wonder with what kind of forehead the interpreters could impose such incredible stories upon the Gentiles, as if it were possible they should be believed.

IV. It is plain enough to any one that diligently considers the Greek version throughout, that it was composed by different hands, who greatly varied from one another, both in style and wit. So that this book was more learnedly rendered than that, the Greek reading more elegant in this book than in that, and the version in this book comes nearer the Hebrew than in that; and yet in the whole there is something of the Jewish craft, favouring and patronising the affairs of that nation. There is something of this nature in the matters now in hand, the addition of Cainan, and the five souls to the seventy that went down into Egypt.

How mighty the Jewish nation valued themselves beyond all the rest of mankind, esteeming those seventy souls that went down with Jacob into Egypt beyond the seventy nations of the world; he that is so great a stranger in the Jewish affairs and writings, that he is yet to learn, let him take these few instances; for it would be needless to add more:

"Seventy souls went down with Jacob into Egypt, that they might restore the seventy families dispersed by the confusion of tongues. For those seventy souls were equal to all the families of the whole world. And he that would be ruling over them, is as if he would usurp a tyranny over the whole world."

"How good is thy love towards me, O thou congregation of Israel! It is more than that of the seventy nations."

"The holy blessed God created seventy nations; but he found no pleasure in any of them, save Israel only."

"Saith Abraham to God, 'Didst thou not raise up seventy nations unto Noah?' God saith unto him, 'I will raise up that nation unto thee of whom it is written, How great a nation is it!'" The Gloss is: "That peculiar people, excelling all the seventy nations, that holy nation, as the holy language excels all the seventy languages."

There are numberless passages of that kind. Now when this arrogant doctrine and vainglorying, if familiarly known amongst the Gentiles, could not but stir up a great deal of hatred, and consequently danger to the Jews, I should rather think the interpreters might make such additions as these, through the caution and cunning of avoiding the danger they apprehend, than that ever they were originally in the text of Moses. To wit, by adding another Cainan, and five souls to those seventy in Jacob's retinue, they took care that the Gentiles should not, in the Greek Bibles, find exactly the seventy nations in Genesis 10, but seventy-two (or seventy-three if we reckon Elisa also;) as also not seventy, but seventy-five souls that went down into Egypt.

It was the same kind of craft they used in that version, Deuteronomy 32:8; whence that comparison between the seventy souls and the seventy nations took its rise. Moses hath it thus; "When the Most High divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel." But they render it thus; He set the bounds of the nations, according to the number of the angels of God. A sense indeed most foreign from that of Moses, yet which served to obscure his meaning, so far as might avoid any danger that might arise from the knowledge of it. Making the passage itself so unintelligible, that it needs an Oedipus to unriddle it; unless they should allude to the Jewish tradition (which I do a little suspect) concerning the seventy angels, set over the seventy nations of the world.

V. But now if this version be so uncertain, and differs so much from the original, how comes it to pass that the evangelists and apostles should follow it so exactly, and that even in some places where it does so widely differ from the Hebrew fountain?

Ans. I. It pleased God to allot the censers of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram to sacred use, because they were so ordained and designed by the first owners: so doth it please the Holy Ghost to determine that version to his own use, being so primarily ordained by the first authors. The minds, indeed, of the interpreters were not perhaps very sincere in the version they made, as who designed the defence and support of some odd things: so neither were the hearts of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram sincere at all, but very perverse in offering their incense: but so long as their incense had been dedicated to sacred use, it pleased God to make their censers holy. So the Greek version designed for sacred use, as designed for the Holy Bible, so it was keept and made use of by the Holy Ghost.

II. Whereas the New Testament was to be wrote in Greek, and come into the hands chiefly of the Gentiles, it was most agreeable, I may say most necessary for them, to follow the Greek copies, as being what the Gentiles were only capable of consulting; that so they, examining the histories and quotations that were brought out of the Old Testament, might find them agreeing with, and not contradicting them. For instance; they, consulting their Greek Bibles for the names from David backward to Adam, there find "Cainan, the son of Arphaxad." If St. Luke should not also have inserted it, how readily they might have called his veracity in question, as to the other part of the genealogy, which had been extracted out of tables and registers not so familiarly known!

