ANSW. Christ’s humiliation after his death, consisted in his being
buried, and continuing in the state of the dead, and under the power
of death, till the third day, which hath been otherwise expressed in
these words, _He descended into hell_.
In considering the subject matter of these answers, we are led to take a
view of our Saviour, in the last stage of life, exposed to those
sufferings which went more immediately before, or attended his death.
And,
I. Let us consider him in his sufferings in the garden, when his soul
was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death; and he desired his disciples,
not only as an instance of their sympathy with, and regard to him in his
agony, that they would tarry at a small distance from him, while he went
a little farther, and prayed, as one that tasted more of the bitterness
of that cup, which he was to drink, than he had done before; but pressed
this upon them, as what was necessary to their own advantage, when he
says, _Watch and pray that ye enter not into temptation_, Matt, xxvii.
38, 39. 41. But they seemed very little concerned, either for his
distress, or their own impending danger; for, when he returned, he found
them asleep, and upbraids them for it, _What, could ye not watch with me
one hour?_ ver. 40. and afterwards, though he had given them this first
kind and gentle reproof, for their unaccountable stupidity, and repeated
his charge, that they should watch and pray; yet, when he came a second
time, he found them asleep again, ver. 43. This was, doubtless, an
addition to his afflictions, that they, who were under the highest
obligation to him, should be so little concerned for him.
II. After this he was betrayed by Judas, a pretended friend, which added
to the affliction. This does not argue any unwillingness in him to
suffer, as is evident from his own words, some time before, viz. _I have
a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be
accomplished?_ Luke xii. 50. As also from his going up to Jerusalem with
that design, as knowing that his hour was at hand. How easily might he
have declined this journey, had he been unwilling to suffer? And, if he
thought it his duty to be at Jerusalem, at the feast of the passover,
which was not absolutely necessary, (for all were not obliged to come
there at the feast) he might, notwithstanding, had he been unwilling to
suffer, have went there privately: but, instead of that, he made a more
public entrance into it than was usual, riding in triumph, and accepting
of the loud acclamations and hosannas of the multitude, which, any one
might suppose, would draw forth the envy of his inveterate enemies, and
sharpen their malice against him, and thereby hasten the execution of
their bloody design.
Again, that he did not suffer unwillingly, appears, in that, when the
band of officers, being led by Judas, was sent to apprehend him, _He
asks them, whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth_; Jesus
saith unto them, _I am he_; upon which we read, that _they went
backward, and fell to the ground_, John xviii. 4-6. and gave him an
opportunity to make his escape, had he intended to decline these last
sufferings: but he not only delivered himself into their hands, but
prohibited the overture of a rescue, which Peter attempted in his
favour, ver. 10, 11. As to what concerns his being betrayed into the
hands of his enemies, by one of his disciples, this is often mentioned,
as a very considerable part of his sufferings: the price which the
traitor demanded, or which was the most they would give for this
barbarous and inhuman action, was thirty pieces of silver.[216] This
being foretold by the prophet, is represented as an instance of the
highest contempt that could be cast upon him: he calls it _a goodly
price that I was prized at of them_, Zech. xi. 13. it was the price of a
_servant_, or slave, when _pushed by the ox, so that he died_, Exod.
xxi. 32. This shews how little he was valued, by those who were under
the highest obligations to him. And providence permitted it to be a part
of his sufferings, that we may learn from hence, that hypocrites
sometimes mix themselves with his faithful servants, who,
notwithstanding the mask, or disguise of religion, which they affect,
their hypocrisy will, one time or other, be made manifest. This was not
a wound given by an open enemy, but a pretended friend, and therefore
more grievous; and this might also give occasion to some to cast a
reproach on his followers (for what will not malice sometimes suggest)
as though they were all like him; and their pretence to religion were no
more than hypocrisy.
III. Another instance of Christ’s humiliation was, in that he was
forsaken by his disciples: thus we read, that when he was apprehended,
_all the disciples forsook him and fled_, Matt. xxvi. 56. from whence we
may learn,
1. How unable the best of God’s people are to exercise that holy courage
and fortitude that is necessary in trying dispensations of providence,
especially when destitute of extraordinary assistance from the Spirit of
God.
2. This was ordered by providence, to add weight to Christ’s sufferings,
in which none stood with him to comfort or strengthen him; as the
apostle Paul says, _At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men
forsook me_, 2 Tim. iv. 16. which could not be otherwise than a very
afflictive circumstance; nevertheless,
3. There was a farther design of providence in permitting this
cowardise, namely, that they might not suffer with him; and therefore it
is observed, by one of the evangelists, that when our Saviour was
apprehended by the officers, he desired leave of them, that his
disciples might _go their way_, John xviii. 8. If they had been
apprehended, it may be, they might have been accused, condemned, and
crucified with him; which might give occasion to some to suppose, that
they bore a part in the purchase of our redemption; which belonged to
him alone; and therefore it is said, concerning him, _I have trodden the
wine press alone, and of the people there was none with me_, Isa. lxiii.
3. To this we may add,
IV. That it was another part of Christ’s sufferings, that he was
disowned and denied by Peter; since this would give occasion to some to
think that he was not worthy to be acknowledged by his friends, while he
was insulted and persecuted by his enemies. In the account the
evangelist gives of this matter, Matt. xxvi. 69-72. we may observe,
1. That Peter was not, at this time, in the way of his duty, though,
probably, it was love to our Saviour, and a desire to see the issue of
his trial, that might occasion his going into the High Priest’s Palace;
yet this he had no call to do at present, it was a running into the
midst of danger, especially considering our Saviour, as in the scripture
but now referred to, had got leave for his disciples to withdraw. This,
Peter ought to have done: for, as we are not to decline sufferings when
called to bear them, so we are not, without a sufficient warrant, to
rush into them, to go, as he did, in the way of temptation.
2. It was not only shame that induced him to deny our Saviour, but fear;
for, it is probable, he might be informed that the High Priest asked him
concerning his disciples, as well as his doctrine, therefore he might
think, that by owning him and his doctrine, he might be exposed to
suffer with him; which, notwithstanding his self-confident resolution a
little before, when he said, _Though I should die with thee, yet I will
not deny thee_, ver. 35. he was now afraid to do.
