soul and body. As in several other passages of Scripture, there is an implication here that the punishment of the wicked is a true destruction, not a living in suffering. But it is only an implication, and there are other passages which certainly appear to teach otherwise. For a consideration of the whole question, see note on Matt. 13: 50. I assume that Him whom we are to fear is God, as do most commentators, not Satan, as do Stier and some others; for (a) It is not true that Satan can destroy either body or soul; he has no power except such as God permits him to exercise (Job 1:12; compare James 4: 12); he is himself shut up in hell (Matt. 25: 41; Rev. 20: 10), 'does not destroy soul and body in hell, but before that time, and for the purpose of having | them consigned to hell."-(Lange.) (b) The fear of Satan is but a sorry protection against the fear of man, but "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" (Prov. 9: 10). (c) The context of the discourse calls for this interpretation. We are both to fear and to trust the All-powerful. See next verses.

In hell. Gehenna. See note on Matt. 5: 22. Dr. Owen concludes that Christ does not here speak of annihilation, "for the destruction spoken of takes place in Gehenna.” But since the fires of Gehenna did in fact utterly consume the corpses of the criminals cast upon them, his deduction is hardly warranted. On the other hand, the metaphor does not necessarily imply annihilation. That question of the true punishment of the lost must be determined by the teachings of other passages, or at least by a comparison of this with other passages.

29. Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? The farthing (Gr. úooaglov) is a Roman coin which was equal to about a cent and a half in value. The word occurs in the N. T. only here and in the analogous passage in Luke 12:6. The sparrow is a general term for a large variety of birds, of which there are known to be above one hundred different species. The corresponding Hebrew term is generally rendered bird or fowl. It is in the O. T. a symbol of | weakness (Psalm 11:1). The various species of sparrow are very numerous in Palestine. They are snared in great numbers and sold for food. The markets of Jerusalem and Joppa are said to be attended at the present day by many fowlers who offer for sale long strings of little birds of various species, chiefly sparrows, wag-tails and

|

larks. It is to this snaring and sale of the sparrow our Lord alludes here. Without your Father. Observe he does not say their Father nor our Father, but your Father, i. e., without his knowledge and his permission (Luke 12 : 6). This verse certainly forbids the construction put by Stier upon the preceding one, that it is the devil who can destroy both soul and body. Not even the sparrow can fall to the ground by the power of the devil without permission of God. Observe that nature as strikingly illustrates God's greatness in little as in great things, a truth of which the microscope affords abundant illustration.

30. But the very hairs of your head. A metaphorical expression to signify the minuteness of God's care. Compare 1 Sam. 14: 45; Luke 21: 13; Acts 27:34. The lesson inculcated is not only that God cares for us despite our insignificance, but also that he cares for us in respects that seem the most insignificant.

31. Of more value. Compare Matt. 6: 26, and note. This is God's answer to David's question : What is man that thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that thou visitest him?” (Psalm 8:4. (Psalm 8:4.) Observe, that nature inspires both question and answer: the stars the question, the birds the answer.

32, 33. Every one therefore who shall confess in me. Observe the phraseology of the original of which the above is a literal translation. The promise is to every one (ñas) who confessed in Christ (έv ɛuoɩ). It is not a mere public profession before the church which is meant, for it must be "before men," i. e., as interpreted by verses 17 and 18, councils, synagogues, governors, kings, in time of peril, when confession costs something; nor is it even every public profession before men which is meant, but a confession in Christ, i. e., such a confession as has its root in Christ, and shows a living union with him. Such a confession in Christ the apostles witnessed before the Sanhedrim (Acts 4:13), and such Christ himself witnessed in God before Pontius Pilate (1 Tim. 6 : 13; compare John 18: 37; 19: 8, 11, 12). Christ also confesses in us; that is, not only acknowledges us his disciples, but shows himself in us and us to be in him (John 17 : 21, 24). "The context shows plainly that it is a practical, consistent confession which is meant, and also a practical and enduring denial." The Lord will not confess the confessing Judas, nor deny the denying Peter."-(Alford.)

35 For I am come to set a man at variancey against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

36 And2 a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

37 Hea that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me.

38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

39 Heb that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake, shall find it.

40 Hec that receiveth you, receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me.

41 Hed that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that

Observe how Christ here ranks himself with God in judging not with man in being the object of judgment.

