Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 27:34
They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted [thereof,] he would not drink.
34. vinegar mingled with gall ] “Wine mingled with myrrh” (Mark). Vinegar = “sour wine” ( vinaigre), or posca, such as was ordinarily drunk by the Roman soldiers. The potion was a stupefying draught given to criminals to deaden the sense of pain. “Some of the wealthy ladies of Jerusalem charged themselves with this office of mercy.” (Lightfoot, ad loc.) Jesus refuses this alleviation of His sufferings.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
They gave him vinegar … – Mark says that, they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh. The two evangelists mean the same thing. Vinegar was made of light wine rendered acid, and was the common drink of the Roman soldiers, and this might be called either vinegar or wine in common language. Myrrh is a bitter substance produced in Arabia, but is used often to denote anything bitter. The meaning of the name is bitterness. See the notes at Mat 2:11. Gall is properly a bitter secretion from the liver, but the word is also used to denote anything exceedingly bitter, as wormwood, etc. The drink, therefore, was vinegar or sour wine, rendered bitter by the infusion of wormwood or some other very bitter substance. The effect of this, it is said, was to stupefy the senses. It was often given to those who were crucified, to render them insensible to the pains of death. Our Lord, knowing this, when he bad tasted it refused to drink. He was unwilling to blunt the pains of dying. The cup which his Father gave him he rather chose to drink. He came to suffer. His sorrows were necessary for the work of the atonement, and he gave himself up to the unmitigated sufferings of the cross. This was presented to him in the early part of his sufferings, or when he was about to be suspended on the cross. Afterward, when he was on the cross and just before his death, vinegar was offered to him without the myrrh – the vinegar which the soldiers usually drank – and of this he drank. See Mat 27:49, and Joh 19:28-30. When Matthew and Mark say that he would not drink, they refer to a different thing and a different time from John, and there is no contradiction.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 34. They gave him vinegar – mingled with gall] Perhaps , commonly translated gall, signifies no more than bitters of any kind. It was a common custom to administer a stupefying potion compounded of sour wine, which is the same as vinegar, from the French vinaigre, frankincense, and myrrh, to condemned persons, to help to alleviate their sufferings, or so disturb their intellect that they might not be sensible of them. The rabbins say that they put a grain of frankincense into a cup of strong wine; and they ground this on Pr 31:6: Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, i.e. who is condemned to death. Some person, out of kindness, appears to have administered this to our blessed Lord; but he, as in all other cases, determining to endure the fulness of pain, refused to take what was thus offered to him, choosing to tread the winepress alone. Instead of , vinegar, several excellent MSS. and versions have , wine; but as sour wine is said to have been a general drink of the common people and Roman soldiers, it being the same as vinegar, it is of little consequence which reading is here adopted. This custom of giving stupefying potions to condemned malefactors is alluded to in Pr 31:6: Give strong drink, shekar, inebriating drink, to him who is ready to PERISH, and wine to him who is BITTER of soul – because he is just going to suffer the punishment of death. And thus the rabbins, as we have seen above, understand it. See Lightfoot and Schoettgen.
Michaelis offers an ingenious exposition of this place: “Immediately after Christ was fastened to the cross, they gave him, according to Mt 27:34, vinegar mingled with gall; but, according to Mark, they offered him wine mingled with myrrh. That St. Mark’s account is the right one is probable from this circumstance, that Christ refused to drink what was offered him, as appears from both evangelists. Wine mixed with myrrh was given to malefactors at the place of execution, to intoxicate them, and make them less sensible to pain. Christ, therefore, with great propriety, refused the aid of such remedies. But if vinegar was offered him, which was taken merely to assuage thirst, there could be no reason for his rejecting it. Besides, he tasted it before he rejected it; and therefore he must have found it different from that which, if offered to him, he was ready to receive. To solve this difficulty, we must suppose that the words used in the Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew were such as agreed with the account given by St. Mark, and at the same time were capable of the construction which was put on them by St. Matthew’s Greek translator. Suppose St. Matthew wrote (chaleea bemireera) which signifies, sweet wine with bitters, or sweet wine and myrrh, as we find it in Mark; and Matthew’s translator overlooked the yod in (chaleea) he took it for (chala) which signifies vinegar; and bitter, he translated by , as it is often used in the Septuagint. Nay, St. Matthew may have written , and have still meant to express sweet wine; if so, the difference only consisted in the points; for the same word which, when pronounced chale, signifies sweet, denotes vinegar, as soon as it is pronounced chala.”