3. He was not only accosted by the damsel, who told him, that he was
with Jesus of Galilee; but he was attacked by _one of the servants of
the High Priest, being his kinsman, whose ear Peter cut off_, who said,
_Did I not see thee in the garden with him?_ John xviii. 26. This still
increased his fear; for he not only appeared as a witness against him,
and charged him with having been with him in the garden, but also
intimates, that he attempted to rescue him, and that by force of arms,
which, as he apprehended might render him obnoxious to the lash of the
law as endeavouring to make a riot, for which he concluded that he was
liable to suffer punishment; and the person, whose ear he cut off, being
the High Priest’s kinsman, this would lay him still more open to his
resentment. Thus Peter, through the weakness of his faith, and the
prevalency of his fear, denied our Saviour; and this was thrice repeated
with curses and execrations annexed to it, which still increased his
guilt, tended to expose religion, as well as cast a reproach on our
Saviour, who was then bearing his testimony to the truth.
V. Another instance of Christ’s humiliation was, that he was scorned and
rejected by the world; scorned, as though he had been inferior to them.
Thus he is represented by the Psalmist, as saying, _I am a worm and no
man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see
me, laugh me to scorn; they shoot out the lip, they shake the head_,
Psal. xxii. 6, 7. This was, doubtless, a malicious design, to fill the
minds of men with prejudice against it, and make them ashamed to own it.
Our Saviour puts these both together, when he speaks of persons being
_ashamed of him, and of his words_, Mark viii. 38. They had often
rejected him, by their unbelief; and this crime was the greater, because
they were under the greatest obligations to the contrary. How often did
he invite them, in the most affectionate manner, to come to him, and
annex hereunto a promise of eternal life? We find, notwithstanding, that
he had reason to complain, as he does, _Ye will not come to me, that ye
might have life_, John v. 40.
Here we might observe the temper of the Jews, before he appeared
publickly among them, to have been different from what it was
afterwards. When John the Baptist, his fore-runner told them, that he
would shortly be made manifest to Israel, multitudes flocked to his
ministry, counted him as a great prophet, and rejoiced in his light for
a season, and, at the same time, were baptized, and professed their
willingness to yield obedience to Christ. But all this was upon a
groundless supposition, that he would appear as an earthly monarch,
erect a temporal kingdom, bring all other powers into subjection to it,
and so deliver them from the Roman yoke, and advance them to great
honours in the world: but, when they saw it otherwise, and that he
appeared in a low humbled state, and professed, that his kingdom was not
of this world, and therefore his subjects must seek for a glory that
lies beyond it, which cannot be beheld, but by faith, and, in the
expectation hereof, take up their cross, and follow him, immediately
they were offended in him: thus the prophet foretels, that he should be
for a _stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence to both the houses of
Israel_, Isa. viii. 14. and the Psalmist styles him, _The stone which
the builders refused_, Psal. cxviii. 22. both which predictions are
applied to Christ by the apostle Peter, 1 Pet. ii. 7, 8. This was also
foretold by Simeon, concerning our Saviour, when he was in his infancy,
_Behold this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in
Israel, and for a sign, which shall be spoken against_, Luke ii. 43. And
this offence taken at him, is intimated to have been almost universal,
as appeared from the small number that adhered to him, when he was here
on earth, which gave him occasion to say, _Blessed is he whosoever shall
not be offended in me_, Matt. xi. 6.
This treatment he met with throughout the whole course of his ministry,
when they loaded him with the most injurious reproaches: but,
immediately before his death, they filled up the measure of their
iniquity, by reproaching him to the utmost; then it is observed that
they blasphemed, and cast contempt upon him, with respect to all those
offices which he executes as Mediator. As to his prophetical office,
with what abominable profaneness do they speak of the sacred gift of
prophecy, which their fathers always counted a peculiar glory, which was
conferred upon some of them, whereby they were honoured above all other
nations in the world! And what contempt do they cast on him, who had
sufficiently proved himself to be greater than all other prophets; when
as it is said, _They smote him with the palms of their hands, saying,
Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, who is he that smote thee?_ chap. xxvi.
67, 68. They also expressed their blasphemy in contemning his priestly
office, when they say, _He saved others, himself he cannot save_, chap.
xxvii. 42. and also his kingly, when, in derision, they put on him _a
scarlet robe, platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and a
reed in his right hand, and bowed the knee before him, and mocked him,
saying, Hail king of the Jews_, ver. 28, 29.
They also expressed the greatest contempt of him, by preferring a vile
and notorious criminal, who was a robber, and a murderer, before him;
and accordingly, as the prophet says, _He was numbered with the
transgressors_, as though he had been the greatest of them, whereas he
had _done no violence; neither was any deceit in his mouth_, Isa. liii.
9, 12. Thus the apostle tells them, _Ye denied the Holy One, and the
Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you_, Acts iii. 14. when
Pilate made an overture to release him, they cried, _with one consent,
Not this man, but Barabbas_, John xviii. 39, 40.
From hence we may learn,
1. That the best of men are not to expect to pass through the world
without reproach, or contempt, how exact, innocent or blameless, soever
their conversation be.
2. We are not to judge of persons, or things, especially in matters of
religion, merely by the opinion of the world concerning them; since it
is no uncommon thing for religion itself to be had in contempt, as well
as those who adhere to it.
3. We ought not to have respect to the praise or esteem of men, as a
motive to induce us to choose and adhere to the way of God and
godliness: thus our Saviour says, _I receive not honour from men_, John
v. 41. that is, I value it not, so as to regulate my conversation
thereby; and then he adds, _How can ye believe which receive honour one
of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only_, ver. 44.
4. Let us not think the worse of Christ, or his gospel, because they are
reproached, but rather, as the apostle adviseth, _Go forth to him
without the camp, bearing his reproach_, Heb. xiii. 13. and not only be
content to bear it, but count it our honour; as he says elsewhere,
concerning himself, _God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross
of our Lord Jesus Christ_, Gal. iv. 14.
5. Let us take heed, that while we seem to honour Christ by our
profession, and testify our abhorrence of the contempt that was cast on
him, by his enemies, we do not reproach him by our practice; and that
either by sinning presumptuously, which is called, _A reproaching of the
Lord_, Num. xv. 30. or not by reproving and bearing our testimony
against those who blaspheme and revile him; by which means, we shall
partake with them in their crime.
VI. Our Saviour was condemned by Pilate. The former indignities offered
him, were without any pretence, or form of law; but now he is set before
a court of judicature, and there tried, and sentence passed immediately
before his crucifixion. In this they had no regard to the exercise of
justice, nor desire to proceed in a legal way with any good and
honourable design, but to prevent the inconvenience that would have
arisen from their putting him to death in a riotous and tumultuous
manner, without the form of a trial. This they had in some particular
instances, at other times, designed, or attempted to do, but they
thought it not a safe way of proceeding; since they might afterwards
have been called to an account for it, by the civil magistrate, as the
town-clerk says, upon occasion of the tumult at Ephesus, _We are in
danger to be called in question for this day’s uproar_, Acts xix. 40.