34. Think not I am come to sow peace on the earth. The metaphor is that of a husbandman sowing seed; Christ's seed is a sword. Yet in the O. T. Christ is called a prince of peace (Isaiah 9:6); his birth is announced by the angels

precursor of peace (Luke 2: 14; compare 1: 19); he bestows peace upon his disciples in his parting benediction (John 14: 27); he declares that the peace-makers shall bear his own title and be called the sons of God (Matt. 5:9); and the peace of God is declared by the apostle to be among the fruits of the spirit (Gal. 5 : 22). (Gal. 5:22). We are not to reconcile these passages by saying, with De Wette, that divisions were not the purpose, but only the inevitable result of Christ's coming, for "with God results are all purposes."—(Alford.) | Christ comes to declare war against the devil and all his works (Ephes. 6: 11, 12; 1 Tim. 6 : 12), and to bring peace only with victory. The first coming of Christ always brings war, whether to the individual soul or to the community. War is the stalk, peace the ripened grain. Romans 7: 23 depicts the sword, 7:25 and ch. 8, the peace. Compare Matt. 13: 33, and note.

35. For I am come, etc. This verse is substantially quoted from Micah 7:6; it is illustrated by John 7: 1-5.

36. A man's foes shall be they of his own household. This declaration finds abundant illustration in the history of religious persecutions; not less in daily life. Husbands, wives, parents, children are helps, but also often hindrances; the same one is sometimes a spiritual friend, sometimes a spiritual foe. Christ found foes in his warmest friends, Matt. 16: 22, 23.

37. He that loveth father, etc. * * more than me. Compare with this the parallel passage, Luke 14: 26. Observe that the test of love according to Christ is not emotional experience, but obedience (John 14: 21); hence this declaration is substantially embodied in Matt. 5:24. No man can serve two masters. For illustration of loving Christ more than father or mother, see Matt. 4: 21, 22. For parallel and illustrative teachings, John 21: 15; 2 Cor. 5: 14, 15; Phil. 3: 7-9. Is not worthy of me, i. e. to be called my disciples. Compare Ephes. 4:1; Col. 1:10; 1 Thes. 2:12. For he only is Christ's

disciple who learns like Christ to sacrifice all for God. "Stier well remarks, that under the words 'worthy of me,' there lies an exceeding great reward which counterbalances all the seeming asperity of this saying."—(Alford.)

38. He that taketh not his cross. The Roman custom obliged the crucified to carry their own cross to the place of punishment. To this custom reference is here made. The meaning of the symbol is, whoever is not willing freely to deny himself, even unto death, and that the most painful and shameful, is not worthy of me. It is, of course, a prophetic reference to Christ's own death, a prophecy which, at the time, the disciples could have only imperfectly understood (John 12: 16). 16). Observe that it is not only cross-bearing but cross-taking that is required of the disciple; not merely submission to burdens which God's providence lays upon them, but a voluntary assuming of burdens, even the burden of death, for the sake of Christ and humanity. In slightly different forms this aphorism repeatedly appears in Christ's teaching (Matt. 16 · 24; Mark 10 : 21; Luke 9: 23). Paul, by his use of the metaphor in Galatians (2:20; 5: 24; 6: 14), gives a partial interpretation to it. We take up our cross when we mortify the deeds of the flesh for the sake of the Spirit (Col. 3: 5), or when we gladly suffer the loss of all things that we may be found in Christ (Phil. 3: 8-10), or share his sufferings and self-sacrifices that we may minister to his suffering ones (Matt. 25: 35, 36).

39. He that findeth his life shall lose it. Repeated in Matt. 16:25; Luke 17:33; John 12:25. Not merely, he that finds the life of this world shall lose eternal life in the world to come, though this is implied in John, nor he that finds the lower earthly life shall lose the higher and spiritual life. The significance of the saying does not depend upon any such play on the word life. The aphorism goes deeper. All selfseeking is self-losing. Even in spiritual things, he who is perpetually studying how to secure joy and peace for himself loses it. A certain measure of self-forgetfulness is the condition of the highest success even in Christian grace. Observe that finding implies seeking; so that this proverb is not at all, He that gains this life loses the next, but, He that makes his own life the chief object of his endeavor and seems to succeed, really fails. 40. He that receiveth you receiveth me.

