The accompanying map presents the supposed sites in the city of Jerusalem. They are, however, largely hypothetical. The city is built on two hills, environed on either side by valleys, that of the Hinnom and that of the Kedron; a third valley, that of the Cheesemongers, penetrates the heart of the city, dividing it into two parts. This valley is now largely filled up with debris, produced by the frequent sieges to which the city has been subject. It is reasonably certain that the ancient Temple stood where the Mosque of Omar now stands, i. e., on the eastern hill, known in Scripture as Mount Moriah, and the palace of Herod on the opposite hill, Mount Zion. Across the valley of Jehoshaphat, over against Jerusalem, is the Mount of Olives. Somewhere in that valley, or on the western slope of that mount, was the garden of Gethsemane. Over the mountain, about two miles away, was Bethany, the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus. Christ, with his disciples, coming from Jericho, by the road marked on this map, entered Jerusalem in triumph on Saturday (ch. 1 : 6-11) by one of the eastern gates; every night he retreated from the city to Bethany, or perhaps to solitude on the Mount of Olives; and from this mountain he overlooked the city with his disciples at the time of the prophecy contained in Matt., ch. 24 (see ver. 3). The other localities of the Passion Week are quite uncertain. I believe, however, that the trial before the Sanhedrim took place in or adjoining the Temple (Luke 22: 66, note), and the trial before Pilate at the Tower of Antonia (John 18: 28, note). The place of execution and burial is unknown; it is hardly possible that it can be the traditional site, which is indicated on this map. See Matt. 27: 33, note. CHAPTER XXVI. AND it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, 2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified. 3 Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, 4 And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. 5 But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people. q Mark 14: 1, etc.; Luke 22: 1, etc.; John 13: 1, etc....r Psalm 2: 2. the slave in a Christian covenant and fellowship, to be literally ever-during, may be embodied. Of the other 66 times in which the word occurs in the N. T., it is 51 times used in describing the blessedness of the saints, 3 times is applied to the Gospel, 3 times to God or his attributes, 3 times (2 Cor. 4: 18; 2 Thess. 2:16; Heb. 6:2), where the word everlasting unquestionably correctly represents it, and 6 times it is applied to future punishment. Thus it will be seen that the ordinary usage of the N. T. justifies the translation here, everlasting. (4.) In all Scripture usage, I think without exception, the word indicates a period of time as long as the existence of the object spoken of. The Jewish nation, as long as it preserved its organic existence, possessed the Holy Land, and the priesthood service (Gen. 17:8; Lev. 16:34). So the Gospel was a mystery from the beginning of the world's existence (2 Tim. 1:9). If this be true, then whenever this word is predicated of the soul's condition it signifies one, whether of life or of death, of blessedness or of punishment, as lasting as the soul. (5.) There is nothing in this verse to indicate the nature of the punishment threatened. The question whether it consists in ever-during life in suffering, or real souldestruction, must be solved, if at all, by reference to other Scripture. The phrase everlasting punishment implies that the result, not the punishment, will be everlasting, as the phrase eternal judgment (Heb. 62) signifies not a judgment lasting eternally, but one having eternal results. (6.) The reward promised is life eternal, and this signifies not merely existence, which might or might not be a boon, but the highest and noblest activity of the soul, in all its God-given powers, and this eternal, i. e., with no fear of decadence, infirmity, or lapse into sin. In these verses Matthew groups several incidents that point to the crucifixion. They are four in number: (1) verses 1, 2, Christ's prophecy of the crucifixion; (2) verses 3-5, the conspiracy of the Jewish authorities; (3) verses 6-13, Mary's unconscious preparation for the Lord's burial by anointing him; (4) verses 14-16, Judas' agreement to betray his Lord. Whether these events occurred in the order here narrated is uncertain. See note on verses 6-16 below. From this point the passion of our Lord properly begins. His mission as a prophet merges in his mission as a sacrifice; his words are pregnant to the last, as his soul has suffered from the beginning. But it is as the Sufferer rather than as the Teacher he appears in the remaining scenes of his life. 1,2. When Jesus had finished all these sayings. The discourse contained in chapter 23 was the last delivered by Christ in public. That contained in chapters 24 and 25, and those reported by John in chapters 14-16, were delivered only to the apostles, the former, perhaps, to but four of them (Mark 13: 3).-Ye know. Because he had previously foretold his passion.