With this conjecture Dr. Marsh (Michaelis’s translator) is not satisfied; and therefore finds a Chaldee word for wine, which may easily be mistaken for one that denotes vinegar; and likewise a Chaldee word, which signifies , (myrrh,) which may be easily mistaken for one that denotes , (gall.) “Now,” says he, ” (chamar) or (chamera) really denotes (wine,) and (chamets) or (charnetsa) really denotes (vinegar.) Again, (mura) really signifies (myrrh,) and (murera) really signifies (gall.) If, then, we suppose that the original Chaldee text was (chamera heleet bemura) wine mingled with myrrh, which is not at all improbable, as it is the reading of the Syriac version, at Mr 15:23, it might easily have been mistaken for (chametsa haleet bemurera) vinegar mingled with gall.” This is a more ingenious conjecture than that of Michaelis. See Marsh’s notes to Michaelis, vol. iii., part 2d. p. 127-28. But as that kind of sour wine, which was used by the Roman soldiers and common people, appears to have been termed , and vin aigre is sour wine, it is not difficult to reconcile the two accounts, in what is most material to the facts here recorded.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
They gave him vinegar to drink,…. It was a custom with the Jews o when
“a man went out to be executed, to give him to drink a grain of frankincense in a cup of wine, that his understanding might be disturbed, as it is said, Pr 31:6. “Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish, and wine to those that be of heavy hearts”; and the tradition is, that the honourable women in Jerusalem gave this freely; but if they did not, it was provided at the charge of the congregation.”
The design of it was to cheer their spirits, and intoxicate their heads, that they might not be sensible of their pain and misery. But such a cup was not allowed Christ at the public expense, nor were the honourable women so compassionate to him; or if it was sent him, the soldiers did not give it him, but another potion in the room of it; indeed Mark says, they gave him “wine mingled with myrrh”,
Mr 15:23; which was either a cordial provided by his friends, and given him, and is different from what the soldiers gave him here; or the sense is, that they gave him the cup, that was so called, but not the thing; but instead of it,
vinegar mingled with gall. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, instead of “vinegar”, read “wine”; and so does Munster’s Hebrew Gospel, and so it is read in Beza’s most ancient copy, and in another exemplar, and in one of Stephens’s; and which may be easily reconciled with the common reading, and that with Mark; for the wine they gave him was flat and sour, and no other or better than vinegar; and real vinegar may be so called, as this seems to be; and the rather, because vinegar was a part of the Roman soldiers’ allowance, and so they had it ready at hand; [See comments on Joh 19:29]. As also, because it was thought that vinegar was useful to prolong the life of a man ready to die; and therefore they might choose to give it to Christ, that he might live the longer in misery: so the Jews p write, that
“if a man swallows a wasp or hornet alive, he cannot live; but they must give him to drink a quarter, , “of vinegar of Shamgaz”, (which the gloss says is strong vinegar,) and it is possible he may live a little while, until he hath given orders to his house.”
The Arabic version, instead of “gall”, reads “myrrh”; nor are we to suppose that this drink was mixed with the gall of a beast itself, but with something that was as bitter as “gall”; as wormwood, or myrrh, or any other bitter, to make it distasteful. This potion of vinegar with gall, was an aggravating circumstance in our Lord’s sufferings, being given to him when he had a violent thirst upon him; and was an emblem of the bitter cup of God’s wrath, he had already tasted of in the garden, and was about to drink up: the Jews had a notion of vinegar’s being expressive of the chastisements of the Messiah; the words in Ru 2:14, they say q,
“speak of the king Messiah; “come thou hither”, draw nigh to the kingdom; “and eat of the bread”, this is the bread of the kingdom, “and dip thy morsel in the vinegar”,
, “these are the chastisements”, as it is said in Isa 53:5, “he was wounded for our transgressions”.”