sumed his fishing, and was a second time called to follow Christ, which he did, with Andrew his brother, and with James and John (Luke 5: 8-11). The healing of his mother-in-law followed almost immediately (Mark 1: 29-31; Luke 4 : 38, 39). The subsequent incidents in his life indicate a warm, affectionate, impulsive but unstable character. He starts to walk to Jesus on the wave, but loses courage almost as soon as his feet touch the water (Matt. 14: 28-30); impetuously refuses to let Christ wash his feet, and as impetuously offers his head and his hands (John 13: 6, 8, 9); draws his sword to fight single-handed the Roman soldiers, yet turns and flees with the others when Christ surrenders to the band (John 18: 10; Matt. 26: 56); follows Christ into the palace, but there denies with vehemence and oaths that he is a disciple (Matt. 26: 69-75; John 18: 15, 17, 25-27); is one of the first to baptize the Gentiles, then refuses to fraternize with them from fear of opposition in the church (Acts 10: 47, 48; Gal. 2: 11-13; but compare Acts 15: 7, etc.) After the resurrection and ascension of our Lord, Peter appears to have taken a leading position in the church, but as an orator rather than as an organizer or ecclesiastical leader (Acts 1: 15; 2: 14-41; 4:8). He traveled about in missionary work, taking his wife with him (1 Cor. 9:5), ministering to the Gentiles, and probably traveling as far east as Babylon (1 Pet. 5:13). If he ever visited Rome, which is uncertain, it was not until the later years of his life, and after the founding of the Christian church. According to tradition, he was crucified under Nero, with his head downward, and to this event our Lord is thought to

Matt. 27: 56.

Mark 15: 40.

refer in John 21:18. The personal friendship between himself and John, illustrated by many incidents (Luke 5:1-11; John 13: 23, 24: 18: 15, 16; 21:7; Acts 3: 1; 4: 13), is one of the most touching and tender of the minor episodes in Gospel history, all the more so from the incidental indication of the contrasts in their characters (John 20: 3-9; 21: 7).

ANDREW (manly), A son of Jonas and brother of Peter. He brought the latter to Christ (John 1: 40-42), and with him was subsequently called by Christ to become a disciple, and later an apostle (Matt. 4; 21; Luke 6:14). The only other incidents respecting him recorded in the Gospels are those narrated in Mark 13 : 3, John 6: 8, and 12:22, and these give little or no information respecting his' character. After the resurrection of our Lord, he appears only in the list of apostles in Acts 1:13. Tradition reports him to have preached the Gospel in Scythia, Greece, and Asia Minor, and to have been crucified upon a cross in the form of a X, which is called, accordingly, St. Andrew's cross.

JAMES (same as Jacob, i. e., Supplanter). He was a son of Zebedee; his mother's name was Salome (compare Matt. 27 : 56 with Mark 15: 40). He probably resided at Bethsaida; joined Jesus with his brother John at the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 4: 21); is never mentioned in the Gospels except in connection with his brother John; was martyred under Herod Agrippa, a. D. 44 (Acts 12 : 2). There is reason to believe that he and his brother John were own cousins of our Lord. This opinion rests on the account given by Matthew, Mark, and John, of the women at the crucifixion. Ther describe these women as follows:

John 19: 25.

Mary, mother of Jesus.

Mary, wife of Cleophas.

Sister of Jesus' mother.

It is evident, from a comparison of these accounts, that Salome and the mother of Zebedee's children are the same; that is, that Salome was the mother of James and John. It is a question whether the sister of Jesus' mother mentioned by John is to be identified with Salome or with Mary, wife of Cleophas; whether, that is, John mentions two or three persons in addition to Mary, the mother of Jesus. If Mary, wife of Cleophas, were the sister of Jesus' mother, there would have been two sisters of the same name, Mary, which is not impossible, as Jewish records show, but is improbable. On the whole, I think the better opinion to be that which identifies the sister of Jesus' mother with Salome, the mother of Zebedee's children, in which case Jesus was

own cousin to James and John. See note on Matthew 13: 55.

JOHN (grace of the Lord). He was a brother of James, and of course is not to be confounded with John the Baptist. Several references in the N. T. indicate that his family was one of some wealth and social position (Mark 1:20; Luke 8:3; 23 : 55, comp. with Mark 16: 1; John 19: 27). He appears to have accompanied our Lord in his first ministry in Judea, and he is the only one of the Evangelists who gives any account of that ministry. He is mentioned frequently in connection with Peter and James as especially intimate with Jesus (Matt. 17:1; Mark 5: 37; John 13: 23); and of those three, he appears to have been the one most beloved of our Lord (John 13: 23; 19: 26; 20: 2; 21: 7, 20, 24). Of his personal

