Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 27:46

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

46. Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? ] (Psa 22:1). Eli is the Hebrew form. In Mar 15:34 the Aramaic words are preserved exactly as they were pronounced by Jesus. The repetition, “My God! My God!” gives a deeply pathetic force; cp. ch. Mat 23:37. It is an expression of utter loneliness and desolation, the depth of which it is not for man to fathom. “It is going beyond Scripture to say that a sense of God’s wrath extorted that cry. For to the last breath He was the well-beloved of the Father, and the repeated ‘My God! My God!’ is a witness even then to His confidence in His Father’s Love” (Canon Perowne. Psa 22:1).

This was probably the fourth word from the cross; the fifth “I thirst” (John); the sixth “It is finished” (John); the seventh “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke). It is thought by some that after these words the darkness, which had lasted to the ninth hour, rolled away; others think that it lasted till the death of Jesus.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Eli, Eli … – This language is not pure Hebrew nor Syriac, but a mixture of both, called commonly Syro-Chaldaic. This was probably the language which the Saviour commonly spoke. The words are taken from Psa 22:1.

My God, my God … – This expression is one denoting intense suffering. It has been difficult to understand in what sense Jesus was forsaken by God. It is certain that God approved his work. It is certain that he was innocent. He had done nothing to forfeit the favor of God. As his own Son – holy, harmless, undefiled, and obedient – God still loved him. In either of these senses God could not have forsaken him. But the expression was probably used in reference to the following circumstances, namely:

1. His great bodily sufferings on the cross, greatly aggravated by his previous scourging, and by the want of sympathy, and by the revilings of his enemies on the cross. A person suffering thus might address God as if he was forsaken, or given up to extreme anguish.

2. He himself said that this was the power of darkness, Luk 22:53. It was the time when his enemies, including the Jews and Satan, were suffered to do their utmost. It was said of the serpent that he should bruise the heel of the seed of the woman, Gen 3:15. By that has been commonly understood to be meant that, though the Messiah would finally crush and destroy the power of Satan, yet he should himself suffer through the power of the devil. When he was tempted Luke 4, it was said that the tempter departed from him for a season. There is no improbability in supposing that he might be permitted to return at the time of his death, and exercise his power in increasing the sufferings of the Lord Jesus. In what way this might be done can be only conjectured. It might be by horrid thoughts; by temptation to despair, or to distrust God, who thus permitted his innocent Son to suffer; or by an increased horror of the pains of dying.

3. There might have been withheld from the Saviour those strong religious consolations, those clear views of the justice and goodness of God, which would have blunted his pains and soothed his agonies. Martyrs, under the influence of strong religious feeling, have gone triumphantly to the stake, but it is possible that those views might have been withheld from the Redeemer when he came to die. His sufferings were accumulated sufferings, and the design of the atonement seemed to require that he should suffer all that human nature could be made to endure in so short a time.

4. Yet we have reason to think that there was still something more than all this that produced this exclamation. Had there been no deeper and more awful sufferings, it would be difficult to see why Jesus should have shrunk from these sorrows and used such a remarkable expression. Isaiah tells us Isa 53:4-5 that he bore our griefs and carried our sorrows; that he was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities; that the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him; that by his stripes we are healed. He hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us Gal 3:13; he was made a sin-offering 2Co 5:21; he died in our place, on our account, that he might bring us near to God. It was this, doubtless, which caused his intense sufferings. It was the manifestation of Gods hatred of sin, in some way which he has not explained, that he experienced in that dread hour. It was suffering endured by Him that was due to us, and suffering by which, and by which alone, we can be saved from eternal death.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Mat 27:46

My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?

The forsaken Christ

the desertion itself is plain. Why hast Thou forsaken Me? Then He felt Himself to be forsaken? The Divine nature could not be separated from the human; He was eternally God. Nor could the Father be separated from the Son in the Divine Godhead, since that in affection and will He was insolubly one. Nor could the Father forsake the Son in any sense that He ceased to love and uphold Him; for at that moment Christ was accomplishing that act of holy obedience worthiest of the admiration of Deity.

I. There remain three senses in which it might be said that he was deserted of his Father.

1. In the first place, it might be said that He bore at that moment the wrath of God on account of our sins. How could the Almighty, as He loved His Son, convey to the mind of Christ a sense of that wrath which was not real?

2. In the sense that God forbore to interfere on Christs behalf to terminate those sufferings, and rescue Him from the hands of His enemies. But many saints have endured as great physical sufferings without complaint.

3. That our Lord was suffered in this hour of anguish to be left destitute of the sense of His Fathers love, and care, and protection. There is a close connection between mind and body; so that when the body is languishing in pain, the mind contracts a sensibility as keen, and shudders at the approach of the least suffering, which in a state of health it would meet unmoved. But there was far more than this in Christ. The comunications which God makes to the minds of His people are directly from Himself; this he is free to give or withdraw. I suppose that on this occasion our Saviour had it withdrawn. It is clear that however pious, however convinced of acceptance with God, there can be a state of mind in which a Christian may be deprived of the present sense of the Being of God; and that this will inflict great misery.

II. Our Saviours complaint under the desertion. Our Lord made no complaint of the nails and spear, but is now urged to lament.

1. Consider the nature of that sorrow which our Lord at this time experienced. Love is a great source of misery or happiness; the former if withdrawn. If so in human objects, how much more as regards Divine.

2. The complaint of these words-Why hast Thou? He was forsaken by His disciples, but now forsaken by His best Friend, and at a moment when He most needs consolation and help. The Almighty thus marks His view of sin. Christ hung upon the cross that we might never be forsaken by God. Every ungodly person is advancing to that sentence, Depart from Me, etc.

3. That God may desert for a moment in the same sense, and in that sense alone, those whom He still loves and upholds. There is nothing in the relationship of a child of God to prevent that experience, and it may be a requisite discipline, by which sin is embittered. (B. Noel, M. A.)

The Redeemers desertion

I. The import of the redeemers language.

1. It does not mean that the Godhead of Christ was separated from His manhood, so that His humanity alone was present on the cross.

2. The language is not that of murmuring.

3. It is not indicative of distrust.

4. It is not that of despair. All sensible comfort is eclipsed.

II. Some of the great designs to be effected through this desertion.

1. The punishment due to the sins of the people was herein endured.

2. The manifestation of Gods regard for the honour of His law.

3. That He might be like unto His people in all things.

4. The brightest pattern of confidence in God.

5. To enable Him to enter upon His mediatorial glory. (J. R. Mackenzie.)

The despairing cry of Jesus on the cross

I. The surroundings of the sufferer uttering this wail of distress.

II. What is the import of this lamentation of Jesus.

1. It is not the result of any corporeal pain being endured. There are two primary causes for this cry.

(1) In a manner beyond finite comprehension God then withheld from His dying Son, as the latest and most appalling ingredient of His atoning sufferings, a cloudless consciousness of His supporting presence.

(2) Track His public ministry and He is never found murmuring as to His Fathers absence. In demonstration of his moral fidelity Daniel went down into the den of lions; but God was with him. Jesus Christ, the purest character, was the only one dying for the Fathers glory, who could not by possibility secure a consciousness of the Divine presence and favour amidst His pains.

2. This seeming abandonment of His suffering Son was the crowning manifestation of Gods wrath against sin. Christ was mans representative at Calvary. The cross at the ninth hour of gloom is the loftiest observatory from which men look at sin.

3. The value at which God rates a human soul is seen in this cry, and the responsibility of the unsaved.(S. V. Leech, D. D.)

Victory in desertion

Thus the will of Jesus, in the very moment when His faith seems about to yield, is finally triumphant. It has no feeling now to support it, no beatific vision to absorb it. It stands naked in His soul and tortured, as He stood naked and scourged before Pilate. Pure and simple and surrounded by fire, it declares for God. The sacrifice ascends in the cry, My God. The cry comes not out of happiness, out of peace, out of hope. Not even out of suffering comes that cry. It was a cry in desolation, but it came out of faith. It is the last voice of truth, speaking when it can but cry. The divine horror of that moment is unfathomable by human soul. It was blackness of darkness. And yet He would believe. Yet He would hold fast. God was His God yet. My God-and in the cry came forth the victory, and all was over soon. Of the peace that followed that cry, the peace of a perfect soul, large as the universe, pure as light, ardent as life, victorious for God and His brethren, He Himself alone can ever know the breadth and length, and depth and height. (G. Macdonald, LL. D.)

Reasons for Christs desertion

He does not even say My Father, the term of endearment, but employs the sterner word, as though more fully to express the desolation which He feels. We may not, however, understand these words as though they signified that the union of the Godhead and the Manhood was at this time dissolved; that could never be. The union between the Father and the Son could never be severed, though for a while the vision of the eternal Presence of God was removed from our Lords human nature. Let us try to discover why it was ordained that this terrible desertion should take place.

1. It was no doubt designed in order to prevent our supposing that the indissoluble union of the Godhead with the Manhood in our Lords Person would interfere with His suffering, to the full, the agony of death as Man. It was for our sakes, that we might be established in the true faith concerning Himself.

2. Hence we gather from it that it was not only possible for Him to suffer, but that He really did suffer as none ever did before or since. His martyrs in their hour of trial were strengthened and refreshed by spiritual consolations, but He would die the very bitterest death, bereft of all.

3. From our Lords privation of all sensible comfort we may learn somewhat concerning the sinfulness of sin. One drop, indeed, of that precious blood would have been enough to save the world from the punishment of sin, and from its power, but He would pay the full price, and drink the cup of sorrow to the very dregs.

4. In the abandonment of Christ we may learn, if we will, what our deserts would be if we were dealt with only in rigid justice. He was forsaken that we might never be forsaken. He was left to suffer the loss of all consolation in order the more fully to convince us of the greatness of His love.

5. How very terrible it must be to be deprived for ever (as the finally reprobate will be) of the presence of God. (J. E. Vaux, M. A.)

Comfort not the measure of grace

Take heed thou thinkest not grace decays because thy comfort withdraws Did ever faith triumph more than in our Saviour crying thus! Here faith was at its meridian when it was midnight in respect of joy. Possibly thou comest from an ordinance, and bringest not home with thee those sheaves of comfort thou used to do, and therefore concluded, grace acted not in thee as formerly. Truly, if thou hast nothing else to go by, thou mayest wrong the grace of God in thee exceedingly; because thy comfort is extrinsical to thy duty, a boon which God may give or not, yea, doth give to the weak, and deny to the strong. The traveller may go as fast, and ride as much ground, when the sun doth not shine as when it doth, though indeed he goes not so merrily on his journey; nay, sometimes he makes the more haste; the warm sun makes him sometimes to lie down and loiter, but when dark and cold he puts on with more speed. Some graces thrive best (like some flowers) in the shade, such as humility and dependence On God. (W. Gurnall.)

Gods comfort may be withdrawn, but not His presence

Sometimes God takes away from a Christian His comfort, but He never takes away His sustaining presence. You know the difference between sunshine and daylight. A Christian has Gods daylight in his soul when he may not have sunlight; that is, he has enough to light him, but not enough to cheer and comfort him. (J. Cumming, D. D.)

The true sense of this cry

Two reasons why Christ chose to express Himself on this occasion in the language of David.

1. That the Jews might call to mind the great resemblance between His case and that of this illustrious king and prophet.

2. This psalm was allowed to belong to the Messiah, and to have its ultimate completion in Him.

I. Consider the style Christ makes use of in addressing Himself to God-My God, My God. This seems to denote His innocence, His choice of God for His God, and His filial trust and confidence in Him.

II. In what sense was Christ forsaken by God in His passion?

1. Are we to believe that God was angry with His well-beloved Son?

2. If God was not angry, might not the Son apprehend that He was, or at least doubt of the continuance of His Fathers love to Him?