Therefore our Saviour, being apprehended, is brought before Pilate, the
Roman governor; and there were the chief priests and elders met
together, as his accusers and prosecutors; and the whole process was the
most notorious instance of injustice, that ever was practised in any
court of judicature in the world. Whatever pretence of law there might
be, the assembly was certainly tumultuous. It is not usual for persons
who are tried for capital matters to be insulted, not only by the rude
multitude of spectators that are present, but by the judge himself, as
our Saviour was, being spit upon, buffeted, and smote with the palms of
their hands; and Pilate also, with a sarcastic sneer, unbecoming the
character of a judge, says, _Behold the Man; Behold your King_, John
xix. 5, 14. Here we may observe,
1. Concerning his persecutors, that they sought false witnesses against
him, that is, they endeavoured to persuade, or bribe any that they could
find, among the most vile and profligate wretches, to come in against
him; nevertheless, they could not bring this matter to bear for some
time: thus, it is said, _They sought false witness against Jesus to put
him to death, but found none; yea, though many false witnesses came, yet
found they none_, Matt. xxvi. 59, 60. The evidence that many gave was
not regarded, and therefore they were set aside; at last they found two,
whom they depended on, as legal evidences: but it is observed, that
_their witness did not agree together_, Mark xiv. 59. and, if they had
agreed in their testimony, the matter alleged against him was no crime,
namely, _We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with
hands; and, within three days, I will build another made without hands_,
ver. 58. which refers to what he had said when he drove the buyers and
sellers out of the temple, and foretelling his resurrection from the
dead, he uses this metaphorical way of speaking; that when they had
destroyed this temple, meaning his body, he would raise it up in three
days. We will suppose, that the Jews, then present, did not understand
what he meant by this expression, or that he did not explain it, as the
evangelist does: but let them take it in what sense they would, it
carries in it no crime for him to say so; and therefore it is observed,
that when this was witnessed against him, though the High Priest urged
him to make a reply, _he held his peace, and answered nothing_, because
there was nothing alleged worth an answer; the thing he was charged
with, carried in it its own confutation, and inferred not the least
degree of guilt in him. This his enemies themselves seemed to be
sensible of; and therefore they ask him this trying question, _Art thou
the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?_ expecting that his reply to this
would have afforded matter for them to proceed upon his conviction. To
this our Saviour gives a direct answer, saying, _I am; and ye shall see
the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the
clouds of heaven_, ver. 62. Here he was called to give a reply; the
question was worthy of an answer; and therefore he does not, on this
occasion, hold his peace, but witnessed a good confession, though he
knew it would cost him his life.
2. Some things may be observed concerning Pilate’s conduct in his trial;
as,
(1.) He acted contrary to that good advice that was given him by his
wife; which, because the Evangelist thinks it worthy to be taken notice
of, as occasioned by a dream, in which she told him, _She had suffered
many things because of him_, Matt, xxvii. 19. gives ground to conclude
that it was a divine dream, which rendered the advice more solemn, and,
as such, deserved his regard.
(2.) He acted against the dictates of his own conscience; for _he knew
that the chief priests had delivered him for envy_, Matt. xv. 20. and
therefore he ought to have stopped all farther proceedings, as in cases
of malicious prosecutions; and it farther appears that he acted against
his conscience, in that he took _water and washed his hands before the
multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just Person_,
Matt. xxvii. 24.
(3.) He appears to have been a very mean-spirited man, and therefore was
apprehensive that the Jews had he released our Saviour, would have
accused him to Cæsar, for sparing one whom they would have pretended to
have been an usurper, and a rebel, inasmuch as he is styled King of the
Jews. Accordingly he feared that he should have been turned out of his
place, or otherwise punished, provided the matter were not fully heard,
or the misrepresentations that might be made thereof, were believed by
him. This seems the main reason of his delivering our Saviour up to
them, to be crucified: thus it is observed, that Pilate first sought out
to release him; but, upon the Jews saying, _If thou let this man go,
thou art not Cæsar’s friend, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the
judgment seat_, and, in haste, _delivered him unto them to be
crucified_, John xix. 12, 13, 16.
(4.) When he thought it his interest to comply with the Jews in this
matter, he did not pass sentence on him himself, it may be, thinking
that not so adviseable, as being contrary to the profession he had a
little before this, made of his innocency: but he asked his prosecutors,
what he should do with him? which was a flagrant instance of barbarity
and injustice, in one who had the character of a judge or
magistrate.[217]
VII. Our Saviour was tormented by his persecutors, scourged, buffeted,
smitten with the palms of their hands, crowned with thorns, which, as
most divines suppose, pierced his head, and drew blood from thence,
which was a part of the torments he endured. And to this we may add,
that they compelled him to bear his cross, till his strength was so
exhausted, that he could carry it no longer; and then they obliged one
Simon, a Cyrenian, _to bear it_; or, as Luke says _to bear it after
him_, John xix. 17. compared with Luke xxiii. 26. that is, as some
suppose, to help him to carry it, going behind, and bearing a part of
the weight thereof. These things he endured, immediately before his
crucifixion, from wicked men, divested of all humanity, as well as
religion: but still there is something more afflictive than this, which
he endured; accordingly it is farther observed,
VIII. That he conflicted with the terrors of death, felt, and bore the
weight of God’s wrath; these were the sufferings which he endured, more
especially in his soul. From whence we may observe, that the death he
was going to endure, was exceeding formidable to him, and accompanied
with great terrors; therefore there must certainly be some bitter
ingredient in it, more than in the death of others. If we enquire what
it was therein that seemed so terrible to him, when many of the martyrs,
who have been, as the apostle says, _pressed out of measure above
strength_, 2 Cor. i. 8. that is, suffered as much as frail nature could
well bear, have endured it without any dread of the wrath of God, the
sting and bitterness thereof being taken away; why then should our
Saviour, who never contracted the least degree of guilt, have any
conflict of this nature in his own spirit? To this it may be replied,
that there were some things in his death that rendered it more
formidable, than it ever was to any of his saints and martyrs. For,
1. It is more than probable that the powers of darkness had a great hand
in setting before his view the terrors of the wrath of God due to sin,
which none are better able to do, than they who are the subjects
thereof; and therefore it is observed, in this answer, that he
conflicted with the terrors of death, and the powers of darkness. The
devil is sometimes said to have _the power of death_, Heb. ii. 14. that
is, if the Spirit of God do not come in with his comforting presence,
but Satan be suffered to do what he can to fill the soul with horror, he
hath certainly power to make death, beyond measure, terrible. His design
herein, with respect to our Saviour, was either to drive him to despair,
induce him to repent of his undertaking what he came into the world
about, or, at least, to take some indirect methods to decline
sufferings. That Satan had some hand in this matter, we may infer from
what our Saviour says, when, considering himself as fallen into the
hands of his enraged enemies, he tells them, not only that this was
_their hour_, that is, the time in which they were suffered to express
their rage and malice against him, but that it was the hour of _the
power of darkness_, Luke xxii. 53.