— After two days is the Passover, and the Son of man is betrayed (the present tense, with a future force; see Mark 9: 31, note) to be crucified. Whether the Jewish Passover took place on Thursday, on the evening of which the Lord's Supper was instituted, or on Friday, the day on which our Lord was crucified, is confessedly one of the most difficult questions in N. T. chronology. So far as this verse affords a note of time at all, it appears to me to sustain the former view. If this prophecy was spoken immediately at the close of the discourse reported in chapters 24 and 25, e., on Tuesday evening, the Passover Supper would come on Thursday Ch. 26: 1-16. PREPARATION FOR THE CRUCIFIXION.- evening. Alford thinks, on the contrary, that IN THE HEARTS OF THE DISCIPLES; BY THE ENEMIES OF CHRIST; BY THE UNCONSCIOUS PROPHECY OF LOVE'S OFFERING; BY THE TREACHERY OF AN APOSTLE.THOUGH FOREWARNED OF SORROW, WE ARE NOT ALWAYS FOREARMED AGAINST IT (ver. 1, 2, with Luke 24: 21, 26).-MEN LOVE DARKNESS RATHER THAN LIGHT, BECAUSE THEIR DEEDS ARE EVIL (ver. 3-5; comp. John 3: 19, 20).-THE TRUE DISCIPLE RARELY KNOWS THE TRUE VALUE OR MEANING OF HIS OWN LIFE (ver. 6-13).-CHRIST COULD NEVER BE CRUCIFIED BY THE WORLD BUT FOR TREACHERY IN HIS OWN CHURCH (ver. 14-16). this is a solemn declaration that "the deliverance of our Lord to be crucified and the taking place of the Passover strictly coincided," because Christ says, "After two days is the Fassover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified." But he apparently forgets that the betrayal took place on the evening of the day preceding the crucifixion; so that if the betrayal and the Passover coincided, the Passover and the Lord's Supper also coincided. See on the whole question, Note on the Lord's Supper, below. 6 Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, 7 There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat. 8 But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? 9 For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. s John 11: 1, 2; 12: 3. 3-5. Then assembled together the chief priests, etc. That is, the Sanhedrim (Matt. 2 : 4, and note). Presumptively this conference was held on Tuesday night, at the close of Christ's public denunciation of the Jewish leaders (chapter 23).— The high priest, called Caiaphas. The high priest was originally the highest religious officer in the land, and held office for life; but at this time was appointed and removed by the Roman government at will, so that in 107 years the office had been filled with 27 appointees. He was the head of the Sanhedrim, and exercised some political and judicial as well as ecclesiastical functions. Caiaphas was a son-in-law of Annas (John 18: 13), with whom he seems to have in some way shared the duties of the office (Luke 3:2 and note). His character, as a wily and unscrupulous politician, is indicated by his counsel respecting Jesus (John 11: 49-51), and by his conduct during the subsequent trial of Jesus (Matt. 26: 57–65, notes). Peter was at a later period brought before him and Annas (Acts 4 : 6). He was appointed high priest 27 A. D., and was removed 36 or 37 A. D. Nothing is known of his history subsequent to his deposition. 5. But they said, Not during the feast. Not merely the feast day, i. e., the day on which the Passover was sacrificed and eaten, but at any time during the festal season, which lasted for seven days. On these occasions Jerusalem was thronged with pilgrims. Christ was popular with the Galileans, and the leaders feared an attempt by them at resistance. Perhaps such an attempt would have been made, but for the fact that Christ discountenanced it (verses 52-54). been once commended by our Lord (as in Luke), was very likely to have been repeated, and especially at such a time as six (?) days before the Last Passover, and by one anointing him for his burial."—(Alford.) The time when this anointing here described took place is uncertain. John's account apparently indicates six days before the Passover, i. e., probably Friday preceding the crucifixion. And this is the view of Townsend, Andrews, Alford, J. H. Morison, and others. These writers suppose that Matthew inserts the account out of its chronological order, because Judas Iscariot's treachery is closely connected with his complaint of Mary's extravagance, and Christ's rebuke of him (John 12: 4,7). Matthew and Mark apparently indicate two days before the Passover, i. e., on the Tuesday night preceding the crucifixion. This is the view of Robinson, Geo. W. Clark, and Dr. Hackett (Smith's Bib. Dict., vol. ii., p. 1372, note). This view appears to me the more probable one, for, (1) the note of time is not definite or conclusive in either of the Evangelists; (2) the immediate occasion of Judas's treachery seems to have been the rebuke administered at this supper (comp. verse 14 here with John 12:4, 7); (3) if his plan was formed four days before, why was it not earlier executed? (4) the discourses of Christ's prophesying the overthrow of Judaism, his own crucifixion, and a long period of trial preceding his second coming (chap. 24), might well prepare the mind of Judas, if his adhesion to Christ was largely induced by earthly ambition, for the temptation of avarice and ambition, combined with resentment. But without some previous disappointment and bitterness of soul, such as would be produced by the final overthrow of all his hopes of preferment, it is difficult to understand how he should have been incited to his treachery. 