By this offer was fulfilled the prophecy in Ps 69:21, and which he did not altogether refuse; for it follows,
and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink: not because it was the vinegar of Gentiles, which was forbidden by the Jewish canons q, lest it should have been offered to idols; but because he would make use of no means either to prolong his life, or discompose his mind; and that it might appear he knew what he did, and that he was not afraid nor unwilling to die; though he thought fit to taste of it in a superficial way, to show he did not despise nor resent their offer; and that he was really athirst, and ready to drink a more disagreeable potion than that.
o T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 12. 2. p Midrash Ruth, fol. 33. 2. q T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 29. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Wine mingled with gall ( ). Late MSS. read
vinegar () instead of wine and Mark (Mr 15:23) has myrrh instead of gall. The myrrh gave the sour wine a better flavour and like the bitter gall had a narcotic and stupefying effect. Both elements may have been in the drink which Jesus tasted and refused to drink. Women provided the drink to deaden the sense of pain and the soldiers may have added the gall to make it disagreeable. Jesus desired to drink to the full the cup from his Father’s hand (Joh 18:11).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Wine [] . The older texts read oxov, vinegar. The compound of wine and gall was intended as a stupefying draught.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
34. And they gave him vinegar. Although the Evangelists are not so exact in placing each matter in its due order, as to enable us to fix the precise moment at which the events occurred; yet I look upon it as a probable conjecture that, before our Lord was elevated on the cross, there was offered to him in a cup, according to custom, wine mingled with myrrh, or some other mixture, which appears to have been compounded of gall and vinegar. It is sufficiently agreed, indeed, among nearly all interpreters, that this draught was different from that which is mentioned by John, (Joh 14:29,) and of which we shall speak very soon. I only add, that I consider the cup to have been offered to our Lord when he was about to be crucified; but that after the cross was lifted up, a sponge was then dipped and given to him. At what time he began to ask something to drink, I am not very anxious to inquire; but when we compare all the circumstances, it is not unreasonable to suppose that, after he had refused that bitter mixture, it was frequently in derision presented to his lips. For we shall find Matthew afterwards adding that the soldiers, while they were giving him to drink, upbraided him for not being able to rescue himself from death. Hence we infer that, while the remedy was offered, they ridiculed the weakness of Christ, because he had complained that he was forsaken by God, (Mat 27:49.)
As to the Evangelist John’s narrative, it is only necessary to understand that Christ requested that some ordinary beverage might be given him to assuage his thirst, but that vinegar, mingled with myrrh and gall, was attempted to be forced upon him for hastening his death. But he patiently bore his torments, so that the lingering pain did not lead him to desire that his death should be hastened; for even this was a part of his sacrifice and obedience, to endure to the very last the lingering exhaustion.
They are mistaken, in my opinion, who look upon the vinegar as one of the torments which were cruelly inflicted on the Son of God. There is greater probability in the conjecture of those who think that this kind of beverage had a tendency to promote the evacuation of blood, and that on this account it was usually given to malefactors, for the purpose of accelerating their death. Accordingly, Mark calls it wine mingled with myrrh. Now Christ, as I have just now hinted, was not led to refuse the wine or vinegar so much by a dislike of its bitterness, as by a desire to show that he advanced calmly to death, according to the command of the Father, and that he did not rush on heedlessly through want of patience for enduring pain. Nor is this inconsistent with what John says, that the Scripture was fulfilled, In my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink. For the two accounts perfectly agree with each other; that a remedy was given to him in order to put an end to the torments of a lingering death, and yet that Christ was in every respect treated with harshness, so that the very alleviation was a part, or rather was an augmentation, of his pain.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(34) Vinegar to drink mingled with gall.In Mar. 15:23, wine mingled with myrrh. The animal secretion known as gall is clearly out of the question, and the meaning of the word is determined by its use in the Greek version of the Old Testament, where it stands for the wormwood of Pro. 5:4, for the poisonous herb joined with wormwood in Deu. 29:18. It was clearly something at once nauseous and narcotic, given by the merciful to dull the pain of execution, and mixed with the sour wine of the country and with myrrh to make it drinkable. It may have been hemlock, or even poppy-juice, but there are no materials for deciding. It is probable that the offer came from the more pitiful of the women mentioned by St. Luke (Luk. 23:27) as following our Lord and lamenting. Such acts were among the received works of mercy of the time and place. The tasting implied a recognition of the kindly purpose of the act, but a recognition only. In the refusal to do more than taste we trace the resolute purpose to drink the cup which His Father had given Him to the last drop, and not to dull either the sense of suffering nor the clearness of His communion with His Father with the slumberous potion. The same draught was, we may believe, offered to the two criminals who were crucified with Him.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
34. Vinegar to drink The fainting prisoner was brought to the place of execution, and the cross was taken from the shoulder of the bearer preparatory to driving the nails into his limbs; and they offer a stupefying potion to him, according to custom, to deaden the sense of pain. Jesus tastes it, as if to accept the insulting mercy; but declines to drink it, as it would obscure the clearness of his faculties. The vinegar mingled with gall is the same as the wine mingled with myrrh, mentioned by Mark; for the wine was so sour as to be truly a vinegar, and the word for gall would stand for anything bitter, as myrrh.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘They gave him wine to drink mingled with gall, and when he had tasted it, he would not drink.’