2. His death was in itself more terrible than the death of his people,
when the sting and bitterness thereof is taken away from them; therefore
it is farther observed, in this answer, that he felt and bore the weight
of God’s wrath, which was the punishment of the sins of his people, for
whom he suffered. It was upon this account that he is said _to begin to
be sore amazed, and to be very heavy_, to cry out, _My soul is exceeding
sorrowful, even unto death_; and to pray, that, _if it were possible_,
this part of his sufferings _might pass from him_, Mark xiv. 33-36. We
cannot suppose that he was afraid of death; but the wrath of God was
what he principally feared. And, since this wrath is, in itself, so
terrible, he might well be supposed to be amazed, and exceeding
sorrowful, at the view thereof, not for his own sin, but ours, and yet
herein not to be guilty of any sin himself.
That this may farther appear, let it be considered, that as he _bore our
sins_, 1 Pet. ii. 14. and _it pleased the Lord to bruise him_ for them,
Isa. liii. 6. so he bore every thing that was a punishment thereof,
excepting some circumstances that are peculiar to us, and were
inconsistent with his perfect holiness, and the efficacy of his
sufferings, to take away the guilt of our sin; and therefore we must
suppose that he bore, that is, he had an afflictive sense of the wrath
of God due to it. Nothing less than this could occasion him to sweat
drops of blood, in his agony, in the garden. Had there been no
circumstance in his death, but barely his leaving this miserable world,
wherein he had such ill treatment, it would have rendered his stay
therein less desirable: but, when he considered those bitter ingredients
that were therein, and how he should, when on the cross be forsaken of
God, as to his comforting, though not his supporting presence, this made
his death more formidable, than the death of any of his people can be
said to be. And this leads us to consider the last part of his
sufferings; and accordingly it is farther said,
IX. That he endured the shameful, painful, and cursed death of the
cross. The pains that he endured before, in being buffeted, scourged,
and crowned with thorns, were very great; but what he suffered, when
nailed to the cross, and hanging on it till he died, was too great for
words to express. His body was, as it were, torn asunder by its own
weight, and the small and very sensible nerves and fibres thereof
broken, by their violent extension. The apostle therefore speaks of it,
as the most cruel death, as appears by the emphasis he puts on the
words, _He humbled himself unto death, even the death of the cross_,
Phil. ii. 8. This death was a punishment peculiar to the Romans, while
the empire was Heathen; but when Christianity obtained in the world, it
was forbidden by supreme authority, not only because of the barbarity of
it, but out of respect and honour to our Saviour, who suffered it.[218]
And therefore we have only some monuments of antiquity that discover
what kind of death it was; but there is enough said of it to give us
ground to conclude, that it was the most cruel, painful, and formidable
death; wherein the body was fastened to, and extended on a tree, or
stake, driven into the ground for that purpose; the arms extended on a
transverse beam; the hands and feet fastened, either by ropes or nails.
The former of these, as some suppose, was often used in fastening
persons to the cross; and, if so, then the nailing our Saviour to it was
an instance of unusual cruelty; but whether this observation be just, or
no, is uncertain.
It appears that our Saviour was nailed to the cross, by the mark and
print of the nails remaining after his resurrection, which he shewed to
Thomas for his conviction, John xx. 27. and this greatly tended to
increase the pain of his crucifixion, in which the weight of the whole
body depended on the hands and feet, which being nervous, are more
sensible of pain, than many other parts thereof; and, they being wounded
with the nails, the pain must be much more exquisite, and this not only
for a little while, but for several hours; all which time he felt the
pains of death, and did, as it were, die many deaths in one. This kind
of death was so cruel, and so excessively tormenting, that some of the
Roman emperors, who were of a more merciful disposition, when persons,
for the highest crimes, had deserved it, notwithstanding ordered, that
they should first be slain, and then hanged on a cross, to be exposed to
shame, or as a terror to others, without suffering those inexpressible
tortures, which would attend their dying on it. But our Saviour
submitted to all these; and so willing was he to bear them, that when
they offered him a mixture of wine and myrrh, as a narcotic, or
stupifying potion, that he might be less sensible of his pain, which was
the only kindness they pretended to shew him, and which is, by many,
supposed to be customary in such cases, _he received it not_; which is
as though he had said, I contemn all your offered assistances to ease my
pain, as much as I do your insults and reproaches; all my ease and
comfort shall be derived from heaven, and not from you. Thus concerning
the death of the cross, as exceeding painful.
There is another circumstance observed in this death, namely, that it
was shameful. Many think it was styled so, because persons, who suffered
it, were stripped of all their garments: but I am inclined to think,
that this opinion, though almost universally received, is no better than
a vulgar error; for the Romans, who were a civilized nation, would not
admit any thing to be done, which is so contrary to the law of nature,
as this thing would have been, had it been done. Besides, there are
other circumstances mentioned by the evangelist, Mark xv. 40, 41. which
farther argue the improbability thereof.
_Object._ To this it is objected, that the soldiers parted our Saviour’s
garments, and divided them among themselves, after they had cast lots
for his upper garment, or seamless coat, John xix. 23. which they
suppose to have been done before his crucifixion.
_Answ._ But to this it may be replied, that it seems more than probable,
that only his upper garment, or seamless coat, was taken from him before
he was nailed to the cross, and other garments were not taken till he
was dead, and, when he was taken down from it, they were exchanged for
those linen garments in which he was buried. This seems evident from the
words of the evangelist, who intimates, that his garments were taken off
_when they had crucified him_. Therefore the principal reason why the
death of Christ is called shameful, as the apostle styles it, when he
says, _He despised the shame_, Heb. xii. 2. is because it was a
punishment inflicted on none but those who were charged with the vilest
crimes, or who were slaves; and therefore it is called a servile
punishment.[219] When any one was made free of Rome, he was exempted
from it; and therefore it was reckoned the highest crime to punish such
an one with it, because of the reproach thereof.