III. If there be any credit to be given to that story of the Greek version, which we meet with in Aristeas and Josephus, then we may also believe that passage in it which we may find in Aristeas. "When the volumes of the law had been read through, the priests, and interpreters, and elders, and governors of the city, and all the princes of the people standing by, said 'Forasmuch as this interpretation is rightly, religiously, and in every thing so very accurately finished, it is fit that all things should continue as they are, and no alteration should be made.' When all had by acclamations given their approbation to these things, Demetrius commanded that, according to their custom, they should imprecate curses upon any that should, by addition, or alteration, or diminution, ever make any change in it. This they did well in, that all things might be kept entire and inviolate for ever."

If this passage be true, it might be no light matter to the Jew, when quoting any thing in Greek out of the Old Testament, to depart in the least from the Greek version; and indeed it is something a wonder, that after this they should ever dare to undertake any other. But supposing there were any credit to be had to this passage, were the sacred penmen any way concerned in these curses and imprecations? Who saith they were? But, however, who will not say that this was enough for them to stop the mouths of the cavilling Jews, that they, following the Greek version, had often departed from the truth of the original to avoid that anathema; at least, if there were any truth in it.

Object. But the clause that is before us (to omit many others) is absolutely false: for there was neither any Cainan the son of Arphaxad; nor was Jesus the son of any Cainan that was born after the flood.

Ans. I. There could be nothing more false as to the thing itself than that of the apostle, when he calleth the preaching of the gospel foolishness, 1 Corinthians 1:21; and yet, according to the common conceptions of foolish men, nothing more true. So neither was this true in itself that is asserted here; but only so in the opinion of those for whose sake the evangelist writes. Nor yet is it the design of the Holy Ghost to indulge them in any thing that was not true; but only would not lay a stumblingblock at present before them: "I am made all things to all men, that I might gain some."

II. There is some parallel with this of St. Luke and that in the Old Testament, 1 Chronicles 1:36: "The sons of Eliphaz, Teman, and Omar, and Zephi, and Gatam, and Timnah, and Amalek." Where it is equally false, that Timnah was the son of Eliphaz, as it is that Cainan was the son of Arphaxad. But far, far be it from me to say, that the Holy Ghost was either deceived himself, or would deceive others. Timnah was not a man, but a woman; not the son of Eliphaz, but his concubine; not Amalek's brother, but his mother, Genesis 36:12. Only the Holy Ghost teacheth us by this shortness of speech, to recur to the original story from whence these things are taken, and there consult the determinate explication of the whole matter: which is frequently done by the same Holy Spirit, speaking very briefly in stories well known before.

The Gentiles have no reason to cavil with the evangelist in this mater; for he agrees well enough with their Bibles. And if the Jews, or we ourselves, should find fault, he may defend himself from the common usage of the Holy Ghost, in whom it is no rare and unusual thing, in the recital of stories and passages well enough known before, to vary from the original and yet without any design of deceiving, or suspicion of being himself deceived; but, according to that majesty and authority that belongs to him, dictating and referring the reader to the primitive story, from whence he may settle and determine the state of the matter, and inquire into the reasons of the variation. St. Stephen imitates this very custom, while he is speaking about the burial of the patriarchs, Acts 7:15,16; being well enough understood by his Jewish auditory, though giving but short hints in a story so well known.

III. It is one thing to dictate from himself, and another thing to quote what is dictated from others, as our evangelist in this place doth. And since he did, without all question, write in behalf of the Gentiles, being the companion of him who was the great apostle of the Gentiles, what should hinder his alleging according to what had been dictated in their Bibles?

When the apostle names the magicians of Egypt, Jannes and Jambres, 2 Timothy 3:9, he doth not deliver it for a certain thing, or upon his credit assure them that these were their very names, but allegeth only what had been delivered by others, what had been the common tradition amongst them, well enough known to Timothy, a thing about which neither he nor any other would start any controversy.

So when the apostle Jude speaks of "Michael contending with the devil about the body of Moses," he doth not deliver it for a certain and authentic thing; and yet is not to be charged with any falsehood, because he doth not dictate of his own, but only appeals to something that had been told by others, using an argument with the Jews fetched from their own books and traditions.