The soldiers then gave him ‘wine mingled with gall’. If meant literally this might mean wine which had been mixed with wormwood, a flavouring testified to in the ancient world, thus indicating a dry wine. But this would contrast with the myrrh-mingled, and therefore strengthened, wine mentioned by Mar 15:23. It may, however, be that Matthew knew that the wine mingled with frankincense, which was often provided by wealthy women of Jerusalem to soothe the sufferings of men who were being crucified, had been taken over by the soldiers and then mingled with gall (a bitter secretion from the liver), or something equally bitter which could be described as gall, as a kind of crude joke. This would tie in with Psa 69:21, ‘they gave me also gall for my food, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink’, which is the idea that Matthew intends us to see here. It may, however, be that Matthew’s description is based on this Psalm and is simply indicating that this strengthened wine was really like offering gall to Jesus as it reminded Him of the suffering that He must face. Whichever way it was it further emphasises the sufferings that Jesus was undergoing in accordance with Scripture.
Note that His tasting of it indicates that He did not see Himself as bound by a promise not to drink wine, otherwise He would not have tasted it. The fact that He did not drink further indicates that He had reason for not doing so, either because the soldiers had doctored it with something bitter (even an over-abundance of myrrh), or because He did not want to take a soporific. For He knew that He had to drink the cup that His Father had given Him to the full. Possibly had it been ordinary wine for the quenching of thirst He would have drunk further.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 27:34. They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall It was usual to give criminals, before they suffered, a stupifying potion to render them insensible of the ignominy and pain of their punishment; but our blessed Lord, because he would bear his sufferings, howeversharp, not by intoxicating and stupifying himself, but through the strength of patience, fortitude, and faith, refused to drink of it. St. Mark says, they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh, Ch. Mat 15:23. But the two Evangelists speak of the same ingredients: for though St. Mark terms that wine, which St. Matthew calls vinegar; he may have really meant vinegar, which was a common drink among the ancients, (see Num 6:3.) and such as might very properly be called wine, in regard that it was usually made of wine, or of the juice of grapes; besides, it is well known that the ancients gave the general name of wine to all fermented liquors: it is evident therefore that to reconcile the Evangelists here, we have no occasion for the reading of Beza’s copy, which has instead of . might be rendered sour wine, as indeed the word vinegar properly imports; and this mixed with water was the common drink of the Roman soldiers, and consequently was in a vessel at hand. As to the other ingredient of this potion, let it be observed, that the word in the LXX, is often used as the translation of the Hebrew word rosh; which properly was the name of a poisonous herb common in those countries, and remarkable for its bitterness; hence an infusion of it is called , bitter water, Jer 23:15 and , the water of bitterness, Jer 8:14; Jer 9:15. Probably it was a weak infusion of this herb in vinegar and water, which our Lord’s friends offered him, (as we have observed was usual on such occasions) to make him insensible, and to shorten his life. It is called indeed by St. Mark , myrrhed vinegar, perhaps because it had myrrh mixed with it, there being nothing more common than for a medicine compounded of many ingredients, to take its name from some one of them which is prevalent in the composition. That myrrh was proper in a potion of this kind has been shewn by Vossius; who proves from Dioscorides, lib. 2. 100. 70 that frankincense, macerated in liquors, makes those who drink them mad; and that if the quantity taken be large, it sometimes produces death. Hence, when Ptolemy Philopater designed to engage his elephants, “He gave them wine mingled with frankincense, to enrage them.” The Evangelists may be reconciled more directly still, by supposing that signifies any bitter drug whatsoever; for it is applied to wormwood, Pro 5:4 and by parity of reason may denote myrrh, which has its name from a Hebrew word signifying bitterness. Casaubon has given a third solution of this difficulty; he thinks that our Lord’s friends put a cup of myrrhed wine into the hands of one of the soldiers to give it to Jesus; but that he, out of contempt, added gall to it. See the note on Psa 69:21. Lipsius de Milit. Rom. and Wetstein.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 27:34 The Jews were in the habit of giving the criminal a stupefying drink before nailing him to the cross. Sanhedr . vi. See Wetstein, ad Marc . xv. 23; Doughtaeus, Anal . II. p. 42. This drink consisted of wine (see the critical remarks) mixed with gall , according to Matthew; with myrrh , according to Mark. admits of no other meaning than that of gall , and on no account must it be made to bear the sense of myrrh or wormwood [36] (Beza, Grotius, Paulus, Langen, Steinmeyer, Keim). The tradition about the gall , which unquestionably belongs to a later period, originated in the LXX. rendering of Psa 68:23 ; people wished to make out that there was maltreatment in the very drink that was offered.