It is farther observed, that the death of the cross was a cursed death;
upon which account the apostle speaks of Christ, as being _made a curse
for us, as it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree_,
Gal. iii. 13. For the understanding of which, let it be considered, that
to be accursed, sometimes signifies to be abandoned of God and man; but
far be it from us to assert this concerning the blessed Jesus, who had
done no violence, neither was any deceit found in his mouth. Therefore
the meaning of that scripture, as applied to him, is only this, that the
death of the cross had a curse annexed to it, and it denotes that the
person, who thus suffered, died the death of those who were made a
public example, as though they had been abandoned of God. Now though
Christ’s death had this appearance, yet he was, at the same time, God’s
beloved Son, in whom he was well pleased, how much soever he bore the
external marks of God’s wrath, or abhorrence of our sins, for which he
suffered. The scripture which the apostle refers to, is in Deut. xxi.
22, 23. from whence we may take occasion to observe, that, after the
Jews had put persons to death for notorious crimes, they sometimes
hanged them on a tree, and such were deemed accursed.
The common punishments, which were ordained, in scripture, to be
inflicted on malefactors, were burning, slaying with the sword, or
stoning; and when persons were hanged up before the Lord, that they
might be a public spectacle to others, it was done after they were
slain: thus it is said, that Joshua _smote_ the five kings, _and slew
them, and then hanged them on five trees until the evening_, Josh. x.
26. so David slew the two men that murdered Ishbosheth, and then _hanged
them over the pool in Heshbon_, 2 Sam. iv. 12. and, inasmuch as these
are said to _be hanged before the Lord_, it was a significant sign of
God’s righteous judgment inflicted on them for their crimes, upon which
account they were said to be cursed: but our Saviour was not liable to
the curse of God, as one who had committed any crime that deserved it;
but it had respect to the kind of death which he endured for our sins,
who were thereby exposed to the curse, or condemning sentence of the
law. Thus concerning Christ’s humiliation in his death.
We are now to consider his humiliation after his death. Though the
greatest part of his humiliation was finished when he yielded up the
ghost, yet his state of humiliation was not fully ended till he rose
from the dead; therefore it is observed in the latter of these answers
we are now explaining, that he was buried, and continued under the power
of death till the third day; which hath been otherwise expressed in
these words, _He descended into hell_, as it is contained in that Creed,
which is commonly attributed to the apostles. Here we may observe,
1. That Christ was buried. Before this, while he hanged on the cross, he
had, as it was before observed, the visible mark of the curse of God
upon him, without any desert of his own; and this he was delivered from,
when he was taken down from thence. It was a custom, among the Romans,
to suffer the bodies of those that were crucified to hang on the cross
till they were devoured by wild beasts, or fowls of the air, or turned
to corruption, unless they were given to their relations to be buried,
as an act of favour: but, in this instance, we may observe, that
Christ’s implacable enemies desired that his body might be taken down
soon after he was dead; not out of respect to him, but for fear the land
should be defiled, as God had ordained in the law, that _if a person
were hanged on a tree, his body should not remain all night upon it, but
must be buried, lest the land should be defiled_, Deut. xxi. 22, 23. and
they were the more importunate that he should be taken down, because of
the sanctity of the approaching day, John xix. 31. They petitioned
Pilate for it with one view, and Joseph of Arimathea, ver. 38. with
another; he begged the body that he might bury it.
Here we may observe, that, after the Jews had done their worst against
him, and he was taken from the cross, there was a becoming honour and
respect shewed to his sacred Body; and herein that scripture was
fulfilled, _He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his
death_, Isa. liii. 9. which words, indeed, seem to have some difficulty
in them, as they are thus translated; for, though he was crucified with
the wicked, it can hardly be said that he made his grave with them; and
therefore I would chuse to render them, as some expositors do,[220] _His
grave was appointed_, viz. by his persecutors, to have been _with the
wicked_, that is, they designed to have thrown him into the common grave
of malefactors, who had no marks of respect shewn them: but it was
otherwise with Christ, for _he made his grave with the rich_, that is,
he was buried in the tomb of Joseph, a rich and honourable counsellor,
where he himself designed to lie, which he had thrown out of the rock
for that purpose. This honour, as the prophet observes, was conferred on
our Saviour, _because he had done no violence; neither was deceit found
in his mouth_.
There were several reasons why God ordained that he should be buried,
and that in such a way and place, as he was; for,
(1.) His burial was a convincing proof to the world that he was really
dead; so much depended upon his death, that it was thought necessary
that there should be an abundant evidence thereof. It is, indeed,
expressly said, that _he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost_, John
xix. 30. and his enemies were convinced thereof, and therefore thought
it needless to break his legs, as they did those of the thieves, who
were crucified with him; providence ordering this, that _that scripture
should be fulfilled_, which fore-signified, that a _bone of him should
not be broken_. But, besides this, that there might be a farther proof
that he was really dead, it is said, that, even when they knew it, they
_pierced his side_, which, of itself, would have killed him, had he not
been dead: this they did, that they might be sure he was dead, before
they took him down from the cross, chap. xix. 33, 34. And it is farther
observed, that Pilate, his unjust judge, was resolved to be satisfied
that he was really dead, before he gave orders for his being taken down
from the cross: thus it is said, that Pilate _marvelled if he were
already dead; and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether
he had been any while dead?_ Mark xv. 44. It may be, the reason why they
were so inquisitive to know whether he were really dead, or no, was
because he seemed to die in his full strength; for there is something
remarkable in that expression, when the evangelist says, _Jesus cried
with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost_, ver. 37. whereby it appeared,
that his spirits were not so much exhausted, but that he might,
according to the course of nature, have lived longer; but he seemed by
an act of his own will, to surrender his soul to God. This was so
remarkable an occurrence, that it was not merely by accident that it is
mentioned by the evangelist; and, indeed, it was the means of the
centurion’s conviction that he was the Son of God, ver. 39.
(2.) Providence ordered that he should be buried by persons of
reputation and honour, that so the world might know, that how much
soever the rude multitude despised him, persons of figure and character
in the world paid a due respect to him, John xix. 39, 40.
(3.) It was farther ordained, that he should be buried in a new tomb,
wherein never man was laid; that so his resurrection might be more fully
demonstrated, that none might pretend that another was raised instead of
him, since no other was buried in this grave.