IV. As it is very proper and even necessary towards the understanding some sentences and schemes of speech in the New Testament, to inquire in what manner they were understood by those that heard them from the mouth of him that spoke them, or those to whom they were written; so let us make a little search here as to the matter now in hand. When this Gospel first appeared in public amongst the Jews and Gentiles, the Gentiles could not complain that the evangelist had followed their copies: and if the Jews found fault, they had wherewithal to answer and satisfy themselves. And that particularly as to this name of 'Cainan' being inserted, as also the five souls being added to the retinue of Jacob; the learned amongst them knew from whence he had it; for what reason this addition had been made in the Greek version, and that St. Luke had faithfully transcribed it thence: so that if there were any fault, let them lay the blame upon the first authors, and not upon the transcriber.

V. To conclude: Before the bible had been translated for Ptolemy (as it is supposed) into the Greek tongue, there were an infinite number of copies in the Hebrew in Palestine, Babylon, Egypt, even everywhere, in every synagogue: and it is a marvellous thing, that in all antiquity there should not be the least hint or mention of so much as one Hebrew copy amongst all these that agrees with the Greek version. We have various editions of that version which they call the Septuagint, and those pretty much disagreeing among themselves: but who hath ever heard or seen one Hebrew copy that hath in every thing agreed with any one of them? The interpreters have still abounded in their own sense, not very strictly obliging themselves to the Hebrew text.

The two foregoing chapters give us an account of the birth of our Saviour Christ, and of John the Baptist. The evangelist now leaving the history of our blessed Saviour for eighteen years, namely till he was thirty years old, (the Holy Ghost having thought fit to conceal that part of our Saviour's private life from our knowledge,) he begins this chapter with a relation of the Baptist's ministry, acquainting us with the time when, and the place where, and the doctrine which, the Baptist taught.

Observe 1. The time described when St. John began his public ministry, namely, when Tiberius was emperor, and Annas and Caiaphas high priests.

Observe 2. In the fifteenth year of Tiberius, when the Jews were entirely under the power of the Romans, who set four governors over them, called Tetrarchs, so named from their ruling over a fourth part of the kingdom.

From hence the Jews might have observed, had not prejudice blinded their eyes, that the sceptre being thus departed from Judah, according to Jacob's prophecy, Gen 49:10 Shiloh, or the Messiah was now come.

Again, the time when St. John began his ministry was when Annas and Caiaphas were high priests. Under the law there were three sorts of ministers that attended the service of the temple, namely, priests, Levites, and Nethinims; over these the high priest was chief, who by God's command was to be the first-born of Aaron's family.

But how came two high priests here, seeing God never appointed but one at a time?

In answer to this, say some, the power and covetousness of the Romans put in high priests at pleasure to officiate for gain.

Say others, the high priest was allowed his assistant or deputy who in case of his pollution and sickness, did officiate in his place.

But that which we may profitably observe from hence, is this, the exactness and faithfulness of this historian, St. Luke, in relating the circumstances of our Saviour's nativity, and the Baptist's ministry. That the truth might evidently appear, he is exact in recording the time.

Observe here, 1. The place where the Baptist exercised his ministry; in the wilderness of Judea, where were some cities and villages, though thinly inhabited.

Note here, the great humility of the Baptisit in preaching in an obscure place, and to a small handful of people. Jerusalem, some might think, was a fitter place, for so celebrated a preacher; but God had called him to preach in the wilderness, and there he opens his commission.

Learn, that the most eminent of God's ministers must be content to execute their office, and exercise their ministry, where God calls them, be the place never so mean and obscure, and the people never so rude and barbarous. In the place where God by his providence fixes us, we must abide, till he that called us thither, removes us thence.

And this was the Baptist's case here. He leaves the wilderness at God's command, and comes to more inhabited places: He came into the country about Jordan, preaching. It is not only lawful, but a necessary duty, for the ministers of God to remove from one place and people to another, provided their call be clear, their way plain, the good of souls their motive, and the glory of God their end.

Observe, 2. The doctrine which the Baptist preached: namely, the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins: that is, the doctrine of baptism, which sealeth remission of sins to the party baptized.

Learn hence, that the preaching of the doctrine of repentance is the indispensable duty of every gospel minister. John the Baptist preached it, our Saviour preached it, his apostles preached it: They went out every where preaching that men should repent.

Till we are in a state of sinless perfection, the doctrine of repentance must be preached unto us, and practiced by us.