] According to Matthew, then, Jesus rejected the potion because the taste of gall made it undrinkable. A later view than that embodied in Mar 15:23 , from which passage it would appear that Jesus does not even taste the drink, but declines it altogether, because He has no desire to be stupefied before death.
[36] No doubt the LXX. translate , wormwood, by (Pro 5:4 ; Lam 3:15 ); but in those passages they took it as meaning literal “gall,” just as in the case of Psa 69:22 , which regulates the sense of our present passage, they also understood gall to be meant, although the word in the original is (poison). Comp. Jer 8:14 ; Deu 29:17 . A usage so entirely foreign to the Greek tongue certainly cannot be justified on the ground of one or two passages, like these from the Septuagint. Had “bitter spiced wine” (Steinmeyer) been what Matthew intended, he would have had no more difficulty in expressing this than Mark himself. But the idea he wished to convey was that of wine along with gall, in fact mixed with it, and this idea he expresses as plain as words can speak it. Comp. Barnab. 7 : .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof , he would not drink.
Ver. 34. They gave him vinegar, &c. ] Cold comfort to a dying man; but they did it in derision, q.d. Thou art a King, and must have generous wines. Here’s for thee therefore. See Trapp on “ Joh 19:29 “ It were happy if this vinegar given our Saviour might melt our adamantine hearts into sorrow.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
34. ] It was customary to give a stupefying drink to criminals on their way to execution: of which our Lord would not partake, having shewn by tasting it, that he was aware of its purpose.
In Mark’s account it is and though and might mean the same, and . . cannot. We may observe here (and if the remark be applied with caution and reverence, it is a most useful one), how Matt. often adopts in his narrative the very words of prophecy , where one or more of the other Evangelists give the matter of fact detail: see above on ch. Mat 26:15 , and compare with this verse, Psa 69:21 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 27:34 . ., wine mingled with gall. Mk. has ., wine drugged with myrrh, a drink given by a merciful custom before execution to deaden the sense of pain. The wine would be the sour wine or posca used by Roman soldiers. In Mk. Jesus declines the drink, apparently without tasting, desiring to suffer with clear mind. In Mt. He tastes ( ) and then declines, apparently because unpalatable, suggesting a different motive in the offerers, not mercy but cruelty; maltreatment in the very drink offered. To this view of the proceeding is ascribed the of Mt.’s text, not without the joint influence of Psa 69:22 (Meyer and Weiss). Harmonists strive to reconcile the two accounts by taking as signifying in Hellenistic usage any bitter liquid ( quamvis amaritiem , Elsner), and therefore among other things myrrh. Pro 5:4 , Lament. Mat 3:15 (Sept [152] ), in which stands for wormwood, , are eited in proof of this. Against the idea that Mt’s text has been altered from Mk.’s under the influence of Psa 69:22 , is the retention of ( in Ps. and in T. R.) and the absence of any reference to the passage in the usual style “that it might be fulfilled,” etc.