The fine linen, in which his body was wrapped, and the sweet spices, or
perfumed ointment, with which it was embalmed, was not only agreeable to
the method of sepulture, used by the Jews, but it was a public testimony
of that respect which his friends bore to him, to whom his memory was
precious: so that Nicodemus, who, before this, was afraid to come
publickly to him, or who, as it is said, at the first, came to Jesus by
night, _brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, and they took the body of
Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes, with the spices, as the manner of
the Jews is to bury_, chap. xix. 30, 40.
2. As Christ died, and was buried, so he continued under the power of
death till the third day; this the apostle calls, _Death’s having
dominion over him_, Rom. vi. 9. and it must be reckoned a part of his
humiliation, as well as the act of dying; for,
_1st_, Though his soul enjoyed the bliss and happiness of heaven,
immediately after his death, as he tells the penitent thief, that _that
day he should be with him in paradise_, Luke xxiii. 43. yet, inasmuch as
it was, when separate, in a state of imperfection, and had a natural
desire, and hope of re-union with the body, this argues that there were
some degrees of perfect blessedness, that it was not then possessed of.
_2dly_, So long as he continued under the power of death, he was not
fully discharged by the justice of God; neither was the work of
satisfaction complete, till he was declared to be the Son of God with
power, and to have fully conquered death and hell, by his resurrection
from the death; this was therefore a part of his humiliation.
_3dly_, His body, while remaining a prisoner in the grave, could not
actively bring that glory to God, which it did before, or would do after
its resurrection; and it was, at that time, incapable of the heavenly
blessedness, and, in particular, of its being so glorious a body, as now
it is.
All these things attending the state of separate souls, or the unseen
state, into which Christ is said to go, immediately after his death,
some call, as it is observed in this answer, his descent into hell,
which is what we are next to consider: but, since this is largely and
judiciously handled by several writers,[221] I shall insist on it with
brevity. And,
[1.] Consider it as founded on scripture, as the judicious Calvin
does,[222] without regard had to its being inserted in any creed of
human composure: thus it is said, _Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell;
neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption_, Acts ii. 27.
where it seems, as the author but now mentioned observes, to be put
before his death; and therefore he supposes, that the apostle hereby
intends the sufferings which our Saviour endured in his soul, which were
not, in all respects, unlike the punishment due to sin in hell: and
herein he is followed by several modern writers; and the principal
reason, which they assign for it, is, because, as our Surety, he endured
all the essential parts of that punishment, which our sins had deserved;
and therefore they suppose, that he endured an afflictive sensation of
the wrath of God, which bore some resemblance to that which is endured
in hell.
But, though I would not extenuate Christ’s sufferings, especially in
that part thereof, that was most formidable to him, which was the cup
that he desired, if it were possible, that it might pass from him; nor
can we suppose that any thing less than a view which he had of the wrath
of God, due to our sins, would fill him with that horror and amazement,
which he expressed: yet we ought carefully to distinguish between this
part of his sufferings, and the punishment of sin in hell, inasmuch as
he was exempted from the sting of conscience, and a constant sense of
the everlasting displeasure of God, together with despair of any better
condition, or the least relaxation, as a judicious writer observes.[223]
And besides, it is expressly said, in this scripture, Thou wilt not
leave my soul; which shews, that though he might be destitute of the
comfortable sense of God’s presence, which occasioned him to cry out,
_My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?_ yet he was not destitute of
the supporting presence of God, nor separate from his love, which always
redounded to his Person; though the effects of God’s wrath, which he
bore, might fill him with the greatest uneasiness, from the afflictive
view, which he had thereof in his soul. However, though the sense of
this text must be thus qualified, if we suppose that it denotes Christ’s
sufferings in his soul before his death; yet it does not sufficiently
appear that the apostle speaks of his sufferings antecedent to it;
because it is brought in as an argument, to prove that he should be
raised from the dead, and accordingly his flesh is said to rest in hope;
therefore we shall proceed,
[2.] To consider Christ’s descent into hell, as contained in one of the
articles of the creed, that is commonly attributed to the apostles,
which is particularly referred to, in the answer under our present
consideration, wherein it is put after his death. Here something might
have been premised concerning that Creed in general, and the reason of
inserting this article in it: but this having been insisted on with
great judgment by others,[224] all that I shall add, is, that
notwithstanding what we meet with in some fabulous and spurious
writings, this Creed was not compiled by the apostles, how consonant
soever it be to the doctrines laid down by them: for we have no account
given of it by any ancient writers before the fourth century, therefore
it is of later date, than either the Nicene or Athanasian Creed; the
former of which was composed about the year of our Lord 325, the latter
not long after it. In the Nicene Creed, there is no mention made of
Christ’s descent into hell, though the Athanasian Creed inserts it; but
there is no mention therein of his being buried. The words are these: He
descended into hell, and the third day he arose from the dead; from
whence some conclude, that nothing else is intended but his being
buried, or continuing in the state of the dead, till his
resurrection.[225] Some think, indeed, that there was a marginal note in
some copies of this Creed, to explain what is meant by his descending
into hell, namely, that he was buried; which the compilers of the
apostles Creed afterwards thought to be a part of the Creed itself, and
therefore they add, that he died, was buried, and descended into hell.
But passing by this critical remark, concerning the reason of the
insertion hereof in this article, we shall proceed to consider how this
is explained, by various writers, who treat on this subject. And,
(1.) The Papists and Lutherans assert that our Saviour descended locally
into hell after his death; not to suffer any of the torments that are
endured there, but to shew himself as a conqueror over those who are
detained in it, and triumph over them. As for the Papists, they suppose,
that he went also into a place, which they describe[226] as a prison,
where the souls of the old Testament-saints were detained, as being
incapable of entering into heaven, inasmuch as they had not a sufficient
discovery of Christ and the gospel made to them, while they were here on
earth; and therefore they were detained in this, which we may call a
fictitious place, which they represent as being between heaven and hell;
not, indeed, according to them, a place of torment, but they suppose it
was such, in which they were destitute of the heavenly blessedness; and
they add, that immediately after Christ appeared among them, and
manifested himself to them, they believed; in which sense they
understand that scripture, where it is said, that _the gospel was
preached to them that are dead_, 1 Pet. iv. 6. and, upon this, he
carried them with him into heaven. This opinion of Christ’s descending
locally into hell, is very absurd, and contrary to scripture;
particularly,
_1st_, To what he says to the penitent thief upon the cross, _To-day
thou shalt be with me in paradise_, Luke xxiii. 43. by which, doubtless
he means heaven, which is called paradise in other scriptures, 2 Cor.
xii. 2. compared with 4. and Rev. ii. 7. The method which the Papists
take to evade the force of this argument, is, by pretending that our
Saviour speaks of his being with him in heaven, as he is there in his
divine nature; or, since that appears to be so great a strain on the
sense of the text, that very few will much regard it; they have another
evasion, which is as little to the purpose, by pretending, that there
ought to be a stop put after the words to day; and so the meaning is,
that now at this time, I say unto thee, that thou shalt be with me in
paradise, or heaven, when I ascend into it, after I have descended into
hell, and that other place which I must go to, before I come to heaven:
but this sense of the text is so evasive, that none, who read the
scripture impartially, can suppose that it is just; and therefore
nothing farther need be said to it.