III. The reasons of Gods thus forsaking His beloved Son.

1. To add the greater perfection to His example.

2. To increase the perfection of His atonement.

3. To contribute to the perfection of His priesthood.

4. To render His triumph the more glorious.

Two reflections:

1. How should this endear the Redeemer of the world to us, who was willing to suffer such things for our sakes.

2. This part of the history of our Saviours passion carries in it a great deal of instruction and consolation to His faithful disciples when they are in like circumstances with Him. (Henry Grove.)

The Hebrew term, Forsaken

In the Hebrew way of speaking, God is said to leave or forsake any person when He suffers him to fall into great calamities, and to lie under great miseries, and does not help him out of them; and therefore Zion, being long afflicted, is brought in by the Prophet Isaiah (ch. 69:14) thus complaining: The Lord has forsaken me, the Lord has forgotten me. And the psalmist, as he is frequent in this complaint, so does he manifestly explain himself in the words following the complaint of his being forsaken: Why art Thou far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? (Whitby.)

Christ forsaken

I. That Christ, being in extremity, was forsaken.

II. Being forsaken, He was very sensible of it, and from sensibleness complains, pouring out His soul into the bosom of the Father.

III. He not only complains, but believes certainly that His Father will help Him.

IV. And to strengthen His faith the more, He puts it forth in prayer, the fire of faith in His heart kindled into a flame of prayer. (R. Sibbs.)

The forsaking itself

I. In what sense was Christ forsaken?

II. In what parts He was forsaken.

III. Upon what ground He was forsaken. And

IV. To what end all this forsaking of Christ was. Christ was forsaken in regard of His present comfort and joy, and He positively felt the wrath and fury of the Almighty, whose just displeasure seized upon His soul for sin, as our surety. (R. Sibbs.)

A true human experience

Without this last trial of all, the temptations of our Master had not been so full as the human cup could hold; there would have been one region through which we had to pass wherein we might call aloud upon our Captain-Brother, and there would be no voice or hearing: He had avoided the fatal spot. (George Macdonald.)

God withdrawn

This is the faith of the Son of God. God withdrew, as it were, that the perfect will of the Son might arise and go forth to find the will of the Father. (George Macdonald.)

The cry a model cry

Troubled soul, will thou His will. Say to Him, My God, I am very dull, and low, and hard; but Thou art wise and high, and tender, and Thou art my God. I am Thy child, forsake me not. Then fold the arms of thy faith, and wait in quietness until light goes up in thy darkness. Fold the arms of thy faith, I say, but not of thy action. Bethink thee of something that thou oughtest to do, and go and do it, if it be but the sweeping of a room, or the preparing of a meal, or a visit to a friend. Heed not Thy feelings. Do thy work. (George Macdonald.)

Significance of small cries

The pennant at the mast-head is a small thing, yet it shows plainly which way the wind blows. A cloud no bigger than a mans hand is a small thing, yet it may show the approach of a mighty storm. The swallow is a little bird, and yet it shows that summer is come. So is it with man. A look, a sigh, a half-uttered word, a broken sentence, may show more of what is passing within than a long speech. So it was with the dying Saviour. These few troubled words tell more than volumes of divinity. (R. M. McCheyne.)

The Eloi

I. The completeness of Christs obedience.

1. Words of obedience.

2. Words of faith.

3. Words of love.

II. The infinity of Christs sufferings.

1. He suffered much from His enemies.

(a) He suffered in all parts of His body;

(b) He suffered in all His offices;

(c) He suffered from all sorts of men;

(d) He suffered much from the devil.

2. He suffered much from those he afterwards saved.

3. From His own disciples.

4. From His Father.

Three things show the infinity of His sufferings.

1. Who it was that forsook Him.

2. Who it was that was forsaken.

3. What God did to Him-forsook Him.

III. Answer the Saviours Why? Because He was the surety of sinners, and stood in their room.

1. He had agreed with His Father, before all worlds, to stand and suffer in the place of sinners.

2. He set His face to it.

3. He knew that either He or the whole world must suffer. (R. M. McCheyne.)

The desertion

I. These words do not imply, on the part of the Father, an entire and perpetual abandonment of His Son.

II. These words do not imply, on the part of the Son, any discontent or rebellion against His Father. (A. L. R. Foote.)

God forsakes only for sin

I venture to lay down this as a fundamental principle-an axiom, it may almost be called-that God never forsakes any one but for one cause, and that cause, sin. He must have seen sin in Christ, or on Him. He must have seen real or imputed sin to warrant His acting towards Him as He did. There is no way of accounting for the sufferings of the Son of God-from His incarnation to His death, from the manger to the grave, from His cradle to His cross-but on the supposition of His being, in the eye of justice and the law, a sinner, the sin-bearer, the sinners substitute. Except on the grand principle of an atonement, all this is unaccountable. (A. L. R. Foote.)

Christ our surety

Christ took not the desert of punishment upon Him (from any fault in Himself), He took whatsoever was penal upon Him, but not culpable. As He was our surety, so He everyway discharged our debt, being bound over to all judgments and punishments for us. (R. Sibbs.)

I. What was Christs desertion? I shall for more distinctness, handle it negatively and affirmatively. First-Negatively.

1. It was not a desertion in appearance and conceit only, but real. We often mistake Gods dispensations. God may be out of sight and yet we not out of mind. When the dam is abroad for meat the young brood in the nest is not forsaken. The children cry as if the mother were totally gone when she is employed about necessary business for their welfare (Isa 49:14-15). So we think that we are cut off when God is about to help and deliver us (Psa 31:22). Surely when our affections towards God are seen by mourning for His absence, He is not wholly gone; His room is kept warm for Him till He come again. We mistake Gods dispensations when we judge that a forsaking which is but an emptying us of all carnal dependence (Psa 94:18-19). He is near many times when we think Him afar off; as Christ was to His disciples when their eyes were withheld that they knew Him not, but thought Him yet lying in the grave (St. Luk 24:16). But this cannot be imagined of Christ, who could not be mistaken. If He complained of desertion, surely He felt it.

II. Though it were real, the desertion must be understood so as may stand with the dignity of his person and office. Therefore-

(1) There was no separation of the Father from the Son; this would make a change in the unity of the Divine essence (St. Joh 10:30). This eternal union of the Father and Son always remained.

(2) There was no dissolution of the union of the two natures in the person of Christ, for the human nature which was once assumed was never after dismissed or laid aside.

III. The love of God to Him ceased not. We read (St. Joh 3:35).

IV. His personal holiness was not abated or lessened. The Lord Jesus was full of grace and truth (St. Joh 1:4). Neither His nature nor His office could permit an abatement of holiness (Heb 7:26). The Son of God might fall into misery, which is a natural evil, and so become the object of pity, not of blame; but not into sin, which is a moral evil, a blot and a blemish.

V. Gods assistance and sustaining grace was not wholly withdrawn, for the Lord saith of Him (Isa 42:1). The power, presence, and providence of God was ever with Him, to sustain Him in His difficult enterprise.

Secondly-Positively.

I. Gods desertion of us or any creature may be understood with a respect to his communicating himself to us. We have a twofold apprehension of God-as a holy and happy being: and when He doth communicate Himself to any reasonable creature it is either in a way of holiness or in a way of happiness. These two have such a respect to one another, that He never gives felicity and glory without holiness (Heb 12:14). And a holy creature can never be utterly and finally miserable. He may sometimes give holiness without happiness, as when for a while He leaveth the sanctified whom He will try and exercise under the cross-or in a state of sorrow and affliction. Now apply this to Christ. It is blasphemy to say that Christ lost any degree of His holiness, for He was always pure and holy, and that most perfectly and exactly. Therefore He was deserted only as to His felicity, and that but for a short time.

II. The felicity of Christ may be considered either as to his outward and bodily estate, or else to his inward man or the estate of his soul.

(1) Some say His desertion was nothing else but His being left to the will and power of His enemies to crucify Him, and that He was then deserted when His Divine nature suspended the exercise of His omnipotency so far as to deliver up His body to a reproachful death.

(a) Why should Christ complain of that so bitterly, which He did so readily and willingly undergo, and might so easily have prevented.

(b) If we look merely to bodily pains and sufferings certainly others have endured as much if not more; as the thieves that were crucified with Him lived longer in their torments, and the good thief did not complain that he was forsaken of God.

(c) It would follow that every holy man that is persecuted and left to the will of his enemies, might be said to be forsaken of God, which is contrary to Pauls holy boasting (2Co 4:9).

(d) This desertion was a punishment one part or degree of the abasement of the Son of God, and so belongeth to the whole nature that was to be abased, not only to His body, but His soul (Isa 53:10).

(2) As to the felicity of His inward estate, the state of His soul. Christ carried about His heaven with Him, and never wanted sensible consolation, spiritual suavity, the comfortable effects of the Divine presence, till now they were withdrawn that He might be capable of suffering the whole punishments of sins.

1. I will show how this sort of desertion is-Possible. The union of the two natures remaining; for us the Divine nature gave up the body to death, so the soul to desertion. Christ, as God, is the fountain of life (Psa 36:9). And yet Christ could die. The Divinity remained united to the flesh, and yet the flesh might die; so it remained united to the soul, and yet the soul might want comfort. There is a partial, temporal desertion, when God for a moment hideth His face from His people (Isa 54:7). This is so far from being contrary to the dignity of Christs nature that it is necessary to His office for many reasons.

2. That it is grievous. This was an incomparable loss to Christ.

(1) Partly because it was more natural to Him to enjoy that comfort and solace than it can be to any creature. To put out a candle is no great matter, but to have the sun eclipsed, which is the fountain of light, that sets the world a wondering.

(2) Partly because He had more to lose than we have. The greater the enjoyment, the greater the loss or want. We lose drops, He an ocean.

(3) Partly because he knew how to value the comfort of the union, having a pure understanding and heavenly affections. Gods children count one clay in His presence better than a thousand (Psa 84:10). One glimpse of His love more than all the world (Psa 4:7).

(4) Partly because He had so near an interest and relation to God (Pro 8:30).

(5) Partly from the nature of Christs desertion. It was penal. There was nothing in Christs person to occasion a desertion, but much in His office; so He was to give body for body and soul for soul. And this was a part of the satisfaction. He was beloved as a son, forsaken as our Mediator and Surety. Why was Christ forsaken? Answer. With respect to the office which He had taken upon Himself. This desertion of Christ carrieth a suitableness and respect to our sin, our punishment, and our blessedness.

1. Our sin. Christ is forsaken to satisfy and make amends for our wilful desertion of God (Jam 2:13). Now we that forsook God deserved to be forsaken by God, therefore what we had merited by our sins, Christ endured as our Mediator. It is strange to consider what small things draw us off from God. This is the first degeneracy and disease of mankind that a trifle will prompt us to forsake God, as a little thing will make a stone run down hill; it is its natural motion.

2. It carries a full respect to the punishment appointed for sin (Gal 3:13). It is true the accidentals of punishment Christ suffered not. As-

(1) To the place, He was not in hell. It was not necessary that Christ should descend to the hell of the damned. One that is bound as a surety for another, needs not go into prison provided that he pay the debts.

(2) For the time of continuance. The damned must bear the wrath of God to all eternity, because they can never satisfy the justice of God. Therefore they must lie by it world without end. Christ hath made an infinite satisfaction in a finite time. He bore the wrath of God in a few hours, which would overwhelm the creature. Christ did not bear the eternity of wrath, but only the extremity of it; intensive, not extensive. The eternity of the punishment ariseth from the weakness of the creature, who cannot overcome this evil and get out of it.

(3) There is another thing unavoidably attending the pains of the second death in reprobates, and that is desperation, an utter hopelessness of any good (Heb 10:27).

3. With respect to our blessedness, which is to live with God for ever in heaven. Christ was forsaken that there might be no longer any separation between us and God.

