There, therefore, by reason of the preparation of the Jews, for the sepulcher was nigh at hand, they laid Jesus. John assigns the rapidity with which the process could be completed as a reason for entombment in this particular garden sepulcher, and the ground of the urgency was the "preparation" solemnities. Once more the critics divide into two groups as to the significance of this reference to the date of the Lord's death. It is obvious that both the synoptists and John imply that it was a "Friday," and that the next day was the sabbath. Why, for the third time in the space of a few lines, should this circumstance be noticed? On the first occasion, the morning of the day is said to be "the preparation of the Passover;" on the second it is called "preparation before the sabbath," and John adds that that particular sabbath was a "high day," which, as we have seen, is explained by remembering that its sanctity was doubled, seeing that on that particular year the weekly sabbath would coincide with the 15th of Nisan, which had a sabbatic value of its own. Now he says for the third time it was the "preparation of the Jews"—as we understand it, a day or a time when special preparations were being made by the Jews, and that before sunset, for the slaying of the Paschal lamb. Moreover, the sabbath was drawing on ( ἐπέφωσκεν, Luke 23:54). This threefold statement implies that there was something more in the παρασκευή than the Friday of the Passover week. It is curious to observe the precisely contradictory conclusions drawn from this statement by two classes of interpreters. Godet has given an interesting sketch of the extraordinary idea of M. Lutteroth, that the Lord was crucified on the 10th of Nisan! that he rose from the dead three full days and nights afterwards, on the morning of the 14th. But why should John three times over thus designate the day? and why should the synoptists lay such emphasis on its being the "preparation," if the day were really the first great day of the Passover Feast? It is remarkable that St. Paul, referring to the institution of the Eucharist, does not say "on the night of the Passover meal," but on "the night in which he was betrayed" (1 Corinthians 11:23), and he speaks of Jesus as the ( ἀπαρχή) "Firstfruits of the dead," as though the resurrection morning coincided with the presentation of the firstfruits, which, on the idea that Jesus suffered on the 15th, would have been presented on the morning of the Jewish sabbath, while the reference in 1 Corinthians 5:7-9, written at the time of a Passover, is rather in favor of the slaying of the Paschal lamb coinciding with the death of Jesus than the institution of the Eucharist doing so. The most extraordinary reference to the παρασκεύη is that which St. Matthew 28:1-20 :62 introduces, when he actually refers to the sabbath when it had begun (on the evening of the 14th or 15th, whichever it was, i.e. after 6 p.m.) under the designation of "the day after the preparation." Generally the more important day would receive its own proper name, and not be designated by the less signal day. Why did not St. Matthew say, "On the morrow, which was the Sabbath"? The one group of interpreters answer that he wished to discriminate the veritable sabbath as distinct from the half-sabbath of the previous day, made so by being also the great day of the feast! But it is more natural to suppose that "the day of preparation," the death-day of the Lord, loomed so largely in the mind of the evangelist, that its morrow derived importance in this particular instance from itself. The only real difficulty in settling this wearisome controversy arises from one statement in the synoptists, which, if resolved in the rigid sense of limiting their expressions to the evening of the 14th and beginning of the 15th, involves us in grave difficulties when considering five or six distinct and independent statements of John's Gospel. We have shown at each of these places the double method of exegetical treatment that has been attempted, and in each case honesty compels us to admit that John is here in apparent discord with the synoptists. If, however, our Lord anticipated by a few hours the celebration of the Paschal supper, seeing that his "hour was come," not indeed deviating from the legal day (though, as Lord of the sabbath and greater than the temple, he was amply justified in doing so), but hurrying on the process between the 13th and 14th, when the water-bearers would be seen fetching their pure water for the purpose; and if he celebrated the Passover at the beginning rather than the end of the 14th of Nisan, then the apparent discord between John and the synoptists vanishes, and the terrible events of the trials and crucifixion of Jesus really took place at the time when the Jews (not Christ himself) were preparing for the Passover proper. On this hypothesis the two narratives would be no longer in hopeless antagonism. With this conclusion we are more satisfied, since, as we have seen in John 13:1 and elsewhere, the synoptists themselves afford numerous corroboratory evidences.
HOMILETICS
The Crucifixion.
The end has come at last.
I. JESUS CARRYING HIS CROSS. "And he, bearing his cross, went forth to the place of the skull, which is called in the Hebrew, Golgotha."
1. The condemned, according to Roman law, had to carry the instrument of their own punishment.
2. Jesus bore his cross part of the way, till he sank with exhaustion. Accordingly, Simon of Cyrene was required to do the office. The exhaustion of Jesus was caused
II. THE SCENE OF THE CRUCIFIXION.
1. It was outside the gate of the city, according to ancient Jewish law. (Le 24:14.)
2. The exhortation, "Let us go forth to him without the camp, bearing his reproach" (Hebrews 13:12, Hebrews 13:13), is founded upon this ancient custom.
3. The actual spot is called Golgotha, or Calvary; but it has not been identified in modern times.
III. THE CRUCIFIXION. "Where they crucified him, and two others with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst."
1. Who were they who did this deed?
(a) God's ancient people;
(b) the witnesses of his marvelous works;
(c) in the land where Jesus was best known;
(d) and in the capital of its solemnities.
2. What did they do? "They crucified him."
(a) The victim was nailed by his hands and his feet to the cross, while, it still lay on the ground.
(b) These nails, by their position, added to the victim's torture.
(c) It was a lingering death, for the victim sometimes survived till the third day.
3. Whom did they crucify?
(a) He is crucified with two robbers, as if he were the fit colleague of malefactors.
(b) He is crucified between them, as if to add to his disgrace. He is the Prince of malefactors. He was indeed "numbered with the transgressors" (Isaiah 53:12).
(c) His central place in that death-scene—"Jesus in the midst"—is, after all, in keeping with his central place in heaven and in earth, and in the hopes of dying men.
( α) He is central in heaven; for "the Lamb is in the midst of the throne."
( β) He is central on earth,
(i.) as the Lord who, at the heart of the universe, upholds all things by the Word of his power;
(ii.) as the Center of the invisible Church, for he is its only Head;
(iii.) as the Center of the visible Church, for all Christendom crystallizes around the Person of Christ;
(iv.) as the infrangible Center of man's dying hopes.