history subsequent to the crucifixion little is known. He went into Asia, exercised a pastoral supervision over the Asiatic churches, was banished to Patmos, and probably died in extreme old age a natural death. Of his personal character much has been written, yet it is certain he has been greatly misunderstood. He was naturally impetuous and ambitious (Matt. 20: 20, 21; Mark 3: 17; 10: 35-37; Luke 9:54), and of all the apostles, he appears to have been the most courageous; he alone of the Evangelists, apparently, accompanied Jesus in his earlier Judean ministry, since he is the only one who gives any account of it; and he alone clung to him and followed him during the trial in the court of Caiaphas and before Pilate's judgment-seat; this is evidenced by his narrative, which is unmistakably that of an eye-witness. His gentleness, patience, love, and spiritual apprehension of Christ's interior teaching, seem to have been the effect of Christ's personal influence upon him. He was the beloved disciple, because of all the disciples he was the most docile and most ready to yield to and receive Christ's teaching and influence. See further on his character, Introduction to Gospel of John. We have, in the N. T., four books from his pen: one Gospel and three Epistles.

PHILIP (warlike). He was a native of Bethsaida; brought Nathanael, who was probably the same as Bartholomew, to Jesus; and is generally mentioned in connection with Bartholomew. The only direct reference to him in the Gospels, except the mere mention of his name here and in other lists of the twelve, are in John 1: 43–45; 12:21, 22; 14:8, 9. Of his life and labors nothing else is known; and the traditions respecting him are conflicting. He is not to be confounded with Philip, the deacon, mentioned in Acts 6:5; 8: 5-12, 26-40; 21 : 8, 9.

BARTHOLOMEW (son of Tholmai). It is generally thought by Biblical scholars that this apostle is identical with Nathanael. John alone mentions Nathanael (John 1: 45-49; 21; 2), whom Philip brought to Jesus; Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not mention him, but give the name of Bartholomew in connection with Philip. This fact, coupled with their otherwise singular omission of the name of Nathanael, and with the fact that Bartholomew is not properly a name at all, but a descriptive title, meaning son of Tholmai, have led to the hypothesis which identifies the two. It is, however, but an hypothesis, though certainly a reasonable one. Nothing is known of his life or character, except what may be gathered from the above reference.

THOMAS (twin). This word is of Hebrew origin; its Greek equivalent is Didymus, and his name occurs in this form (John 11: 16; 20: 24; 21: 2). He was doubtless a Galilean, but neither his parentage, birth-place, nor call are mentioned.

There are but four incidents in his life recorded in the N. T. (John 11: 16; 14; 5; 20: 24-29; 21: 2). These indicate that he possessed an affectionate spirit but a skeptical mind. The earnestness and fidelity of his love was unaccompanied by a faith and hope at all comparable to it (John 11 : 16); he could not understand the "mansions" which Christ, after his death, would prepare for his followers (John 14: 5); he refused to believe in his Lord's resurrection without tangible evidence (John 20: 24-29). Of his history subsequent to the ascension of Christ, nothing is known with any certainty; the Syrian Christians, however, claim him as the founder of their church.

MATTHEW (probably, gift). He is also called Levi (Luke 5: 27-29; and see note on Matt. 9:9). He was a publican, i. e. tax-gatherer and the son of Alphæus (Mark 2 : 14); but whether of the same Alphæus mentioned in this history as the father of James the less is uncertain; most scholars think not. The name Alphæus is a common one in Jewish records, and if Matthew were a brother of James, the two would probably have been mentioned together, as are Simon Peter and his brother Andrew and James and his brother John. Of his life, subsequent to his call, the N. T. gives no information, except that his Gospel indicates that he accompanied Christ to the last. No reliance can be placed on the traditions respecting his later history.

JAMES, THE SON OF ALPHÆUS. His father's name is given by John as Cleophas or Cleopas, a different form of the same word; his mother's name was Mary (Mark 15: 40), assuming, as I do from reasons which will appear elsewhere (see note on Brethren of our Lord on Matt. 13:55), that there are three persons of the name of James mentioned in the N. T., James the brother of John, James the son of Alphæus, and James the Lord's brother, and that the latter was the author of the Epistle General of James, nothing more is known concerning this James, who is generally in Biblical literature distinguished from James the brother of John by being entitled James the less.

In

LEBBÆUS (the meaning is uncertain). Mark 3: 18 he is called Thaddæus, and it is probable that the addition here of the words, "whose surname was Thaddeus," has been added by some copyist to harmonize the two accounts. In the lists given in Luke 6:14, etc., and Acts 1 : 13, neither Lebbæus nor Thaddeus appears, but in their place the name of Judas of James, which our translators interpret Judas the brother of James. This is, however, merely their interpretation, the word brother being added by them; the better opinion appears to be that the proper interpretation would be son of James. This Jude or Judas, also called Lebbæus and Thaddæus, is by many critics regarded as identical with the Judas mentioned in Matthew 13: 55, and as the