Application:

1. How different are they from the Spirit of Christ that can brook Gods absence without any remorse or complaint?

2. It informeth us of the grievousness of sin. It is no easy matter to reconcile sinners to God, it cost Christ a life of sorrows, and afterwards a painful and accursed death, and in that death, loss of actual comfort, and an amazing sense of the wrath of God.

3. The greatness of our obligation to Christ, who omitted no kind of sufferings which might conduce to the expiation of sin.

4. The infiniteness of Gods mercy, who appointed such a degree of Christs sufferings-as in it He gives us the greatest ground of hope to invite us the more to submit to His terms. (T. Manton.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 46. My God! My God! why hast thou forsaken me!] These words are quoted by our Lord from Ps 22:1; they are of very great importance, and should be carefully considered.

Some suppose “that the divinity had now departed from Christ, and that his human nature was left unsupported to bear the punishment due to men for their sins.” But this is by no means to be admitted, as it would deprive his sacrifice of its infinite merit, and consequently leave the sin of the world without an atonement. Take deity away from any redeeming act of Christ, and redemption is ruined. Others imagine that our Lord spoke these words to the Jews only, to prove to them that he was the Messiah. “The Jews,” say they, “believed this psalm to speak of the Messiah: they quoted the eighth verse of it against Christ – He trusted in God that he would deliver him; let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him. (See Mt 27:43.) To which our Lord immediately answers, My God! my God! c, thus showing that he was the person of whom the psalmist prophesied.” I have doubts concerning the propriety of this interpretation.

It has been asked, What language is it that our Lord spoke? Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani. Some say it is Hebrew – others Syriac. I say, as the evangelists quote it, it is neither. St. Matthew comes nearest the Hebrew, Eli, Eli, lamah azabthani, in the words, , , , Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani.

And St. Mark comes nearest the Syriac, Mr 15:34, [Syriac] Alohi, Alohi, l’mono shebachtheni, in the words , , , Eloi, Eloi, lamma sabachthani. It is worthy of note, that a Hebrew MS. of the twelfth century, instead of azabthani, forsaken me, reads shechachthani, FORGOTTEN me. This word makes a very good sense, and comes nearer to the sabachthani of the evangelists. It may be observed also, that the words, Why hast thou FORGOTTEN me? are often used by David and others, in times of oppression and distress. See Ps 42:9.

Some have taken occasion from these words to depreciate the character of our blessed Lord. “They are unworthy,” say they, “of a man who suffers, conscious of his innocence, and argue imbecility, impatience, and despair.” This is by no means fairly deducible from the passage. However, some think that the words, as they stand in the Hebrew and Syriac, are capable of a translation which destroys all objections, and obviates every difficulty. The particle lamah, may be translated, to what – to whom – to what kind or sort – to what purpose or profit: Ge 25:32; Ge 32:29; Ge 33:15; Job 9:29; Jer 6:20; Jer 20:18; Am 5:18; and the verb azab signifies to leave – to deposit – to commit to the care of. See Ge 39:6; Job 39:11; Ps 10:14, and Jer 49:11. The words, taken in this way, might be thus translated: My God! my God! to what sort of persons hast thou left me? The words thus understood are rather to be referred to the wicked Jews than to our Lord, and are an exclamation indicative of the obstinate wickedness of his crucifiers, who steeled their hearts against every operation of the Spirit and power of God. See Ling. Brit. Reform. by B. Martin, p. 36.

Through the whole of the Sacred Writings, God is represented as doing those things which, in the course of his providence, he only permits to be done; therefore, the words, to whom hast thou left or given me up, are only a form of expression for, “How astonishing is the wickedness of those persons into whose hands I am fallen!” If this interpretation be admitted, it will free this celebrated passage from much embarrassment, and make it speak a sense consistent with itself, and with the dignity of the Son of God.

The words of St. Mark, Mr 15:34, agree pretty nearly with this translation of the Hebrew: ; To what [sort of persons, understood] hast thou left me? A literal translation of the passage in the Syriac Testament gives a similar sense: Ad quid dereliquisti me? “To what hast thou abandoned me?” And an ancient copy of the old Itala version, a Latin translation before the time of St. Jerome, renders the words thus: Quare me in opprobrium dedisti? “Why hast thou abandoned me to reproach?”

It may he objected, that this can never agree with the , why, of Matthew. To this it is answered, that must have here the same meaning as – as the translation of lama; and that, if the meaning be at all different, we must follow that evangelist who expresses most literally the meaning of the original: and let it be observed, that the Septuagint often translate by instead of , which evidently proves that it often had the same meaning. Of this criticism I say, Valet quod valet, Let it pass for no more than it is worth: the subject is difficult. But whatever may be thought of the above mode of interpretation, one thing is certain, viz. That the words could not be used by our Lord in the sense in which they are generally understood. This is sufficiently evident; for he well knew why he was come unto that hour; nor could he be forsaken of God, in whom dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. The Deity, however, might restrain so much of its consolatory support as to leave the human nature fully sensible of all its sufferings, so that the consolations might not take off any part of the keen edge of his passion; and this was necessary to make his sufferings meritorious. And it is probable that this is all that is intended by our Lord’s quotation from the twenty-second Psalm. Taken in this view, the words convey an unexceptionable sense, even in the common translation.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

And about the ninth hour,…. Or three o’clock in the afternoon, which was about the time of the slaying and offering of the daily sacrifice, which was an eminent type of Christ. The Jews say i, that

“every day the daily sacrifice was slain at eight and a half, and was offered up at nine and a half:”

about which time also the passover was killed, which was another type of Christ; and as they say k, “was offered first, and then the daily sacrifice.” Though the account they elsewhere l give of these things, is this;

“the daily sacrifice was slain at eight and a half, and was offered up at nine and a half; (that is, on all the common days of the year;) on the evenings of the passover, it was slain at seven and a half, and offered at eight and a half, whether on a common day, or on a sabbath day: the passover eve, that happened to be on the sabbath eve, it was slain at six and a half, and offered at seven and a half, and the passover after it.”

At this time,

Jesus cried with a loud voice: as in great distress, having been silent during the three hours darkness, and patiently bearing all his soul sufferings, under a sense of divine wrath, and the hidings of his Father’s countenance, and his conflicts with the powers of darkness; but now, in the anguish of his soul, he breaks out,

saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani: which words are partly Hebrew, and partly Chaldee; the three first are Hebrew, and the last Chaldee, substituted in the room of “Azabthani”; as it was, and still is, in the Chaldee paraphrase of the text in Ps 22:1, from whence they are taken;

that is to say, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? He calls him his God, not as he was God, but as he was man; who, as such, was chosen by him to the grace of union to the Son of God; was made and formed by him; was anointed by him with the oil of gladness; was supported and upheld by him in the day of salvation; was raised by him from the dead, and highly exalted by him at his own right hand; and Christ, as man, prayed to him as his God, believed in him, loved him, and obeyed him as such: and though now he hid his face from him, yet he expressed strong faith and confidence of his interest in him. When he is said to be “forsaken” of God; the meaning is not, that the hypostatical union was dissolved, which was not even by death itself; the fulness of the Godhead still dwelt bodily in him: nor was he separated from the love of God; he had the same interest in his Father’s heart and favour, both as his Son, and as mediator, as ever: nor was the principle and habit of joy and comfort lost in his soul, as man, but he was now without a sense of the gracious presence of God, and was filled, as the surety of his people, with a sense of divine wrath, which their iniquities he now bore, deserved, and which was necessary for him to endure, in order to make full satisfaction for them; for one part of the punishment of sin is loss of the divine presence. Wherefore he made not this expostulation out of ignorance: he knew the reason of it, and that it was not out of personal disrespect to him, or for any sin of his own; or because he was not a righteous, but a wicked man, as the Jew m blasphemously objects to him from hence; but because he stood in the legal place, and stead of sinners: nor was it out of impatience, that he so expressed himself; for he was entirely resigned to the will of God, and content to drink the whole of the bitter cup: nor out of despair; for he at the same time strongly claims and asserts his interest in God, and repeats it; but to show, that he bore all the griefs of his people, and this among the rest, divine desertion; and to set forth the bitterness of his sorrows, that not only the sun in the firmament hid its face from him, and he was forsaken by his friends and disciples, but even left by his God; and also to express the strength of his faith at such a time. The whole of it evinces the truth of Christ’s human nature, that he was in all things made like unto his brethren; that he had an human soul, and endured sorrows and sufferings in it, of which this of desertion was not the least: the heinousness of sin may be learnt from hence, which not only drove the angels out of heaven, and Adam out of the garden, and separates, with respect to communion, between God and his children; but even caused him to hide his face from his own Son, whilst he was bearing, and suffering for, the sins of his people. The condescending grace of Christ is here to be seen, that he, who was the word, that was with God from everlasting, and his only begotten Son that lay in his bosom, that he should descend from heaven by the assumption of human nature, and be for a while forsaken by God, to bring us near unto him: nor should it be wondered at, that this is sometimes the case of the saints, who should, in imitation of Christ, trust in the Lord at such seasons, and stay themselves on their God, and which may be some support unto them, they may be assured of the sympathy of Christ, who having been in this same condition, cannot but have a fellow feeling with them. The Jews themselves own n, that these words were said by Jesus when he was in their hands. They indeed apply the passage to Esther; and say o, that

“she stood in the innermost court of the king’s house; and when she came to the house of the images, the Shekinah departed from her, and she said, “Eli, Eli, lama Azabthani?” my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

Though others apply the “Psalm” to David, and others to the people of Israel in captivity p: but certain it is, that it belongs to the Messiah; and many things in it were fulfilled with respect to Jesus, most clearly show him to be the Messiah, and the person pointed at: the first words of it were spoken by him, as the Jews themselves allow, and the very expressions which his enemies used concerning him while suffering, together with their gestures, are there recorded; and the parting his garments, and casting lots on his vesture, done by the Roman soldiers, are there prophesied of; and indeed there are so many things in it which agree with him, and cannot with any other, that leave it without all doubt that he is the subject of it q.

i T. Hieros. Pesachim, fol. 31. 3, 4. k lb. l Misn. Pesachim, c. 5. sect. 1. m Vet. Nizzachon, p. 162. n Toldos Jesu, p. 17. o Bab. Megilia, fol. 15. 2. & Gloss. in T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 29. 1. p Vid. Jarchi & Kimchi in Psal. xxii. 1. q See my Book of the Prophecies of the Old Test. &c. p. 158.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? ( , , ;). Matthew first transliterates the Aramaic, according to the Vatican manuscript (B), the words used by Jesus: Eloi, eloi, lema sabachthanei; Some of the MSS. give the transliteration of these words from Ps 22:1 in the Hebrew (Eli, Eli, lama Zaphthanei). This is the only one of the seven sayings of Christ on the Cross given by Mark and Matthew. The other six occur in Luke and John. This is the only sentence of any length in Aramaic preserved in Matthew, though he has Aramaic words like amen, corban, mammon, pascha, raca, Satan, Golgotha. The so-called Gospel of Peter preserves this saying in a Docetic (Cerinthian) form: “My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me!” The Cerinthian Gnostics held that the aeon Christ came on the man Jesus at his baptism and left him here on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. Nothing from Jesus so well illustrates the depth of his suffering of soul as he felt himself regarded as sin though sinless (2Co 5:21). Joh 3:16 comes to our relief here as we see the Son of God bearing the sin of the world. This cry of desolation comes at the close of the three hours of darkness.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Ninth hour. “Early on Friday afternoon the new course of priests, of Levites, and of the ‘stationary men’ who were to be the representatives of all Israel, arrived Jerusalem, and having prepared themselves for the festive season went up to the temple. The approach of the Sabbath, and then its actual commencement, were announced by threefold blasts from the priests ‘ trumpets. The first three blasts were blown when one – third of the evening – sacrifice service was over, or about the ninth hour; that it, about 3 P. M. on Friday” (Edersheim, ” The Temple “).