_2dly_, It appears that Christ immediately went into heaven, as to his
soul, when he died upon the cross, from his last words, _Father, into
thine hands I commend my spirit; which having said, he gave up the
ghost_, Luke xxiii. 46. This giving up himself to God, implies a desire
that God would receive his spirit; even as Stephen said, with his dying
breath, _Lord Jesus, receive my spirit_, Acts vii. 59. Christ, in
effect, desires that God would receive his spirit; and can we suppose
this prayer to be unanswered, or that he was not immediately received
into heaven?
We might farther have shown how little ground they have to conclude that
Christ went to preach the gospel to those, who, by reason of the
darkness of the Old Testament-dispensation, were detained in prison, as
being unfit for the heavenly state: but the falseness of this
supposition has been considered elsewhere,[227] and therefore pass it
over at present. And as for that scripture, which they bring in defence
hereof, that Christ went and preached to the spirits in prison, 1 Pet.
iii. 19. it is plain from the context, that the apostle means nothing
else thereby, but his sending Noah to preach to the old world, who were
disobedient, and, for this, were sent into the prison of hell, _after
the long-suffering of God had waited on them while the ark was
building_. How easy a matter is it for those, who regard but the analogy
of faith, or the context of those scriptures, which they bring in
defence of their wild absurdities, to pretend to prove any thing from
scripture![228]
As to what they say concerning Christ’s descending into hell, to triumph
over the devils, and others, who were there plunged into that abyss of
misery, this conjecture has no foundation in scripture. We read, indeed
of his _spoiling principalities and powers, and making a shew of them
openly, triumphing over them_; but it was _in his cross_, and not in
hell, Col. ii. 15. and elsewhere of his _destroying him that had the
power of death, that is, the devil_, Heb. ii. 14. But it was not by
going in his own Person into that place, where he is detained in chains
of darkness; it was not by any thing done by him after his death, but,
as it is expressed, by death, as he purchased that victory, which he
obtained over him on the cross, which was the seat of his triumph in
this respect; and therefore there is no foundation to assert his local
descent into hell.
(2.) The most probable opinion concerning Christ’s descent into hell,
which I cannot but acquiesce in, is what is observed in this answer, as
implying his continuing in the state of the dead, and under the power of
death till the third day. The word _hell_, indeed, in our English
tongue, generally, if not always, signifies that place of torment, which
they are adjudged to, who are for ever excluded from the divine favour:
thus it is said, concerning the rich man in the parable, that _in hell
he lift up his eyes, being in torments_, Luke xvi. 23. But the Hebrew
and Greek words,[229] which we often translate _hell_, have not only
that, but another sense affixed to them, as they sometimes signify the
_grave_; so our translators frequently render the word; as when Jacob
speaks of _bringing down his gray hairs with sorrow to the grave_, Gen.
xlii. 38. and elsewhere it is said, _The Lord killeth and maketh alive;
he bringeth down to grave, and bringeth up_, 1 Sam. ii. 6. And it is
taken for the state of the dead: thus Jacob, when he thought that his
son Joseph was torn in pieces, without being laid in the grave, says, _I
will go down into the grave, unto my son_, Gen. xxxvii. 35. There are
many other places in which the Hebrew word is so rendered; and as for
the Greek word, that, according to its proper derivation and
signification, denotes the state of the dead, or the unseen state: thus
our Saviour, after death, continued in the state of the dead, his soul
being separate from his body till the third day, when his state of
humiliation was finished.
This leads us to consider Christ’s state of exaltation.
Footnote 216:
_A piece of silver is the same which is elsewhere called a shekel,
which was valued at about half a crown, English money; so that the
whole price for which our Saviour was sold into their hands, was no
more than three pounds fifteen shillings._
Footnote 217:
_Pilate is characterized, by various writers, as a man of inhuman
cruelty, insatiable avarice, and inflexible obstinacy. An instance of
his cruelty we have mentioned in Luke_ xiii. _1. in his mingling_ the
blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices, _that is, as some
suppose he fell upon them without a fair trial, and murdered them
while they were engaged in a solemn act of religious worship, offering
sacrifice at Jerusalem, in one of the public festivals; pretending,
though without a fair trial, that they were of the same mind, with
Judas of Galilee, who had persuaded many of the Galileans to refuse to
give tribute to Cæsar. A learned writer_ (Vid. Grot. in Luke xiii. 1.)
_supposes, not only that this was the occasion of this inhuman action,
which is not improbable, (though Josephus makes no mention of it) but
also that this is one of those things which was reported to the
emperor, who did not approve of it. And afterwards there were other
instances of his oppression and mal-administration laid before
Tiberius, which, had not that emperor’s death prevented, it would have
occasioned his disgrace; and afterwards he fell under the displeasure
of his successor, and was not only turned out of his procuratorship,
but reduced to such miserable circumstances, that he laid violent
hands on himself_, (Vid. Phil. Jud. de Leg. ad Caj. & Joseph. Antiq.
Lib. XVIII. cap. 5. & Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. II. cap. 7.)
_Therefore we may well suppose, that though he had, in other respects
no regard to the Jews; yet, on this occasion, he feared, lest they
should report his vile actions to the emperor, and that they would
represent this to him with a malicious insinuation, that he was his
enemy, because he spared our Saviour: this occasioned him to deliver
him up to them, to do what they would with him._
Footnote 218:
_Vid. Sozom. Hist. Eccl. Lib. I. cap. 8_.
Footnote 219:
_It is frequently styled, by the Romans, Servile supplicium_, (Vid.