Observe, 3. The motive and inducement which prompted the Baptist to this duty; which was, to fulfil the prophecies that went before of him: As it is written in the book of the prophecies, the voice of one crying in the wilderness, prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight: every valley shall be filled.

Where note, 1. The title given to John the Baptist: a Voice, a crying voice. This implies both his vehemency and earnestness, and also his freedom and boldness, in delivering his message: when a minister's own heart is warmly affected with what he preaches, he may hope to affect the hearts of others.

Note, 2. The sum and substance of what he cried: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, that is, make yourselves ready to receive the Messiah, to embrace and entertain his doctrine. As loyal subjects, when their prince is coming near their city, remove everything out of the way that may hinder his progress; all annoyances and all impediments; in like manner the preparatory work of the gospel upon the hearts of sinners, lies in pulling down mountains, and filling up vallies; that is, in humbling the proud hearts of sinners, puffed up, as the Pharisees were, with a conceit of their own righteousness, who would be their own saviours, and not beholden to Christ, and to his free grace for salvation.

Learn hence, 1. That man's heart is naturally very unfit to receive and entertain the Lord Jesus Christ, and his holy doctrine; we have naturally no fitness, no inclination, nor disposition, to believe in him, or submit unto him.

2. That if ever we design to entertain Christ in our hearts, we must first prepare and make ready our hearts for the receiving and embracing of him. For though the preparation of the heart be from the Lord, yet he requires the exercise of our faculties, and the use of our endeavours; he prepares our hearts, by enabling us to prepare our own hearts, by getting a sight of the evil of sin, and a sense of our misery without Christ; and hungering desire after him, and a lively faith in him.

God does not work upon man, as masons work upon a stone; what he doth in us and for us, he doth it by us; he works by setting us to work; therefore says the holy Baptist, prepare ye the way of the Lord. The act of endeavour is ours, the aid and assistance is God's.

Observe lastly, the encouragement which the Baptist gives to persons to prepare the way of the Lord: For, says he, all flesh shall see the salvation of God; that is, now is the time that all persons, Jews and Gentiles, may see the Author of salvation, whom God has promised to the world; and may by faith be made partakers of that salvation which the Messiah shall purchase for them, and in his gospel tender to them. The great end of Christ's coming into the world, was to purchase salvation for all flesh willing to be saved by him.

Matt 3:7,8 says, that the Baptist spake these words to the Pharisees and Sadducees, whom he gives, first, a quick and cutting compellation, O generation of vipers: then a sharp and severe reprehension, Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? And, last of all, a seasonable exhortation, Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance.

As if he had said, "O ye Pharisees, and worst of men, I perceive by your coming hither, somebody has alarmed you with the notice of that dreadful vengeance that is coming upon this generation; to prevent which you pretend repentance of your sins: but let me see by your actions that you are not only demure, but sincere penitents; let me see the fruits of your repentence in the daily course of your conversation."

Learn here, 1. That the condition of proud Pharisees, pretending and false-hearted hypocrites, though very dangerous, yet is not hopeless and desperate; and their salvation, though the worst of men, must not be despaired of. St. John reproves them for their sins, but yet encourages their repentance.

2. That sincere repentance is not a barren thing, but does constantly bring forth fruits answerable to its nature: as faith without works, so repentance without fruits, is dead also. The genuine fruits of repentance are humility of heart and holiness of life.

Observe, lastly, the cautionary direction which he gives to these hypocrites not to rest in their external privileges: Think not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father; glory not in this, that you are the only visible church that God has upon earth, for God can, out of the obdurate Gentile world, raise up a people to himself, take them into covenant with himself, and cast you out.

Learn hence, 1. That men are exceeding apt to boast of and glory in their external privileges, and to place religion most in those things wherein God places it least. How did the Jews glory in their fleshly descent from Abraham, as if God was tied to Abraham's line, and could have no people if he had not them for his people?

2. That it is a vain thing to expect exemption from the judgments of God, because of outward privileges enjoyed by us. If we be not born again of the Spirit, it will avail us nothing to be born of Abraham's flesh: if Abraham's faith be not found in our hearts, it will be of no advantage to us that Abraham's blood is running in our veins: Think not to say, we have Abraham to our father.