[152] Septuagint.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
They gave Him . . . drink. Note the five occasions on which this was done; and observe the accuracy of what is said, instead of creating “discrepancies”:
1. On the way to Golgotha (Mar 15:23 = were offering, Imperfect Tense), He did not drink.
2. When they arrived there (Mat 27:33), He tasted it, but would not drink.
3. Later, by the soldiers after He was on the cross (Luk 23:36), probably at their own meal.
4. Later still, a proposal made by some and checked by others, but afterward carried out (Mat 27:48).
5. The last about the ninth hour, in response to the Lord’s call (Joh 19:29).
vinegar. In the first case, it was wine (Greek. oinon) drugged with myrrh (see Mar 15:22, Mar 15:23). 2. In the second case, it was “vinegar (Greek. oxos) mingled with gall” (Greek. chole) (Mat 27:33). 3. In the third case, it was “sour wine” (Greek. oxos), (Luk 23:36). 4. In the fourth case it was also “sour wine” (Greek. oxoa), (Mat 27:48, as in Mat 27:34). 5. In the fifth case it was the same (Greek. oxoa), (Joh 19:28). These then were the five occasions and the three kinds of drink.
tasted. See notes above. He would not. Greek. thelo.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
34.] It was customary to give a stupefying drink to criminals on their way to execution: of which our Lord would not partake, having shewn by tasting it, that he was aware of its purpose.
In Marks account it is -and though and might mean the same, and . . cannot. We may observe here (and if the remark be applied with caution and reverence, it is a most useful one), how Matt. often adopts in his narrative the very words of prophecy, where one or more of the other Evangelists give the matter of fact detail: see above on ch. Mat 26:15, and compare with this verse, Psa 69:21.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 27:34. , vinegar) St Mark (Mar 15:23) calls it, , myrrhed wine: the liquor was of a taste between sweet wine and vinegar (cf. the Gnomon on Mat 27:48), seasoned with myrrh from custom, adulterated with gall from malice.- , He would not drink) for that behoved to be deferred to the end of His sufferings; see Joh 19:30. And Jesus wished to retain His senses fully undisturbed, even up to His death.[1194]
[1194] Mat 27:35. , having crucified) Christ, in order to be a blessing to us, was made a curse. Who is there would have dared to assert this, had not the Apostle declared it? Gal 3:13. Let the passages also. Gen 3:6, Joh 3:14, 1Pe 2:24, be well weighed.-Harm., p. 563.- , they parted His garments) When the very poorest man dies, he has at least some covering on his body: Jesus had none. Not even are His garments given up to His friends and relatives, but to the soldiers.-Harm., p. 564.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
gave: Mat 27:48, Psa 69:21, Mar 15:23, Joh 19:28-30
vinegar: Mark says wine mingled with myrrh; but as the sour wine used by the Roman soldiers and common people was termed [Strong’s G3631] wine, and [Strong’s G3690] vinegar, vin aigre (French), is sour wine; and as chole [Strong’s G5521] gall, is applied to bitters of any kind, it is not difficult to reconcile the two accounts.
Reciprocal: Jer 8:14 – water Jer 23:15 – will Luk 23:33 – when Luk 23:36 – General Joh 19:17 – Golgotha Joh 19:29 – was set
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
CHRIST REFUSING HELP
They gave Him vinegar to drink and when He had tasted thereof, He would not drink.
Mat 27:34
Why not? The Cross was to be endured with full consciousness.
I. Endurance to the end.What is our lesson from this last act of self-denial of Jesus Christ? Is it not this, that to suffer pain which we may evade if we will, to endure unto the end, is often the most imperative of duties? A commonplace lesson, indeed; but it is just these commonplace lessons that are hardest to learn.
(a) In the ordinary affairs of business we often see a man lose all profit of his toil, because he will not take the small additional pains which are needed to bring his machinery or his organisation to perfection. After long toil, effort becomes enfeebled, and enthusiasm wanes; and it is only the exceptional man who is so determined of purpose and so completely master of himself that he will endure the pains of labour up to the end.
(b) Or, again, in domestic life, is it not in little acts of self-denial rather than in great that character most truly displays itself? It is often because a man or woman will not give up some trivial indulgence, will not undertake some trivial daily task, that the happiness of a home is endangered.