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

46. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried. Though in the cry which Christ uttered a power more than human was manifested, yet it was unquestionably drawn from him by intensity of sorrow. And certainly this was his chief conflict, and harder than all the other tortures, that in his anguish he was so far from being soothed by the assistance or favor of his Father, that he felt himself to be in some measure estranged from him. For not only did he offer his body as the price of our reconciliation with God, but. in his soul also he endured the punishments due to us; and thus he became, as Isaiah speaks, a man of sorrows, (Isa 53:3.) Those interpreters are widely mistaken who, laying aside this part of redemption, attended solely to the outward punishment of the flesh; for in order that Christ might satisfy for us, (285) it was necessary that he should be placed as a guilty person at the judgment-seat of God. Now nothing is more dreadful than to feel that God, whose wrath is worse than all deaths, is the Judge. When this temptation was presented to Christ, as if, having God opposed to him, he were already devoted to destruction, he was seized with horror, which would have been sufficient to swallow up a hundred times all the men in the world; but by the amazing power of the Spirit he achieved the victory. Nor is it by hypocrisy, or by assuming a character, that he complains of having been forsaken by the Father. Some allege that he employed this language in compliance with the opinion of the people, but this is an absurd mode of evading the difficulty; for the inward sadness of his soul was so powerful and violent, that it forced him to break out into a cry. Nor did the redemption which he accomplished consist solely in what was exhibited to the eye, (as I stated a little ago,) but having undertaken to be our surety, he resolved actually to undergo in our room the judgment of God.

But it appear absurd to say that an expression of despair escaped Christ. The reply is easy. Though the perception of the flesh would have led him to dread destruction, still in his heart faith remained firm, by which he beheld the presence of God, of whose absence he complains. We have explained elsewhere how the Divine nature gave way to the weakness of the flesh, so far as was necessary for our salvation, that Christ might accomplish all that was required of the Redeemer. We have likewise pointed out the distinction between the sentiment of nature and the knowledge of faith; and, there ore, the perception of God’s estrangement from him, which Christ had, as suggested by natural feeling, did not hinder him from continuing to be assured by faith that God was reconciled to him. This is sufficiently evident from the two clauses of the complaint; for, before stating the temptation, he begins by saying that he betakes himself to God as his God, and thus by the shield of faith he courageously expels that appearance of forsaking which presented itself on the other side. In short, during this fearful torture his faith remained uninjured, so that, while he complained of being forsaken, he still relied on the aid of God as at hand.

That this expression eminently deserves our attention is evident from the circumstance, that the Holy Spirit, in order to engrave it more deeply on the memory of men, has chosen to relate it in the Syriac language; (286) for this has the same effect as if he made us hear Christ himself repeating the very words which then proceeded from his mouth. So much the more detestable is the indifference of those who lightly pass by, as a matter of jesting, the deep sadness and fearful trembling which Christ endured. No one who considers that Christ undertook the office of Mediator on the condition of suffering our condemnation, both in his body and in his soul, will think it strange that he maintained a struggle with the sorrows of death, as if an offended God had thrown him into a whirlpool of afflictions.

(285) “ A fin que Christ fist la satisfaction et le payment pour nous;” — “in order that Christ might make satisfaction and payment for us.”

(286) “ A voulu qu’il fust escrit et enregistré en langue Syrienne, de la quelle on usoit lors communément au pays;” — “determined that it should be written and recorded in the Syrian language, which was then commonly used in the country.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(46) Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani.The cry is recorded only by St. Matthew and St. Mark. The very syllables or tones dwelt in the memory of those who heard and understood it, and its absence from St. Johns narrative was probably due to the fact that he had before this taken the Virgin-Mother from the scene of the crucifixion as from that which was more than she could bear (Joh. 19:27). To the Roman soldiers, to many of the by standers, Greeks or Hellenistic Jews, the words would be, as the sequel shows, unintelligible. We shrink instinctively from any over-curious analysis of the inner feelings in our Lords humanity that answered to this utterance. Was it the natural fear of death? or the vicarious endurance of the wrath which was the penalty of the sins of the human race, for whom, and instead of whom, He suffered? Was there a momentary interruption of the conscious union between His human soul and the light of His Fathers countenance? or, as seems implied in Joh. 19:28, did He quote the words in order to direct the thoughts of men to the great Messianic prophecy which the Psalm contained? None of these answers is altogether satisfactory, and we may well be content to leave the mystery unfathomed, and to let our words, be wary and few. We may remember (1) that both the spoken words of His enemies (Mat. 27:43) and the acts of the soldiers (Mat. 27:35) must have recalled the words of that Psalm; (2) that memory thus roused would pass on to the cry of misery with which the Psalm opened; (3) that our Lord as man was to taste death in all its bitterness for every man (Heb. 2:9), and that He could not so have tasted it had His soul been throughout in full undisturbed enjoyment of the presence of the Father; (4) that the lives of the saints of God, in proportion to their likeness to the mind of Christ, have exhibited this strange union, or rather instantaneous succession, of the sense of abandonment and of intensest faith. The Psalmist himself, in this very Psalm, is one instance; Job (Job. 19:6-9, Job. 19:23-26) and Jeremiah (Jer. 20:7-9; Jer. 20:12-13) may be named as others. Conceive this conflictand the possibility of such a conflict is postulated in Joh. 12:27 and in the struggle of Gethsemaneand then, though we cannot understand, we may in part at least conceive, how it was possible for the Son of Man to feel for one moment that sense of abandonment, which is the last weapon of the Enemy. He tasted of despair as others had tasted, but in the very act of tasting, the words My God were as a protest against it, and by them He was delivered from it. It is remarkable, whatever explanation may be given of it, that as these words are recorded by the first two Gospels only, so they are the only words spoken on the cross which we find in their report of the Crucifixion.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

46. About the ninth hour At the close of the darkness. Eli These words are the first verse of Psalms 22, quoted by our Lord in the Syro-Chaldaic language, the language in common use. The evangelist gives them in the very words of Jesus, rather than in the Greek, to show the reason of their mistake who supposed that he called for Elias. These words do not, we think, contain any reference to the darkness which was now disappearing, and which was given for his murderers rather than for him. The Saviour here applies the holy psalm to himself as prophetic. The particular words are expressive of the divine abandonment, of the departure of the divine presence as part of his atonement endurance. They are uttered by him to show that he is enduring an intolerable agony, deeper than any external infliction.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Mat 27:46. Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, &c. A little before he expired, Jesus repeated the first verse of the 22nd Psalm, pronouncing it in the Syriac dialect, which was the common language of the country; and speaking with a loud voice, that all who stood around might hear him distinctly, and know that he was the person spoken of by David. Some would translate the words, My God, my God, to what a degree, or to what a length of time, hast thou forsaken me? Lama in the Hebrew has this signification. Accordingly St. Mark, in the parallel passage, has rendered it by . But, however translated, our Lord’s words must be viewed in the same light with his prayer in the garden. For, as that prayer expressed only the feelings and inclinations of his human nature, sorely pressed down with the weight of his sufferings; so his words on the cross proceeded from the greatness of his sufferings then, and expressed the feelings of his human nature; viz. an exceeding grief at God’s forsaking him, and a complaint that it was so. But as his prayer in the garden was properly tempered by the addition of the clause, yet not as I will, but as thou wilt; so his complaint on the cross may have been tempered in the same manner; perhaps byhis repeating the following third verse of the Psalm, though the Evangelists have not mentioned it particularly: for that, in the inward disposition of his mind, Jesus was perfectly resigned, even while he hung on the cross, is evident beyond all doubt, from his recommending his spirit to God in the article of death; which he could not have done, had he been discontented with the divine appointments. The sufferings which made our Lord cry out, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? were not merely those which appeared to the spectators, viz. the pains of death which he underwent. Many of his followers have suffered sharper and more lingering bodily tortures, ending in death, without thinking themselves on that account forsaken of God; on the contrary, they both felt and expressed raptures of joy under the bitterest torments. Why then should Jesus have complained and been so dejected under inferior sufferings, as we must acknowledge them to be, if there was nothing here but the pains of crucifixion? Isthere any other circumstance in this history which leads us to think him defective in courage or patience? In piety and resignation came he behind his own Apostles? Were his views of Deity and religion more confined than theirs? Had he greater sensibility of pain than they, without a proper balance arising from the superiorityof his understanding? In short, was he worse qualifiedfor martyrdom than they? The truth is, his words on the cross cannot be accounted for, but on the supposition that he suffered in his mind pains inexpressible, inflicted on him by an immediate interposition of the power of God, the nature and intenseness of which cannot in the language of men be more justly, or more emphatically expressed, than by the metaphor of God’s forsaking him. Some think that Jesus on this occasion repeated the whole 22nd Psalm; and certainly, as it is composed in the form of a prayer, it must be acknowledged, that no address could be more suitable to the circumstances wherein our Lord then was, or better adapted to impress the minds of the beholders with becoming sentiments. Nevertheless, the things mentioned by the Evangelists as next happening, were of such a kind, that they must have followed immediately upon the repetition of the first three or four verses of the Psalm. It is probable, therefore, that he stopped there. Perhaps it was not his intention to go farther; for it was the custom of the Jews, when they quoted large portions of Scripture, to mention only the firstverses or words of the passage. Such of his hearers as knew these to be the first verses of the 22nd Psalm, would easily understand that Jesus meant to apply the whole Psalm to himself. And as it contains the most remarkable particulars of our Lord’s passion, being a sort of summary of all the prophesies relative to that subject, by citing it on the cross, and applying it to himself, Jesus signified, that he was now accomplishing the things therein predicted concerning the Messiah. Farther, as the Psalm is composed in the form of a prayer, by citing it at this time, Jesus also claimed of his Father the performance of all the promises that he had made, whether to him, or to his faithful people, the chiefof which are recorded in the latter part of the Psalm.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 27:46 ] He cried aloud . See Winer, de verbor. cum praepos. compos, usu , 1838, III. p. 6 f.; comp. Luk 9:38 ; LXX. and Apocr., Herod., Plato.

The circumstance of the following exclamation being given in Hebrew ) is sufficiently and naturally enough accounted for by the jeering language of Mat 27:47 , which language is understood to be suggested by the sound of the Hebrew words recorded in our present passage.