St. John having preached the doctrine of repentance in the foregoing verses, he backs it with a powerful argument in this verse, drawn from the certainty and severity of that judgment which should come upon them, if they continued their sins: Now is the axe laid to the root of the tree.

Learn, 1. That it is not unsuitable for gospel preachers to press repentance and holiness of life upon their hearers, from arguments of terror. John does it here, and Christ elsewhere.

2. That those whose hearts are not pierced with the sword of God's word, shall certainly be cut down and destroyed by the axe of his judgments.

Observe farther, that forasmuch as the sin here specified is a sin of omission, every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit, as well as that which bringeth forth evil fruit, is hewn down, and cast into the fire. We learn that sins of omission are certainly damning as well as sins of commission. The neglects of duty are as dangerous and damnable as the acts of sin. Such trees as stand in God's orchard, the church, and bring forth no good fruit, are marked out as fuel for the devil's fire.

The Baptist having pressed his hearers to bring forth fruits meet for repentance, here they enquire of him what fruits they should bring forth? He tells first the fruits of charity and mercy: He that hath two coats, let him give to him that hath none. This is not to be understood strictly, as if the command required us to give the clothes off our back to every one that wanted them. But it directs those that have the things of this life in abundance, to distribute and communicate to those that are in want.

Learn hence, that an extensive liberality, and a diffusive charity in distributing such things as we can well spare towards the relief of others' necessities, is an excellent fruit of repentance, and a good proof and evidence of the truth and sincerity of it. Let him that hath two coats impart to him that hath none.

Note, that the Baptist here doth not make it unlawful for a man to have two coats, but means only, that he that has one coat which his brother wants, and he at present doth not, should rather give it him, than suffer him to be in want of it.

Teaching us, that it is not lawful to abound in those things which our brother wants, when we have sufficient both to relieve his and our necessities.

The publicans were persons employed by the Romans to gather the tax of tribute among the Jews, who were now tributaries to the Romans, and paid them a public revenue. These publicans were great oppressors, exacting more than was the emperor's due. Therefore we find the publicans and sinners so often joined together in the gospel. These men enquiring what fruits of repentance they should bring forth, St. John directs them to acts of justice: Exact not.

Where note, 1. That acts of justice and righteousness, as well as of charity and mercy, are real fruits of sincere repentance.

Observe, 2. John doth not condemn the office, but cautions the officer. If magistrates may impose taxes, they may doubtless appoint officers to collect those taxes. Christian charity then must always teach us to distinguish betwixt the calling and the crime. We must not censure any office, either in church or state, for the sake of their mal-administration who are employed in that office.

Observe here, what a general resort there was of all sorts of persons to John's ministry; Pharisees, Sadducees, publicans, soldiers; these last here enquire of him what they should do to gain acceptance with God? He answers, Do no violence, defraud no man of his own by false accusation, but be content with the allowance assigned you for your maintenance.

Where it is, 1. Strongly supposed that soldiers are insolent oppressors, making no conscience or injustice, false accusation, and violent oppression.

Yet, 2. The office and employment of a soldier is not condemned, but regulated; he does not bid them cast away their arms, abandon war, appear no more as military men in the field; but manage their employment inoffensively.

Whence we learn, that in some cases, and under some circumstances, for Christians to make war is both lawful and necessary. To make a war lawful, there is required a lawful authority, a righteous cause, an honourable aim and intention, and a just and righteous manner of prosecution, without vanity and ostentation, without cruelty and oppression. Courage and compassion on the one hand, and cowardice and cruelty on the other hand, do frequently accompany one another.

Observe here, 1. How the extraordinariness of John the Baptist's person, the earnestness of his preaching, the acceptableness of his doctrine, and the exemplariness of his conversation, drew all persons to an admiration of him; insomuch that they began to think within themselves, whether here were not the Messiah himself. He plainly tells them he was not, but only his servant, his harbinger and forerunner.

Observe 2. The high opinion which John had of Christ, He is mightier than I; that is, a person of greater authority, dignity, and excellency, than myself.

From whence may be gathered, that though Christ was man, he was more than man, even very God, equal with the Father: for John himself was the greatest of them that were born of women. Matt 11:11 Yet, says John, Christ is mightier than I. How so? In regard of the dignity of his person, being both God and man? He that cometh after me is mightier than I.