6, 7. Bethany. A village about two miles east of Jerusalem (John 11: 18), being on the other 6-16. THE ANOINTING OF JESUS BY MARY, AND THE SUBSEQUENT TREACHERY OF JUDAS.This anointing is also described by Mark (14:3-10) and John (12: 2-8). For general exposition see notes on John 12: 1-8. From his account it appears to have taken place at the house of Lazarus and his sisters Mary and Martha, and to have been performed by Mary, who poured the oint-side of the Mount of Olives. See map, p. 238. It was ment on Christ's feet as well as on his head. It is not to be confounded with the anointing mentioned in Luke 7:36-50, though this has been done. There is nothing in common between them, except the name of the householder, Simon (Luke 7: 40); and this was a very common name in Palestine. The occasion, the time, the parties, and the spiritual significance, are all different. The repetition of the incident is not at all strange. "An act of this kind, which had the home of Mary and Martha, where Christ was wont to visit when in Jerusalem (Luke 10: 38-41; Matt. 21: 17; Mark 11: 11, 12). It was the scene of the resurrection of Lazarus (John, ch. 11), and of Christ's own ascension (Luke 24: 50). It is not mentioned in the O. T.-Simon the leper. Nothing is known of him. Whether the father, or the husband of one of the sisters, or a more distant relative, is merely matter of conjecture. He is not mentioned in the other incidents referring to 10 When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. 11 For ye have the poor always with you; but me" ye have not always. 12 For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial. 13 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be to'd for a memorial of her. 14 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, 15 And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted w with him for thirty pieces of silver. 16 And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him. t Deut. 15: 11.... u John 14: 19; 17: 11....v ch. 10: 4.... w ch. 27: 3; Zech. 11: 12, 13. this family; hence the surmise that he was dead. He could not at this time have been a leper, and living in the house, for in that case he could not have received guests.-A woman. Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 19:3). 8, 9. His disciples. The complaint appears to have originated with Judas (John 12: 4), but may have been caught up and echoed by the others. For much. John and Mark specify the cost, 300 pence (denarii), equal to $54, but equivalent to nearly a year's wages of an ordinary laboring man (Matt. 20: 2, note). 11. Ye have the poor always with you. Mark adds significantly: "Whensoever ye will, ye may do them good." 13. The promise of this verse is given by Mark, but not by John. On it Alford well remarks, "This announcement is a distinct prophetic recognition by our Lord, of the existence of written records, in which the deed should be related; for in no other conceivable way could the universality of mention he brought about." 14-16. Judas Iscariot, i. e., probably Judas of Kerioth, a town of Judea (Josh. 15: 25). On his character and the explanation of his treachery, see notes on chap. 27: 3-10.-Chief priests, i. e., heads of the priestly courses. Matt. 2:4, note.-Thirty pieces of silver, i. e., thirty shekels, equal to about eighteen dollars. It was earnest to bind the bargain. Whether the priests actually paid him the money at this time, or only agreed to pay it, is not clear from the original, which is literally, They placed to him thirty shekels. This may mean that they actually delivered it to him, as is indicated by Zechariah, or that they put it to his credit, on condition of his fulfillment of his promise. The latter agrees better with the accounts in Mark (14:11) and Luke (29:5). In the latter passage the word rendered covenanted is different from that employed here, and signifies a covenant or agreement. the sum fixed to be paid in case of the killing of a slave by an ox (Exod. 21: 32. Comp. Lev. 27:3). The exact sum to be paid for Christ's betrayal was a subject of prophecy (Zech. 11: 12, 13). The smallness of the sum forbids the idea that Judas was incited only by avarice, unless the thirty shekels be regarded merely as earnest money; and this hypothesis appears untenable, for no more appears to have been paid to him. The language in Zechariah and in Matt. 27: 3, indicate that the thirty shekels was the price paid, not an Of the institution of the Lord's Supper, and the concurrent events, we have four accounts, viz., Matt. 26: 16-30; Mark 14: 12-25; Luke 22: 7-30, and 1 Cor. 11: 23-25. John gives no account of the Lord's Supper, but is the only one who reports the contemporaneous feet-washing, and the discourses of Jesus in connection with the Supper. That he omits all mention of the Supper, and reports what the other Evangelists do not mention, is an incidental indication