Val. Max. Lib. II. de discipl. milit. § 12.) _as being inflicted, by
them, on none but slaves; so one_ (Vid. Ter. Andr.) _represents a
master speaking to his servant_, Quid meritus es? _To which he
replies, Crucem. & Juv. in Satyr, 6. says_, Pone Crucem servo. _Cicero
inveighs, with so much earnestness, against this severe and cruel
punishment, that he signifies how glorious and delightful a thing it
would be for him to declaim against it, not only at the expence of his
strength, but of his very life_: Quorum ego de acerbissima morte,
crudelissimoq; cruciatu dicam, cum eum locum tractare cœpero; & ita
dicam, ut si me in ea querimonia, quam sum habiturus de istius
crudelitate, & de civium Rom, indignissima morte, non modo vires,
verum etiam vita deficiat, id mihi præclarum & jucundum putem. _And
elsewhere he intimates, that it was universally reckoned the highest
crime to crucify any one that was free of Rome, in a beautiful climax,
or gradation of expression_: Facinus est, vinciri civem Romanum;
scelus verberari: prope parricidium necari: quid dicam in crucem
tollere? (Vid. Orat. in Verr. Lib. V.) _And elsewhere he says_, Nomen
ipsum crucis, absit non modo a corpore civium Romanorum, sed etiam a
cogitatione, oculis, auribus. _And he adds concerning it, together
with other cruelties that attended it_, Harum enim omnium rerum non
solum eventus, atque perpessio, sed etiam conditio, expectatio, mentio
ipsa denique, indigna cive Romano, atque homine libero est. (Vid.
Orat. pro C. Rabir.) _As for the cruelty of this death, it was so
great, that the greatest tortures that are expressed by the word
Cruciatus, are plainly derived from Crux: and some of the Roman
emperors, who were of a more merciful disposition than others,
considering the inhumanity of this kind of death, when they exposed
some persons for their crimes to public shame upon the cross, ordered
them first to be put to death by the sword._
Footnote 220:
_See Lowth in loc._
Footnote 221:
_Vid. Wits. in Symbol. Exercitat. 18. and Pearson on the Creed,
Article 5. and Parker de descensu Christi ad inferos._
Footnote 222:
_Vid. Institut. Lib. II. cap. 16. § 10._
Footnote 223:
_Vid. Pearson on the Creed, Artic. 5._
Footnote 224:
_Vid. History of the apostles Creed._
Footnote 225:
The Creed called the Apostles’ is not offered by the first writers in
whom it is found, upon its own authority. They attempt to prove it
from the scriptures, and we can receive it in no other way. The
article “He descended into hell” did not originally stand in the
Eastern, nor in the Roman creed; it was first found in the creed of
Aquileia, which had nothing of Christ’s burial; and no doubt as αδκσ
is often put for the grave, this article meant in it his burial. When
inserted from thence into the two other creeds, which mentioned his
burial already, it was understood of his human soul. Yet it stands
incoherently, for his body was crucified, dead, buried, arose, and was
seen to ascend: but this article, in the midst of those verbs,
predicates something of another subject, his soul. Yet if taken in the
sense of “_Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell_,” (Psa. xvi. Acts ii.)
it is true. But שאול and αδκσ are each taken for the invisible world
or separate state, of the good, as well as evil, both in the old and
new Testament, and this was thought by Jews and Gentiles to be under
the surface. Thus Abraham and Lazarus were supposed there, and Samuel
to have been called up from thence. Christ asserting his divinity,
must allege he came from heaven, for that was the place of God. He
also returned thither, and is to come from thence; yet he has gone to
prepare a place, and his disciples expected by his promise to be with
him, and so all other Christians. His descent therefore means that his
soul, when separated from his body, was immediately with the separate
spirits, who are happy, and so said to be in paradise. But whether
above, or below the surface, is unimportant. None but the Divine
Spirit is ubiquitary, but the transitions of others may be as quick as
thought. They have means of communication with each other, and can
receive what answers to our sense of light, without bodily senses, and
no doubt vastly more satisfactorily, than we do in our most vivid
dreams. The Divine Nature of Christ was, and is, omnipresent; for he
declared he was in heaven whilst on earth, and it is not probable that
his human soul was separated from this after his death any more than
during his life.
Footnote 226:
_This they call Limbus Patrum._
Footnote 227:
_See Vol. I. page 54, 55, and page 209, ante._
Footnote 228:
1 Peter iii. 18. describes the sufferings, death, and resurrection of
Christ, as encouragement for the suffering saints. There are no
prepositions before σαρκς, and πνευματι (flesh and spirit:) our
translators have taken the former as the dative of the _part
affected_, the latter as the dative of the _cause_; and have expressed
the former by _in_, the latter by _by_. Some preposition, or
prepositions must be inserted in the translation. It is said, to
preserve the antithesis, the same should be repeated, and so it will
be; “Was quickened in the Spirit,” which will refer to his human soul.
But his human soul was not dead, and could not be quickened. And it is
absurd to substitute the adjective _quick_, (as Dr. Horseley has done)
for this is to make, not translate scripture. Nor could his human soul
quicken his body; it was the power of God, whether we understand by
Spirit his divine nature, the person of the Father, or of the Holy
Spirit. Now as the word Spirit here cannot mean his human soul, this
passage will not prove that it went to any place, or prison, whatever.
_By which_, (ver. 19.) relates to the Divine Spirit: _he_, that is,
Christ, _went_ (πορευθεις having gone,) _preached_ (this is also the
indefinite past tense) _to the spirits in prison_. The omission of the
substantive verb makes the present tense; and the spirits here spoken
of were still in prison, at the time of the writing this epistle, and
therefore whether good or evil, they had not been set at large by
Christ from their imprisonment. The word _disobedient_ is also the
indefinite participle. _Went_, _preached_, and _disobedient_, are all
the same tense; and, coming together, evidently relate to the same
time. Ποτε οτε connect them with, and pin them down to the time of the
verb _waited_, which is the unfinished action, _was waiting_, the
tense, which is most definite, and in this case actually connected
with absolute time, to wit, “_in the days of Noah_.” The _going
forth_, the _preaching_, and the _disobedience_, were therefore all,
as well as the _waiting_ of God, in the days of Noah, and not between
the death, and resurrection of Christ.
The reason that the Apostle fixes on the fearful example of rejecting
divine instructions in the days of Noah, was probably that Noah had
been called in scripture a _preacher of righteousness_: the Lord had
also said of that generation, that his _Spirit should not always
strive with man_, which implies, that his Spirit did go forth with the
preaching of that age; and their disobedience was proved by their
destruction by the deluge; and their death in impenitency was a proof
of their everlasting punishment.
Footnote 229:
שאול _and_ Αδης.
Quest. LI., LII.