(c) Or in the personal life of the soul, is it not by small decisions that the religious character is formed? It is, perhaps, in the pains which we experience when we resist temptation that we approach most nearly to that state which St. Paul describes as being crucified with Christ. Our pains are not, indeed, comparable to His. Nay! and yet we, too, must not only endure, butthey are His own wordstake up the cross.
II. Fellowship with His sufferings.There is a pain of renunciation which you are called to endure for a season at least. You may refuse to give up any of your time to the claims of Gods Church or His poor on the plea that you have no leisure. But remember that the pain entailed in the consecration of our leisure to the service of God rather than to the indulgence of self may be the very pain by which we shall best appropriate to ourselves Christs message in His Passion. To be crucified with Him means more than to be affected with a passing emotion by the Tragedy of the Cross.
Dean Bernard.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
7:34
According to both Smith’s Bible Dictionary, and Funk and Wag-nails Standard Bible Dictionary, this gall was made from the poppy plant which grew in abundance in Palestine. That, combined with the vinegar which would be somewhat alcoholic, composed a stupifying product that would act as an easement from pain. Jesus would not drink it because he was not willing to do anything to make his sufferings any less severe. Incidentally, we have an important bit of information as to what the verb “drink” means. The passage says that Jesus “tasted” of the mixture but would not “drink,” which shows there is a difference between the two. Christians are commanded to “drink” of the fruit of the vine, not just taste of it. There is no need to consume a regular serving of it as one would to quench thirst, but we are expected to partake of it enough that it can be said we drink and not merely taste as is commonly done. Most churches do not provide enough of the fruit of the vine in the Lord’s supper to meet the requirement of the ordinance.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof; he would not drink.
[They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall.] “To those that were to be executed they gave a grain of myrrh infused in wine to drink, that their understanding might be disturbed,” (that is, that they might lose their senses); “as it is said, ‘Give strong drink to them that are ready to die, and wine to those that are of a sorrowful heart,’ etc. And the tradition is, That some women of quality in Jerusalem allowed this freely of their own cost,” etc.
But it makes a scruple that in Matthew it is vinegar with gall; in Mark wine mingled with myrrh. If wine; why is it called vinegar? If wine mingled with myrrh; why gall? Ans. The words of Mark seem to relate to the custom of the nation; those of Matthew, to the thing as it was really acted. I understand Mark thus, They gave him, according to the custom of the nation, that cup which used to be given to those that were led to execution; but (as Matthew has it) not the usual mixture; namely, wine and frankincense, or myrrh; but for the greater mockery, and out of more bitter rancour, vinegar and gall. So that we may suppose this cup not to have been prepared by those honourable women, compassionating those that were to die, but on purpose by the scribes, and the other persecutors of Christ, studying to heap upon him all kind of ignominy and vexation. In this cup they afterward dipped a sponge, as may be supposed: see the 48th verse.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Mat 27:34. Wine, according to the best authorities; but the sour wine used might be called vinegar. See Luk 23:36, where the vinegar offered Him by the soldiers must have been their ordinary drinking wine; comp. Mat 27:49; Psa 69:21.
Mingled with gall. Mark: myrrh. The term gall was applied to many bitter substances, including myrrh. It was a stupefying draught, such as was commonly given before execution. The custom was, however, a Jewish rather than a Roman one.
He would not drink. He afterwards took the unmixed vinegar wine, when He was about to say: It is finished (comp. Joh 19:28-30). He tastes this mixture, to show that He was aware of its purpose, and refuses it. He would drink of the cup His Father had given Him, but not of this. The early martyrs felt justified in thus mitigating their pains; but His vicarious sufferings must be borne to the fullest extent.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 34
Mark 15:23 says wine mingled with myrrh; but the difference is not material. Vinegar was wine in an advanced stage of fermentation.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
27:34 {7} They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted [thereof], he would not drink.
(7) Christ found no comfort anywhere, that in him we might be filled with comfort.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Evidently some women gave Jesus some wine to drink to which they had added myrrh to decrease His pain (Mar 15:23). [Note: Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 43a.] Jesus refused it because He chose to endure the cross fully conscious. Matthew wrote "gall" because of the myrrh’s bitter taste and to make the fulfillment of Psa 69:20-21 clearer. Another view is that the soldiers offered the drink to Jesus, but it seems uncharacteristic that they would have tried to lessen His sufferings.