that he wrote with the other histories before him, and in part for the sake of supplying what they omitted. A harmonized narrative of the four Gospels is confessedly difficult, Alford thinks impossible." It is at best but hypothetical. The most probable hypothesis combines these accounts as follows: Christ gives two of his disciples directions as to the preparation of the Passover supper for himself and the twelve (Mark 14: 12-16; and Luke 22: 7-13, notes); when the even is come he goes with the twelve to the place prepared for them, where an unseemly strife occurs as to which shall be greatest (Luke 22: 24-30, notes); this Christ rebukes by washing the feet of the disciples (John 13: 1-20, notes); all then take their places at the table (Matt. 26: 20); Christ prophecies his betrayal (Matt. 26: 21-25; Mark 14: 18-21; Luke 22: 21-23; John 13: 21-26, notes); Judas learning that his treachery is known, goes out to complete it (John 13: 27-30, notes). The Supper, which has been interrupted by this incident, now goes on and ends with the institution of the Lord's Supper at the close of the Passover feast (Matt. 26: 26-29, notes; Mark 14: 22-25; Luke 22: 19, 20; 1 Cor. 11: 23-25). After, or during, this meal Christ gives his disciples the instruc 17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread, the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? 18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; 1 will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed <them; and they made ready the passover. 20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. 22 And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it 1? 23 And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. x Exod. 12: 6, 18....y Ps. 41:9; 55: 12, 13. tions and utters for them the prayer recorded in John, chaps. 14-17 inclusive. 17. Now the first of the unleavened bread. That is, the first day, viz. Thursday the 14th day of Nisan. The feast of the unleavened bread, or the Passover, properly began on the 15th of Abib or Nisan, and lasted seven days. But the preceding day, the 14th, was the one appointed for the slaying of the lamb, and on the evening of that day the paschal supper was eaten (Exod. 12:6; Lev. 23:5). It was, therefore, termed the first day of the feast. See note on Lord's Supper below, § 1. -The disciples came to Jesus. The movement for the observance of the Passover originated, therefore, with them. The directions were given to two of them only, Peter and John (Luke 22: 7 -13).-Where wilt thou that we prepare the Passover? The Scripture directions for the preparation of the Passover are contained in Exod. 12: 1-11, 14-20, but are modified by Deut. 16:5, 6. The guest-chamber was already prepared (Mark 14:15), and the lamb had probably been previously selected for the sacrifice (Exod. 12:10). The other preparations would consist of making ready the unleavened bread, the bitter herbs, etc. Jewish custom required that the Passover be celebrated, if not within the city walls, at least within the distance of a Sabbath day's journey, i. e., about three-quarters of a mile. 18, 19. The account of this direction and the apostle's compliance is not found in John. It is fuller in Mark (14: 12-16) and Luke (22:7-13). See notes on Luke.-My time is at hand. Peculiar to Matthew. Its meaning can hardly be other than, The time for my passion and death (John 7:6). 20. When even was come. The lamb must be kilied "in the evening " (Exod. 12 : 6), or, as it is rendered in the margin in Exodus, "between the two evenings," a phrase interpreted by the rabbis as equivalent to between the declining and the setting sun, i. e., between 3 P. M. and 5 P. M., or between sunset and deep twilight. The former was the more general view. Deut. 16: 6 specifies more accurately, "about the going down of the sun." The paschal supper followed, on the same night (Exod. 12:8). He sat down with the twelve. Literally, Reclined with the twelve. The supper appears to have been originally taken standing (Exod. 12:11); but whether the direction so to take it was intended except for the Israelites at the time of the exodus, is uncertain. It was not observed in Christ's time. The reclining posture had been borrowed from other nations long prior (Amos 6:4), probably from the Babylonians and Syrians (Esther 1: 5, 6; 7: 8). In taking their places in the manner indicated in the annexed cut, John reclined next to Christ on one side; thus he might easily rest his head on the Master's bosom (John 13: 25). Judas sat near Christ, probably on the other side, for Christ reached to him a sop or morsel (John 13:26). Observe that only the twelve participated with Christ in this supper. The proprietor of the house was probably at the same time partaking the Passover in another room with his own family. On Passover week every Jew in Jerusalem extended the hospitality of his house to pious strangers. Our Lord and the twelve were a full paschal company; ten persons were the minimum number. Luke (22: 24-30, notes) gives an account of a strife among the disciples which should be greatest, probably a contention which should have the places of honor at the table, in |