] Chald.: = the Heb. . Jesus gives vent to His feelings in the opening words of the twenty-second Psalm. We have here, however, the purely human feeling that arises from a natural but momentary quailing before the agonies of death, and which was in every respect similar to that which had been experienced by the author of the psalm. The combination of profound mental anguish, in consequence of entire abandonment by men, with the well-nigh intolerable pangs of dissolution, was all the more natural and inevitable in the case of One whose feelings were so deep, tender, and real, whose moral consciousness was so pure, and whose love was so intense. In Jesus expressed, of course, what He felt, for His ordinary conviction that He was in fellowship God had for the moment given way under the pressure of extreme bodily and mental suffering, and a mere passing feeling as though He were no longer sustained by the power of the divine life had taken its place (comp. Gess, p. 196); but this subjective feeling must not be confounded with actual objective desertion on the part of God (in opposition to Olshausen and earlier expositors), which in the case of Jesus would have been a meta-physical and moral impossibility. The dividing of the exclamation into different parts, so as to correspond to the different elements in Christ’s nature, merely gives rise to arbitrary and fanciful views (Lange, Ebrard), similar to those which have been based on the metaphysical deduction from the idea of necessity (Ebrard). To assume, as the theologians have done, that in the distressful cry of abandonment we have the vicarious enduring of the wrath of God (“ira Dei adversus nostra peccata effunditur in ipsum, et sic satisfit justitiae Dei,” Melanchthon, comp. Luther on Psa 22 , Calvin, Quenstedt), or the infliction of divine punishment (Kstlin in the Jahrb. f. D. Theol. III. 1, p. 125, and Weiss himself), is, as in the case of the agony in Gethsemane, to go farther than we are warranted in doing by the New Testament view of the atoning death of Christ, the vicarious character of which is not to be regarded as consisting in an objective and actual equivalent. Comp. Remarks after Mat 26:46 . Others, again, have assumed that Jesus, though quoting only the opening words of Psalms 22., had the whole psalm in view, including, therefore, the comforting words with which it concludes (Paulus, Gratz, de Wette, Bleek; comp. Schleiermacher, Glaubensl. II. p. 141, Exo 4 , and L. J. p. 457). This, however, besides being somewhat arbitrary, gives rise to the incongruity of introducing the element of reflection where only pure feeling prevailed, as we see exemplified by Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 309, who, in accordance with his view that Jesus was abandoned to the mercies of an ungodly world, substitutes a secondary thought (“request for the so long delayed deliverance through death”) for the plain and direct sense of the words. The authenticity of our Lord’s exclamation, which the author of the Wolferibttel Fragnents has singularly misconstrued (in describing it as the cry of despair over a lost cause), is denied by Strauss (who speaks of Psa 22 as having served the purpose of a programme of Christ’s passion), while it is strongly questioned by Keim, partly on account of Psa 22 and partly because he thinks that the subsequent accompanying narrative is clearly (?) of the nature of a fictitious legend. But legend would hardly have put the language of despair into the mouth of the dying Redeemer, and certainly there is nothing in the witticisms that follow to warrant the idea that we have here one legend upon another.

] the momentary but agonizing feeling that He is abandoned by God, impels Him to ask what the divine object of this may be. He doubtless knew this already, but the pangs of death had overpowered Him (2Co 13:4 ), a passing anomaly as regards the spirit that uniformly characterized the prayers of Jesus.

] means: to abandon any one to utter helplessness. Comp. 2Co 4:9 ; Act 2:27 ; Heb 13:5 ; Plat. Conv. p. 179 A; Dem. p. 158, 10, al.; Sir 3:16 ; Sir 7:30 ; Sir 9:10 .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Ver. 46. Jesus cried with a loud voice ] Therefore he laid down his life at his own pleasure; for by his loud outcry it appears that he could have lived longer if he had listed, for any decay of nature under those exquisite torments that he suffered in his body, but much greater in his soul. That which for the present seems to have expressed from him this doleful complaint, was the sense of his Father’s wrath in the darkening of the body of the sun over him; which though God causeth to shine upon the just and unjust for their comfort, yet was not suffered to shine upon him for those three sorrowful hours together. When Theodorus, the martyr, was racked and tortured by the command of Julian the Apostate, an angel, in the form of a young man, stood by him and comforted him, wiping off his sweat with a fine linen cloth, and pouring cold water on his vexed limbs. When Mr Saunders, martyr, was examined before Stephen Winchester, he felt a most pleasant refreshing issuing from every part of his body to his heart, and from thence ebbing and flowing to each part again. William Hunter, martyr, cried out at the stake, Son of God, shine upon me, and immediately the sun shone out of a dark cloud so full in his face that he was constrained to look another way; whereat the people mused, because it was so dark a little before. And I myself was an eyewitness of a like answer returned from heaven, to a like prayer made by a penitent malefactor executed at Evesham in Worcestershire, many years since. But our Lord Christ was forsaken of all these creature comforts; and (which was worse than all) of his Father’s favour, to his present apprehension; left forlorn and destitute for a time, that we might be received for ever. a Howbeit, perplexed though he were, yet not in despair; persecuted, yet not forsaken; cast down, yet not destroyed. 2Co 4:8-9 He could say My God, in the midst of all, by the force of his faith, which singles out God (as a father saith) and appropriateth him to a man’s self. b And Hilary hath a good note, which here comes in not out of place. Habes conquerentem relictum se esse, quia homo est; habes eundem profitentem latroni in paradiso regnaturum, quia Deus est. As man, he cries out My God, my God, &c., when, as God, he promiseth paradise to the penitent thief.

a est plus quam , ut deserere quam derelinquere.

b .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

46. ] See Psa 22:1 . The words are Chaldee, and not Hebrew. Our Lord spoke them in the ordinary dialect, not in that of the sacred text itself. The weightiest question is, In what sense did He use them? His inner consciousness of union with God must have been complete and indestructible but, like His higher and holy Will, liable to be obscured by human weakness and pain, which at this time was at its very highest. We must however take care not to ascribe all his suffering to bodily pain , however cruel: his soul was in immediate contact with and prospect of death the wages of sin , which He had taken on Him , but never committed and the conflict at Gethsemane was renewed. ‘He himself,’ as the Berlenberg Bible remarks (Stier, vi. 442), ‘becomes the expositor of the darkness, and shews what it imports.’ In the words however, ‘ My God’ there speaks the same union with the Divine Will, and abiding in the everlasting covenant purpose, as in those, ‘Not my will, but thine.’

These are the only words on the Cross related by Matt. and Mark and they are related by none besides.

The form is very seldom used, only in Jdg 16:28 [184] , Ezr 9:6 . The LXX here has the usual vocative : as also Mark.

[184] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle; it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as ‘Verc’): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are (1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as ‘Blc’); (2) that of Birch (‘Bch’), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798, Apocalypse, 1800, Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (‘Btly’), by the Abbate Mico, published in Ford’s Appendix to Woide’s edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus’ Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentley’s books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (‘Rl’), and are preserved amongst Bentley’s papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20) 1 . The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgon’s “Letters from Rome,” London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 27:46 . , , etc.: the opening words of Psa 22 , but partly at least in Aramaic not in Hebrew, wholly so as they stand in Codex [155] (W.H [156] ), , , etc., corresponding exactly to the version in Mark. , , if the true reading in Matthew, seems to be an alteration made to suit what follows, whereby the utterance of Jesus becomes a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. It is not likely that Jesus would so express Himself. He would speak wholly either in Hebrew or in Aramaic, saying in the one case: “eli eli lamah asavtani”; in the other: “eloi eloi lema savachtani”. The form the utterance assumed in the earliest evangelic report might be an important clue. This Resch finds in the reading of Codex [157] , which gives the words in Hebrew. Resch holds that [158] often preserves the readings of the Urevangelium , which, contrary to Weiss, he believes to have contained a Passion history in brief outline ( Agrapha , p. 53). Brandt expresses a similar view ( E. G. , pp. 228 232). The probability is that Jesus spoke in Hebrew. It is no argument against this that the spectators might not understand what He said, for the utterance was not meant for the ears of men. The historicity of the occurrence has been called in question on the ground that one in a state of dire distress would not express his feelings in borrowed phrases. The alternative is that the words were put into the mouth of Jesus by persons desirous that in this as in all other respects His experience should correspond to prophetic anticipations. But who would have the boldness to impute to Him a sentiment which seemed to justify the taunt: “Let Him deliver Him if He love Him”? Brandt’s reply to this is: Jewish Christians who had not a high idea of Christ’s Person ( E. G. , p. 245). That in some Christian circles the cry of desertion was an offence appears from the rendering of “eli eli” in Evang. Petri . . = my strength, my strength. Its omission by Luke proves the same thing.

[155] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[156] Westcott and Hort.

[157] Codex Bezae

[158] Codex Bezae

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

about. Greek. peri. App-104. Eli, Eli, lama sabachtnani. The English transliteration of the Greek, which is the Greek transliteration of the Aram, ‘eli, ‘eli, lamah ‘azabhani. The whole expression is Aramaic. See App-94. Words not reported in Luke or John. Quoted from Psa 22:1. See the notes there. Thus, with the Lord’s last breath He gives Divine authority to the O.T. See App-117. Note the “seven words” from the cross: (1) Luk 23:34; (2) Luk 23:43; (3) Joh 19:26, Joh 19:27; (4) Mat 27:46; (5) Joh 19:28; (6) Joh 19:30; (7) Luk 23:46.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

46.] See Psa 22:1. The words are Chaldee, and not Hebrew. Our Lord spoke them in the ordinary dialect, not in that of the sacred text itself. The weightiest question is, In what sense did He use them? His inner consciousness of union with God must have been complete and indestructible-but, like His higher and holy Will, liable to be obscured by human weakness and pain, which at this time was at its very highest. We must however take care not to ascribe all his suffering to bodily pain, however cruel: his soul was in immediate contact with and prospect of death-the wages of sin, which He had taken on Him, but never committed-and the conflict at Gethsemane was renewed. He himself, as the Berlenberg Bible remarks (Stier, vi. 442), becomes the expositor of the darkness, and shews what it imports. In the words however, My God-there speaks the same union with the Divine Will, and abiding in the everlasting covenant purpose, as in those, Not my will, but thine.

These are the only words on the Cross related by Matt. and Mark-and they are related by none besides.

The form is very seldom used,-only in Jdg 16:28 [184], Ezr 9:6. The LXX here has the usual vocative : as also Mark.

[184] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle;-it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon;-nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as Verc): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are-(1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as Blc); (2) that of Birch (Bch), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798,-Apocalypse, 1800,-Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (Btly), by the Abbate Mico,-published in Fords Appendix to Woides edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentleys books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (Rl), and are preserved amongst Bentleys papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20)1. The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgons Letters from Rome, London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 27:46. , …, but about, etc.) From this connection, it may be inferred that the darkening of the sun (at the full moon[1200]) represented, not so much the malice of the Jews, as the dereliction of Jesus; which lasted, as it may be supposed, the whole of that three hours, at the conclusion of which He uttered this exclamation. St Luke (Luk 23:45) joins the darkening of the sun with the rending of the veil without mentioning the dereliction. As soon as the dereliction was ended, the Holy of Holies became immediately open to the Mediator.[1201]-, cried out) Both this cry (repeated in Mat 27:50), and the silence which preceded it, are of the utmost importance.-, sabachthani) i.e. , hast Thou forsaken Me? The is rendered in Greek by , [1202][1203], when , th, follows.- , My God) On other occasions He was accustomed to say, Father: now He says, My God, as being now in a degree estranged;[1204] yet He does so twice, and adds MY with confidence, patience, and self-resignation. Christ was , the servant of the Lord:[1205] and yet He calls Him God, not Master (). In Psalms 22(21):1, the LXX. have , , ; My God, My God, protect Me! Why hast Thou forsaken Me? where the meaning is evident from the remainder of that and the following verse. He does not only say that He has been delivered by God into the hands of men, but also that He has suffered something, to us ineffable, at the hand of God.-, why?) Jesus knew the cause, and had prepared Himself for all things: but yet the why expresses that the Son would not have had to endure the dereliction on His own account, but that it happened to Him for a new cause, and would last but for a short time; after which His yearning desire[1206] towards the Father would be again gratified.-, hast Thou forsaken) The past tense.[1207] At that very instant the dereliction came to an end, and shortly afterwards the whole Passion. In the midst and deepest moment of dereliction He was silent. He complains of the dereliction alone.[1208]

[1200] This could not have been an eclipse of the sun, for the passover was celebrated at the time of full moon, when the moon is opposite to the sun. Luk 23:45 says, The sun was darkened.-ED.

[1201] , the ninth hour) Some one has thrown out the surmise that it was at mid-day the definitive sentence was pronounced by Pilate, and that His being led forth was delayed up to that point of time, so that the crucifixion would thus take place on the third hour from mid-day (3 oclock), at the time of the evening sacrifice. Nay, rather His death occurred at that time, after that the gracious Saviour had hung for six whole hours on the cross.-Harm., p. 571.

[1202] Colbertinus, do.

[1203] Primasius in Apocalypsin.

[1204] In the original, quasi jam alienior.-(I. B.)

[1205] Isa 42:1.-ED.