Observe, 3. The humble and low estimation that the holy Baptist had of himself: His shoe-latchet I am not worthy to unloose: a proverbial speech, implying that he was unworthy to do the lowest offices, and meanest services for Christ.

Lord, how well does humility of mind, an humble apprehension, and a low opinion of themselves, become the messengers and ministers of Christ! John was a man of eminent abilities, yet of exemplary humility; he thought himself unworthy to unloose Christ's shoe.

Observe, 4. John does not only declare the dignity of Christ's person, but the excellency of his office; He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. As if he had said, "I only wash the body with water, but Christ cleanses the soul by the operation of his Holy Spirit, which is as fire in the effects of it, purifying the hearts of his people from sin, and consuming their lusts and corruptions; yet at the same time having fiery indignation, and flaming judgments, to destroy and burn up impenitent sinners like dry stubble."

Observable it is in scripture, that Christ is represented by one and the same metaphor of fire, in a way of comfort to his children, and in a way of terror to his enemies; he is fire unto both. He sits in the hearts of his people as a refiner's fire; he is amongst his enemies as a consuming fire: a fire for his church to take comfort in, a fire for his enemies to perish by.

Observe, lastly, how the holy Baptist compares our Saviour to an husbandman, and the Jewish church to a barn floor; the office of an husbandman is to thresh, fan, and winnow, his corn, separating it from the chaff, preserving the one, and consuming the other.

Observe, 1. That the church is Christ's floor.

2. That this floor Christ will purge, and that thoroughly.

3. That the word of Christ is the fan in his hand, by and with which he will thoroughly purge his floor.

The church is compared to a floor, upon the account of that mixture which is in the church. In a floor there is straw as well as grain, chaff as well as corn, tares as well as wheat, cockle and darnel as well as good seed. Thus in the church there has been, there is, and ever will be, a mixture of good and bad, saints and sinners, hypocrites and sincere Christians: but this floor Christ will purge; purge it, but not break it up; purge out its corruptions, but not destroy its essence and existence: and the fan in Christ's hand, with which he will purge his floor, is his holy word, accompanied with the wing of discipline. The fan detects and discovers the chaff, and the wing dissipates and scatters it; and by the help of both the floor is purged: His fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge.

Observe here, 1. In John the Baptist the character of a zealous and faithful minister of the gospel: he is one that deals plainly, and durst tell the greatest persons of their faults. Herod, though a king, is reproved by him for his adultery and incest. The crown and sceptre of Herod could not daunt the faithful messenger of God. There ought to meet in the ministers of Christ both courage, and impartiality; courage in fearing no faces, and impartiality in sparing no sins.

Observe, 2. Who it was that imprisoned and beheaded the holy Baptist: Herod a king. How sad is it when kings, who should be nursing-fathers to the church, do prove the bloody butchers of the prophets of God. Many of the severest persecutions which the ministers of God have fallen under, have been occasioned by their telling great men of their crimes. Men in power are impatient of reproof, and imagine that their authority gives them a license to transgress.

Observe, 3. The heinous aggravations of this sin in Herod: He added this to all his other sins, that he shut up John in prison. This evidenced him incorrigible and irreclaimable. John had preached before Herod, and Herod had heard John with some delight; but he had a darling lust, which occasioned his destruction.

Learn hence, that hypocrites may hear the word with some pleasure, and do many things with some delight, but they have always some beloved lust that must be spared; they will neither part with it, nor bear reproof for it. Herod sticks not to cut off that head, whose tongue was so bold as to reprove him for his lusts.

Observe, 1. The great condescension of Christ in seeking and submitting to the baptism of John. Christ, though John's Lord and Master, yet yields to be baptized of his servant and messenger.

Observe, 2. The reasons why Christ would be baptized.

1. That by this rite he might enter himself into the society of Christians, as he had before by circumcision entered into the society of the Jews.

2. That he might by his own baptism sanctify the ordinance of baptism unto us.

3. That thereby he might fulfil the righteousness of the ceremonial law, which required the washing of the priests in water, before they entered upon their office, as appears, Exod 29:4

Observe, 3. How the duty of prayer accompanieth the ordinance of baptism: Jesus being baptized, and praying. Teaching us by his example to sanctify every ordinance and every action, with prayer.