[1206] In the original, desiderium, a word which is said by some to have no equivalent in any other language. It implies here longing and love in the highest and fullest degree, accompanied by sorrow for, and privation of, the object desired; and corresponds very nearly with the Portuguese word saudade, which I believe to be utterly untranslatable.-(I. B.)

[1207] Some recent interpreters render it, Why (How) can it (ever) come to pass, that thou shouldest forsake Me? And yet that interpretation, however soothing it be to natural weakness (softness), does not satisfy the demands of divine rigorous strictness in this most momentous transaction. We may term it, as it were, a filial expostulation, wherein, if we may be permitted to express the sense with some little change of the words, the beloved Son speaks thus to His beloved Father, What is this that thou hast done unto Me? In truth, the best of deeds! Most excellently endured! A brief time so extraordinary, that, on account of it, He is to have [or else feel] everlasting thanks.-Harm., p. 573.

[1208] Not of His sufferings.-ED.

The Greek .-ED.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

why

Psa 22:3 gives the answer to this significant and terrible cry:

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

Jesus: Mar 15:34, Luk 23:46, Joh 19:28-30, Heb 5:7

Eli: Psa 22:1, Psa 71:11, Isa 53:10, Lam 1:12

Reciprocal: Exo 12:6 – in the evening Deu 16:1 – the passover Psa 31:14 – Thou Psa 42:6 – my God Psa 69:17 – hide Psa 88:14 – Lord Lam 3:8 – General Dan 6:22 – My God Dan 9:21 – the time Act 10:3 – about

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

CHRIST FORSAKEN

My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?

Mat 27:46

A darkness had overspread the land, and there was darkness in the Saviours soul. We may not follow Him, but the awfulness of it we may partly understand from the exceeding bitter cry: My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?

I. Forsaken for our sins.It was the loss of the sense of the Presence of God. God seemed so far away that He had to be called back by a conscious effort of the Redeemer. And the reason we know. Christ was burdened with the sin of men. The Lord had laid upon Him the iniquity of us all. God and sin cannot exist together, any more than light and darkness can be found in one. If Christ had not been forsaken for us we should now be inevitably forsaken of God.

II. The sinfulness of sin.What a wonderful mystery there is about Gods dealings with us and about this fact of sin intervening. What a dislocation in the order of the world sin has produced. On every side we are aware of its consequences, and are blindly indignant at them. We cry for justice, for reversal of human conditions as we know them now. Why is God so silent? Why does He not make Himself felt? Why does He not do something? Gods justice may be slow in vindicating itself, but on the whole it vindicates itself here and now, and we must have faith to believe that it will be wholly vindicated hereafter. It was so in the case of our Saviour Christ; it will be so in ours.

III. But Gods mercy and Gods justice triumph.Think once more, the agonised cry was not the end; Christs death was not the end. He died, yes; but He rose three days later. The triumph of His Cross remained. Therefore let us take courage. Let us not turn back because there comes into our life that suffering which our religion always told us we were to expectthe fellowship of Christs sufferings, the fellowship of the Crossand if His yoke is easy and His burden light, it is not because it is a painless yoke, no, no, but because love will make the pain welcome. Be sure, too, that one day Gods justice will triumph, that what is base will be debased; that if we do not live to see it in our lives, yet in the next life at least there will be the great reward.

The Rev. Lionel Ford.

(SECOND OUTLINE)

THE CRY OF AGONY

This is the fourth of the Seven Words from the Cross, and it is the word of Agony.

I. The cry of agony.First of all, fancy Christ saying, My God, My God! Hitherto it has been My Father. It is the cry which comes from His perfect human nature. It shows us that we must not confound our Lords human nature with His Deity. We cannot understand these things: we cannot understand how He could increase in wisdom and stature when He was the Eternal Son of God; but He did. We do not know why He cried, My God, My God; but He did: it was perfect human nature. It is the cry of Agony. He was born with a perfect human nature that He might die a perfect human death. He was the Man Christ Jesus Who tasted death for every man. But He was also God.

II. What made Him cry?Was it weakness? No. It could not be weakness, because afterwards He cried with a loud voice: He was not exhausted. Was it, do you think, that He had made a mistake and thought that God had forsaken Him? No. He could not make a mistake. He never made a mistake in His life, and not in His death. But had God forsaken Him? How could God forsake God? The only explanation that I can possibly give you is that He willed to feel forsaken that you and I might never be forsaken. It was to teach us the lesson that the Lord hath laid upon Him the iniquity of us all. As representing Sin, He had to go through the Passion of seeming forsaken. He became Sin (hear the words of Scripture; I do not understand these things, but I believe and worship) Who knew no sin. And why did He become Sin? For me. He loved me and gave Himself for me.

III. God forsaken.During the Passion darkness came upon the land, and when you have your passion (it may be at midday or midnight, and though the sun be shining in the heaven yet it may be as dark around you as night) you may say, I am a God-forsaken man. And He will be near you, I know, and forgive you and excuse you. And when, afterwards, the sun begins to shine upon your life again, and you are sorry you ever said or thought such a thing, you can say to Him, Thou, dear Saviour, didst say in thine Agony, My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me? I lie down under Thy Cross, and hide myself in Thine Agony, and cover myself with Thy Blood of Redemption.

The Rev. A. H. Stanton.

(THIRD OUTLINE)

THE MYSTERIOUS CRY

Two things we notice about this mysterious cry of the stricken Saviour.

I. The cry.First of all that it is a question, the only question, which, so far as we are told, was ever uttered to the Father by His lips: My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me? And the Blessed Son of God seems to put Himself, as it were, with those holy men of old who at different times and stages of Israels history pleaded with God concerning His judgments.

II. Gods silence.And yet, in the second place, how strange it is that to that question there is no reply, as if to teach us of the mystery of Gods dealing with men. What an unspeakable mystery is the Atonement of Christ! We see enough to satisfy our reason to some extent; we see enough to reassure our aching heart, but we cannot fathom the mystery of what Jesus did upon the Cross. Religion does not profess to give us cut-and-dried answers to every futile or unreasonable question that we may ask. All we know is, and that is quite enough for us, that he that followeth the Lord Jesus Christ shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. And so I suppose in this utterance Jesus shows Himself the helper of the perplexed. Let us be sure that Gods judgments are a great deep, that there is much which in this life at least we must be content not to know, and that our Blessed Lord passed victorious through the pain of perplexity and went forth into the light once more.

III. The faithfulness of the Creator.And one more thought is thisthe thought of the faithfulness of our Creator. Christ does not say, My Father, My Father, but My God, my God. He appeals to God as a Creater; He commits His soul as to a faithful Creator, and He knows that He is safe. Though a man does not see what is the exact meaning, what is the end of the discipline through which he passes, he may commit himself to God with the faithful assurance that he will not be forsaken. For man is not alone in his search for truth. The Truth is seeking him. And so for our comfort in perplexity let us remember that the Blessed Saviour Himself has got a heart that can sympathise with the perplexed, and that He for Whom we seek here, and for Whom we wait, and for Whom we long, will manifest Himself, if not here, then beyond the veil, and in due season we who seek after Him shall find Him, and we shall reap if we faint not.

The Rev. T. G. Longley.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

7:46

Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani is from Hebrew words as Jesus uttered them. Then Matthew translates them into Greek, which the translators of King James render in English for us, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken met This bewailing sentence is recorded as a prophecy in Psa 22:1.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

[Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani.] I. All the rout indeed and force of hell was let loose at that time against Christ, without either bridle or chain: he calls it himself, the power of darkness; Luk 22:53. God who had foretold of old, that the serpent should bruise the heel of the promised seed, and now that time is come, had slackened the devil’s chain, which, in regard of men, the Divine Providence used to hold in his hand; so that all the power and all the rancour of hell might, freely and without restraint, assault Christ; and that all that malice that was in the devil against the whole elect of God, summed up and gathered together into one head, might at one stroke and onset be brandished against Christ without measure.

II. Our most blessed Saviour, therefore, feeling such torments as either hell itself, or the instruments of hell, men conspiring together in villainy and cruelty, could pour out upon him, cries out, under the sharpness of the present providence, “My God! My God! Why hast thou delivered me up and left me to such assaults, such bitternesses, and such merciless hands?” The Talmudists bring in Esther using such an ejaculation, which is also cited in the Gloss on Joma: “Esther stood in the inner court of the palace. R. Levi saith, When she was now just come up to the idol-temple, the divine glory departed from her: therefore she said, Eli, Eli, lamma azabhtani.”

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

Mat 27:46. And about the ninth hour. During the three hours of darkness, our Lord was silent. He seems not to have become gradually exhausted, for after nearly six hours on the cross, according to three Evangelists, Jesus cried out with a loud voice (comp. Mat 27:50). The agony resembles that in Gethsemane, but seems even more intense. Matthew and Mark mention only this utterance from the cross.

Eli, Eli. The first words of Psalms 22, given by Mark in the Aramaic dialect then spoken: Eloi, Eloi.

Lama, or Lema (Aramaic, and better supported).

Sabaohthani, also Aramaic. The translation follows: My God, etc., suggesting that Matthew wrote in Greek. The 22d Psalm, from which this cry is taken, had already been cited (from Mat 27:8) in mockery by the rulers (Mat 27:43), whose conduct is described in the Psalm (Mat 27:7). The casting lots for His garments (Mat 27:35) is a fulfilment of Mat 27:18 (comp. Joh 19:24). There are so many other points of agreement, that the Psalm has been deemed a direct and exclusive prophecy of Christs passion. But it is better to admit a primary reference to David, or to an ideal person representing the righteous. It is then typical of the life, sufferings, and victory of Christ, necessarily finding its highest and most striking fulfilment in Him.