Christ, when he was baptized, he prayed. When he was tempted, he prayed. When he brake bread, he prayed. When he wrought miracles, he prayed. In his agony in the garden, he prayed. When he suffered on the cross, he prayed.

What was the subject-matter of our Lord's prayer at this time is not expressed; but by what followed, namely, the heavens opening and the Holy Ghost descending, it is probably conjectured, that he prayed for some testimony to be given from heaven concerning himself, for it immediately follows.

Observe here, the solemn investing of Christ into his office, as Mediator, is attended with a threefold miracle; namely, the opening of the heavens, the descending of the Holy Ghost, and God the Father's voice concerning the son.

The heavens were opened; to show, that heaven, which was closed and shut against us for our sins, is now opened to us, by Christ's undertaking for us.

Next, The Holy Ghost descends like a dove upon our Saviour. Here we have a proof and evidence of the blessed Trinity; the Father speaks from heaven, the Son comes out of the water, and the Holy Ghost descends after the manner of a dove, hovering and overshadowing him. But why did the Holy Ghost now descend upon Christ?

First, for the designation of his person, to show that he was the person set apart for the work and office of a mediator.

Secondly, for the unction and sanctification of his person for the performance of that office. Now was he anointed to be the king, priest, and prophet of his church.

Lastly, we have here the voice of God the Father, pronouncing.

1. The nearness of Christ's relation: This is my Son.

2. The endearedness of his person: This is my beloved Son.

3. The fruit and benefit of this near relation unto us: In thee I am well pleased.

Learn hence, 1. That there is no possibility for any person to please God out of Christ; neither our persons nor our performances can find acceptance with God, but only in and through him, and for his sake.

2. That the Lord Jesus Christ is the ground and cause of all that love and good will which God the Father showeth to the sons of men.

In Christ, God is well pleased with us as a reconciled Father; out of him a consuming fire; Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I am well pleased.

At thirty years of age, the priests under the law entered upon their public office; accordingly Christ stays the full time prescribed by the law, before he undertakes his public ministry, and he gives the reason for it. That he might fulfil all righteousness. Matt 3:15 That is, the righteousness of the ceremonial law, which required persons to be of that age, before they entered upon that office; and also enjoined them to be baptized or washed in water, when they undertook their office. See Exod 29:4

Learn hence, that whatever the law required in order to perfect righteousness, that Christ fulfilled in most absolute perfection, both in his own person, and also in the name of all believers.

Observe farther, the title given to Joseph here: he is called the supposed father of Christ. Joseph was not his natural father, though so supposed by the Jews; but he was his legal father, being married to the Virgin when our Saviour was born; and he was his nursing father, that took care of him, and provided for him, though Christ sometimes showed both his parents, that, if he pleased, he could live without any dependence upon their care. See Luke 2:49

We find the genealogy of our blessed Saviour recorded by two evangelists, St. Matthew and St. Luke. His pedigree is set forth by St. Matthew from his father Joseph, by St. Luke from his mother Mary; the design of both is to prove him lineally descended from Abraham and David, and consequently the true and promised Messiah.

St. Matthew, intending his history primarily for the Jews, proves him to be the son of Abraham and David, for their comfort. St. Luke, designing the information and comfort of the Gentiles, derives our Lord's pedigree from Adam, the common parent of mankind; to assure the Gentiles of their possibility of an interest in Christ, they being the sons of Adam. Neither of these evangelists are strict and accurate in enumerating every individual person; which should teach us not to be over-curious in scanning the parts of this genealogy, much less captiously to object against it, because of some seeming contradictions to it; for if the evangelists were not nice and critical in composing this genealogy, why should we be so in examining of it? Let us rather attend to the design of the Holy Ghost in writing of it, which was twofold.

1. For the honour of our Saviour as man, showing who were his noble and royal progenitors according to the flesh.

2. For the confirmation of our faith, touching the reality of our Saviour's incarnation. The scripture making mention of all his progenitors from the first man Adam, to his reputed father Joseph, we cannot reasonably doubt either of the truth of his human nature, or of the certainty of his being the promised Messiah.

Hence we may learn that the wisdom of God has taken all necessary care, and used all needful means, for satisfying the minds of all unprejudiced persons, touching the reality of Christ's human nature, and the certainty of his being the promised Messiah; for both these ends is our Saviour's genealogy, descent, and pedigree, recorded in holy scripture.