Why hast thou forsaken me? These words express feeling, and the feeling indicated by their obvious meaning. Bodily causes, inflammation, interruption of the flow of blood, dizziness, no doubt acted on His real human body and soul. But His soul was capable of unusual sufferings. The speedy death, while He could cry with a loud voice (Mat 27:50) points to a deeper struggle. This was an experience of sin and death in their inner connection and universal significance for the race, by One who was perfectly pure and holy, a mysterious and indescribable anguish of the body and the soul in immediate prospect of, and in actual wrestling with, death as the wages of sin and the culmination of all misery of man, of which the Saviour was free, but which He voluntarily assumed from infinite love in behalf of the race. In this anguish, He expresses His actual feeling of abandonment. But His spirit still holds fast to God, and thus our hold on God is established. Here the vicarious nature of the sufferings distinctly appears.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Mat 27:46. About the ninth hour Just before he expired; Jesus cried with a loud voice Our Lords great agony probably continued these three whole hours, at the conclusion of which he thus cried out, while he suffered from God himself, and probably also from the powers of darkness, what was unutterable; Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani These words are quoted from the first verse of the twenty-second Psalm. (where see the note,) but it is to be observed, that they are not the very words of the Hebrew original; but are in what is called Syro-Chaldaic, at that time the language of the country, and the dialect which our Lord seems always to have used. Mark expresses the two first words rather differently, namely; Eloi, Eloi, which comes nearer to the Syriac. Some think our Lord, in his agony, repeated the words twice, with some little variation, saying at one time, Eloi, and the other, Eli. This, says Dr. Doddridge, is possible, and if it were otherwise, I doubt not but Mark has given us the word exactly, and Matthew a kind of contraction of it. Both the evangelists have added the interpretation of the words, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? which words the last-mentioned divine paraphrases thus: O my heavenly Father, wherefore dost thou add to all my other sufferings, those which arise from the want of a comfortable sense of thy presence? Wherefore dost thou thus leave me alone in the combat, destitute of those sacred consolations, which thou couldst easily shed abroad upon my soul, and which thou knowest I have done nothing to forfeit. Thus, in a most humble and affectionate manner, he intimated to his heavenly Father that he was only by imputation a sinner, and had himself done nothing to incur his displeasure, and showed that the want of the light of Gods countenance on his soul, and the sense of divine wrath due to the sins of mankind, were far more than all his complicated sufferings; but that his confidence in his Father, his love to him, and submission to his will, were unabated, even in that dreadful hour. In other words, while he utters this exclamation of the psalmist, he at once expresses his trust in God, and a most distressing sense of his withdrawing the comfortable discoveries of his presence, and filling his soul with a terrible sense of the wrath due to the sins which he was bearing. Some would interpret the words, My God, my God, to what a degree, or, to what length of time, or, to what [sort of persons] hast thou forsaken me? because lama, in the Hebrew, may have this signification, and the expression , whereby Mark has rendered it. But certainly the word , which answers to it here in Matthew, is not liable to such ambiguity; nor can such an interpretation of Psa 22:1, be made in any degree to accord with the verses immediately following, as the reader will see, if he will please to turn to them. The truth is, our Lords words here must be viewed in the same light with his prayer in the garden. For as that prayer expressed only the feelings and inclinations of his human nature, sorely pressed down with the weight of his sufferings, so his exclamation on the cross proceeded from the greatness of his sufferings then, and expressed the feelings of the same human nature, namely, an exceeding grief at Gods forsaking him, and a complaint that it was so. But as his prayer in the garden was properly tempered with resignation to the will of his Father, while he said, Not as I will, but as thou wilt; so his complaint on the cross was doubtless tempered in the same manner, though the evangelists have not particularly mentioned it. For that in the inward disposition of his mind he was perfectly resigned while he hung on the cross, is evident beyond all doubt, from his recommending his spirit to his Father in the article of death, which he could not have done if he had either doubted of his favour, or been discontented with his appointments. That the sufferings which made our Lord utter this exclamation, were not merely those which appeared to the spectators, namely, the pains of death which he was then undergoing, is evident from this consideration, that many of his followers have suffered sharper and more lingering bodily torture, ending in death, without thinking themselves on that account forsaken of God; on the contrary, they both felt and expressed raptures of joy under the bitterest torments. Why then should Jesus have complained and been dejected under inferior sufferings, as we must acknowledge them to have been, if there were nothing in them but the pains of crucifixion? Is there any other circumstance in his history which leads us to think him defective in courage or patience? In piety and resignation came he behind his own apostles? Were his views of God and religion more confined than theirs? Had he greater sensibility of pain than they, without a proper balance arising from the superiority of his understanding? In short, was he worse qualified for martyrdom than they? The truth is, his words on the cross cannot be accounted for but on the supposition that he endured in his mind distresses inexpressible, in consequence of the withdrawing of his heavenly Fathers presence, and a sense of the wrath due to the sins of mankind, which he was now suffering. See Macknight. It is justly observed here by Dr. Doddridge, That the interruption of a joyful sense of his Fathers presence (though there was, and could not but be, a rational apprehension of his constant favour, and high approbation of what he was now doing) was as necessary as it was that Christ should suffer at all. For had God communicated to his Son on the cross those strong consolations which he has given to some of the martyrs in their tortures, all sense of pain, and consequently all real pain, would have been swallowed up; and the violence done to his body, not affecting the soul, could not properly have been called suffering. Some think Jesus on this occasion repeated the whole twenty-second Psalm. And, as it contains the most remarkable particulars of our Lords passion, being a sort of summary of all the prophecies relative to that subject, it must be acknowledged, that nothing could have been uttered more suitable to the circumstances wherein he then was, or better adapted to impress the minds of the beholders with becoming sentiments. For by citing it, and thereby applying it to himself, he signified that he was now accomplishing the things predicted therein concerning the Messiah. See the notes on that Psalm.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Verse 46

Eli, &c.; Hebrew words.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

Ver. 46. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama Sabachthani? that is to say, My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me? quoting Psa 22:1. “Sabachthani” is Syriac, not Hebrew.

He was indeed continually praying on the Cross, and offering Himself wholly to God for man’s salvation. But as his death was drawing near He recited this Psalm, which throughout speaks of His Passion, to show that He was the very person there spoken of, and that the Jews might thus learn the reason why He refused to descend from the Cross, viz., because the Father had decreed that He should die for the salvation of men; as David had there foretold.

Calvin says impiously that these were the words of Christ in despair, for that He was obliged to experience the full wrath of God which our sins deserve, and even the sufferings of the lost, of which despair is one. But this blasphemy refutes itself. For if he despaired on the Cross, He sinned most grievously. He therefore did not satisfy but rather enflamed, the wrath of God. And how can it be said that Christ ever despaired, when He said shortly afterwards, “Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit”? Christ therefore does not cry out as being forsaken by the Godhead and hypostatic union of the Word, nor even by the grace and love of God, but only because the Father did not rescue Him from instant death, nor soothe in any way His cruel sufferings, but permitted Him to endure unmitigated tortures. And all this was to show how bitter was His death on the Cross, the rending asunder of His soul and body with such intense pain as to lead Him to pray in His agony and bloody sweat, “Father, if it be possible,” &c. So S. Jerome, S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and other Fathers; nor do & Hilary and S. Ambrose mean anything else in saying, “The man cried aloud when dying at being separated from the Godhead.” For they mean not a severing of essence and of the hypostatical union, but of support and consolation. For the faith teaches us that though the soul of Christ was separated from His body, yet the Godhead remained as before, hypostatically united both to His soul and His body. Besides this, Christ complained of His desertion, because the Godhead withheld Its succour, solely to keep Him still suffering, and to prolong His life for greater endurances; nay, rather to augment His pain when He saw Himself, though in union with Godhead, enduring such atrocious indignities (see S. L. Justiniani, de Triumph. Agone Christi, cap. viii.).

Symbolically: Christ here inquires why He was thus forsaken. What have I done that I should die on this Cross? I am most innocent, the Saint of Saints. He gives His own answer. “Far off from My salvation are the words of My sins” (Psa 22:1), meaning thereby, “The sins of men, whose expiation the Father hath put on Me, these are they which take away My life, and bring Me to the death of the Cross.” But some (see Theophylact) consider that He is here speaking not of His own desertion, but of that of the Jewish people.

Origen thinks He is complaining of the fewness of those who will be saved, and the multitude of the lost, in whom the fruit of His Passion comes to nought. Why forsakest Thou My kinsmen in the flesh, for whom I am dying? Why savest Thou the few and rejectest the many? For in so doing Thou forsakest Myself; for thou makest the fruit of My suffering to perish.

Tropologically: [Arnold apud] Cyprian (de Passione) thinks He spoke thus in order that we should inquire why He was forsaken. “He was forsaken,” he says, “that we should not be forsaken; that we should be set free from our sins and eternal death; to manifest His love to us; to display His righteousness and compassion; to draw our love towards Him; lastly, to set before us an example of patience” The way to Heaven is open, but it is arduous and difficult. He wished to precede us with His wondrous example, that the way might not terrify us, but that the stupendous example of God in suffering might urge us on to say exultingly with S. Paul, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?”

This, then, His fourth word on the Cross, is a consolation to all who are desolate and afflicted. He consoled in this way S. Peter Martyr when falsely accused. The Saint complained to Christ (he was kneeling before the crucifix) that he had kept silence, and not defended him. Christ replied, “What wrong had I done to be crucified for thee on this Cross? Learn patience from Me, for all thy sufferings cannot equal Mine.” The Saint on this was so strengthened that he wished to endure still further suffering. And therefore Christ at length established his innocence, and turned all his disgrace into glory (see Surius, April 29).

Ver. 47. Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias. According to S. Jerome and others, these were the Roman soldiers, who also gave Him vinegar (Luk 23:36). But not understanding Hebrew, they thought He called for Elias, of whose return at Christ’s coming they had beard from the Jews.

Ver. 48. And straightway one of them ran, and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave Him to drink. All these were ready at hand, for the drink used to be given to those who were crucified. They did this as soon as Jesus had cried, “I thirst” (Joh 19:28), His fifth word on the Cross. The sponge was for Christ to suck out the vinegar, as they could not lift a cup to His lips. The sponge is preserved in St. John’s Lateran. Wine was usually given to those who were crucified, to quench their thirst, and strengthen them to bear their tortures. But the Jews (and, the soldiers to gratify the Jews’ hatred to Christ) offered Him vinegar instead (Psa 69:22). De Lyra says (quoting Pro 31:6) that devout women used to prepare wine flavoured with spices, but that the Jews on this occasion took it away, and put in its stead vinegar mingled with gall.

Now they gave it Him in mockery, to give Him pain by the bitterness of the draught; to increase and not to quench His thirst, this being the property of vinegar. Baronius thinks it was given to keep Him alive, and thus prolong His suffering; Theophylact, Cajetan, and others, that it was to hasten His death. “For vinegar has malignant properties,” says Theophylact, “which penetrates into wounds.” Thus-

Symbolically: It signifies the malignity which the Jews, and all sinners, exhibit to Christ. So S. Augustine (in Joh 19:29), “Give that which ye are yourselves.” For the Jews were as vinegar, in degenerating from the wine of the Patriarchs and Prophets; having a heart full of iniquity, as a vessel full of vinegar; and full of fraud, like a sponge, with its winding and hollow hiding-places.

But Christ by drinking the vinegar converted it for us into wine, and by so doing gained power to turn our vices into virtues, our weaknesses into glory. “The wine,” says S. Hilary, “which turned acid in Adam was the glory or might of immortality. But He drank it, and thus transfused into Himself, and into union with immortality, that which in us was vitiated.” And so Remigius, “Vinegar means the Jews who had degenerated from their fathers; the sponge, their hearts full of fraud; the reed, Holy Scripture, which was thus fulfilled.”

And put it on a reed. That is, the stalk of some plant. S. Joh 19:29 says it was the stalk of the hyssop. For the Cross was not high, so that by stretching out the arms the sponge on a short stalk would easily reach Christ’s mouth. In Palestine the garden hyssop grows higher than in Europe, though on walls it grows low 1Ki 4:33. Sometimes it runs to 18 inches.

Some suspect that for is to be read , a spear; a mere conjecture. Others think, with S. Augustine, that a sponge full of vinegar was placed on the hyssop, and then both of them on the reed. Others, that a sponge full of hyssop juice and vinegar was placed on the reed. Anyhow, the sponge was placed on the hyssop, whether it was itself the stalk or merely fastened to it.

Hyssop was given, because it is frequently used with wine and vinegar (see Columella, de Re Rust. xii. 35; and Pliny, N. H. xiv. 16). It has reviving, and strengthening, and other medicinal properties.

Now the soldiers tied the hyssop round the sponge, that the vinegar should not escape, and that Christ, taking the vinegar and the hyssop, might revive.

It was used for cleansing lepers (Lev 14:49), also in the sin-offering and in the sprinkling of the water of purification (Num 19:2 seq); and was therefore a type of Christ’s Blood, in its purifying, refreshing, and strengthening power. “It is a lowly herb,” says S. Augustine on John xix., “cleansing the chest, and signifies the humility of Christ, whereby we are cleansed.”

Ver. 49. But the rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save Him. The word “let be” is here in the singular, in S. Mark in the plural. In the plural it would mean, keep quiet, attend solely to Jesus, see whether Elias will come to save Him; for they doubted whether He were really the Messiah, whose precursor Elias was to be. S. Mark says that only one soldier spoke thus, addressing the rest. It is supposed by S. Augustine (de Cons. Evang. iii. 17) and others that the word was used both by the one soldier and by the whole body; secondly, that the soldiers said to him that offered the vinegar, Wait a while, do not give it, for fear He should die too soon, for vinegar hastens death; let us see whether Elias will come. And that he replied, Let me give it, lest He should die of thirst. Just let Him drink it, and keep alive; so shall we see whether Elias will come (so Jansenius). Or, again, that the soldiers said to him who offered the vinegar, Leave Him alone, do not annoy Him. For they thought that Elias would come if He were left alone, but not if others were about Him. And that he replied, Cease your clamour, lest ye drive Elias away; or otherwise, Leave Him lest ye hasten His death (Barradi). Or, again, Suffer me to mock Him in this way, for the more He is molested, the more will Elias come if he wishes to help Him. What I am doing will not delay but rather hasten his coming. Or, it may be, Let me give Him the vinegar, for I shall thus kill Him, and keep Elias from saving Him. For all this (as S. Luke says) was done in jest and mockery.

Ver. 50. But Jesus, when He had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. “Again” refers to the former words on the Cross. He first cried out, and then expired. S. Luke gives the exact words, “Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit.” In the Greek, “I will lay down My life; I will consign it into Thy hands as a deposit, to take it back when I am raised up on the third day.” Hence the faithful use this verse when dying, as David first used it when in suffering (Psa 31:5 ).[Psa 30:6]

It was by a miracle that Christ cried with a loud voice, for the dying lose their voice, so that they can hardly speak. For though S. Thomas says (par. iii. q. 47) that Christ preserved the vigour and strength of His body to the last; yet others suppose, more correctly, that His strength had so failed by what He had gone through, that He could not cry out naturally, but only by a miracle, for otherwise He would not have died through the violence of His sufferings, but merely by His own voluntary severing of His soul and body, and thus would not have been slain, or have made satisfaction to His Father by His death of violence.

He cried out, then, by the supernatural powers which His Godhead furnished. And that to signify, 1st, that He, as God, died not by compulsion or necessity, but of His own free will. As He said, “I have power to lay down My life,” &c. (John x. 18); and that His sacrifice of Himself might clearly be voluntary. “He had His whole life and death,” says S. Victor of Antioch, “entirely in His own power.” 2ndTo show that He was more than man, and was God, as the Centurion exclaimed. 3rd To set forth His vehement love of God, His reverence, His obedience, and earnest desire for man’s salvation (see Heb. v. 7, and notes thereon). 4th To indicate His sure and certain hope of His glorious resurrection on the third day (so Origen).

Yielded up the ghost. Voluntarily. “For that which is sent forth (emittitur) is voluntary, that which is lost (amittitur) is of necessity,” S. Ambrose (in Luc. xxiii.); and S. Augustine (de Trin. iv. 13), “The spirit of the Mediator left not His body against His will, but because of it when He willed, and as He willed it; for man was blended into union with the Word of God. Hence He says, ‘I have power,'” &c. (Joh 10:18).

So, too, S. Jerome, Bede, and others. Whence, also, “He bowed His head” (Joh 19:30). “As the Lord of death,” says Theophylact; “for other men when dying first breathe their last, and then bow the head, which thus droops by its own weight.” S. Chrysostom says this was “to show that He died not of necessity, but voluntarily. He lived as long as He willed; when He willed He gave up the ghost.” A spurious work attributed to S. Athanasius is also quoted to the same effect. For though His human nature sank beneath the violence of His pains, and He ought to have died, yet His Godhead was able to give it strength, and to prolong His life. That nature, therefore, could not die, except by permission of His Godhead. He therefore freely died, whether as God or man; for His human nature could have asked, and would have obtained, this strength from His Godhead.

Observe, He died at the ninth hour, the very hour when Adam sinned, and to expiate his sin. The same hour also when the Paschal Lamb was slain, and the Jews offered the daily sacrifice. And this to show that He thus fulfilled all these types in His death. Whence the ninth hour is the Christian’s hour of prayer.

Symbolically and Morally: He bowed His head, as bearing the burden of all men’s sins, sin being the heaviest of all burdens; to mark His obedience, thus teaching “religious” persons, and those under authority, to obey those over them (conf. Phi 2:8); to humble Himself before the Father, to do Him reverence, and to submit His own will to His, even to the death of the Cross; to bid farewell to the world, especially to Italy and the West, for His head, as we have said, was turned towards Italy, which He wished to make illustrious by His faith, and by the Pontificate and martyrdom of SS. Peter and Paul; to bid farewell to His Mother; to mark the spot where the spear was to pierce Him; to show that He and His Father were by His Passion reconciled to men. So S. Augustine (de Virg,.) says, “Behold His wounds when hanging, His Blood when dying, His value when dying, His scars when rising, His head bent down to kiss, His heart opened to love, His arms extended to embrace, His whole body exposed to redeem,” &c. It was, again, to show that His soul would descend below, and set the Patriarchs free; to manifest His compassion. “He made His head to melt,” says Laur. Justiniani (de Triumph. Agone, cap. xx.), “to show compassion; He bent down to display His grace; He bowed it to show forgiveness;” again, to manifest His love for S. John, the Magdalen, and others like them who were standing by, and to turn away from those who shrank from the Cross; to look away (again) from the title on the Cross, as declining, and teaching us to decline, all worldly sovereignty and pomp; to show that His death, as He was to rise on the third day, was rather sleep than death; for they who sleep bow the head, “I will lay me down in peace,” &c. (Psa 4:8). Lastly, having fulfilled His mission, He asks, as it were, His Father’s blessing and permission to depart from the world. He seems to say, I have finished My course, I have done and suffered for man’s salvation all Thou commandest. Permit Me to die, and return to Thee. And I ask, too, according to Thy promise (Psa 2:8), that all nations may be converted and saved by My Passion and death. I have done Thy bidding, fulfil Thou Thy word. “Religious” persons and Priests, in like manner, when their mission is done, return to their Superiors, bow the head, and ask their blessing, and their former rank and position. S. Bernard pointedly says, in a moral sense, “What avails it to follow Christ if Thou canst not come up with Him? For S. Paul said, ‘So run that ye may attain.’ Fix the limits of thy course where Christ fixed His. ‘He became obedient even unto death.’ However far thou hast run, if thou hast not gone as far as unto death, thou wilt not win the prize.”

Ver. 51. And behold the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. At the death of Christ the Creator the whole Creation was agitated with indignation. S. Augustine (de Cons. Evang. iii. 19) observes that the veil was rent immediately on His death, to show that it was on account of it. S. Luke, therefore, who connects it with the darkness which took place before His death, speaks by anticipation. Now there were two veils, one before the Holy of Holies, the other before the Holy Place, which the priests entered every day. But the Holy of Holies the Chief Priest alone entered, and once only in the year. Some consider that the outer veil was rent (S. Jerome, Ep. cl. ad Hedibiam). But it was clearly the inner one. (See S. Leo, Serm. x. de Pass.; S. Cyril, in John xix.; Euthymius and others.) But why was it rent? S. Cyril, Theophylact, and Euthymius say to show that the temple was indignant that the Priests, who should have been the first to acknowledge Christ, had denied and slain Him. And that it thus foretold, and threatened, as it were, that they were to be deprived of their Priesthood (S. Leo, Serm. x. de Pass.).

Mystically: Theophylact says it was to signify that the temple was to be profaned, and done away with, and set aside, with all its rites and sacrifices (nay, more, says S. Chrysostom, “to be laid waste”). “God in this way made it manifest,” says Theophylact, “that the grace of the Holy Spirit was flying away from the temple, and that the Holy of Holies (before inaccessible) was brought within view of all.” “For then,” says S. Cyril (xii. 27 on John), “Israel fell utterly away from the grace of God when it so madly and impiously slew its Saviour.” And S. Hilary, “The glory of the veil was taken away, and the protection of the guardian angel.” Hence S. Ephr. (Serm. de Pass.) records that when it was rent asunder, a dove, the type of the Holy Spirit flew out of the temple.

Allegorically: To signify that the veil of legal ceremonies was thrown open, as fulfilled in Christ, so that henceforth both Jews and Gentiles should clearly know God, and Christ, and His Mysteries, which the Jews figuratively shadowed forth in so many ways; nay, more, that the service and Church of God should be transferred from Jerusalem, and the temple to the Gentiles and to Rome. So Origen, S. Jerome, S. Ambrose, and others. S. Leo says (Serm. xvii. de Pass.), “There was then so clear a change made from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to the One Victim, God Himself, that when our Lord gave up the ghost the veil was violently and suddenly rent asunder.” And S. Jerome, “The veil of the temple was rent, and all the mysteries of the Law, which before were kept secret, were then laid open, and handed over to the Gentiles.”

Anagogically: S. Paul says (Heb. ix.) that the way to Heaven, was then opened, for the Holy of Holies was a type of Heaven, and the veil signified that it was closed till Christ burst through it by His death. S. Jerome mentions that the huge lintel of the temple was then broken (Epist. cl.). But Josephus says that it was at the destruction of Jerusalem.

And the earth did quake. 1. That is, the whole earth, as the darkness (ver. 45) was universal. Many authorities are quoted for this. Didymus (in Catena) says it was prophesied by Job (Job 9:6). Both Pliny and Suetonius speak of a great earthquake in Asia at this time. By this earthquake was indicated the Godhead of Christ, for He it was who shook the earth, earthquakes being frequently ascribed to divine power, e.g., 1Ki 19:11; Ex 19.; Psa 18:7; Nah 3:6. In the Passion, then, of Christ is fulfilled the prophecy of Hag 2:6.

2. It signified the natural indignation of the earth at the awful crime committed against its Lord.

Mystically: It signified the new heavens and earth (Isa 45:17), for the old earth seemed to be passing away.

Tropologically: It signified that the earthly and stony hearts of men would be moved to repentance by the death of Christ, since the earth, the sea, the sun, and the heavens, the darkened air, and the riven rocks, proclaimed their indignation at the death of their Creator. But see here how Christ, in His lowliest estate, manifested His supreme majesty and power, that He might not seem to be compelled to die, and that men, learning who and how mighty He was, who was suffering for them such vile indignities with such great dignity, might be astounded and awe-struck. For, as S. Ambrose says (de Fide v. 2), “Jesus was wearied by His journey, that He might refresh the wearied; He asks for drink, though about to give spiritual drink to those who thirsted for it; He is hungry, though about to give the food of life to the hungry; He dies, though about to quicken; He is buried, though about to rise again; He hangs on the trembling tree, though about to strengthen the trembling; He covers the heaven with darkness, that He may illuminate it; He shakes the earth, in order to make it firm; He lifteth up the sea, that He may calm it; He unbars the tombs of the dead, to show that they are the abodes of the living; He is fashioned of a Virgin, that He may be believed to be the Son of God; He assumes ignorance, that He may instruct the ignorant; He is said to worship as a Jew, to the end that He may be worshipped as indeed the Son of God.”

And the rocks rent. First in Golgotha. Whence S. Cyril Hieros. says (Catech. xiii.), “Up to this day Golgotha bears its witness, where on Christ’s account the rocks were rent.” And S. Lucian, too, giving a reason for His faith to the Governor, says, “With these, too, agree the very spot at Jerusalem, and the rock of Golgotha, which was burst asunder by the weight of the Cross.” Adrichomius (Descr. Jerus. num. 252) speaks more fully. “There can be seen even now the fissure which was made at Christ’s death, and also the stain of His Blood,” and then describes at length its size, &c. But in many other places besides, says Baronius (ad An. 34, num. 107), the rocks were rent, as at Mount Alverno, where it was revealed to S. Francis that this took place at the crucifixion. He had accordingly a great devotion to the place, and he there received the Stigmata. S. Ambrose therefore justly exclaims, “0 breasts of the Jews! harder than rocks, for the rocks were rent, but their hearts were hardened,” &c.

Allegorically: S. Jerome (ad Hedib. q. 8), “The rocks were rent, that is, the hard hearts or rocks of the Gentiles; the universal predictions, too, of the Prophets (who, as well as the Apostles, were termed rocks, by the Rock which is Christ), that whatever was concealed in them by the hard covering of the Law might be rent open and revealed to the Gentiles. The tombs also (of whom it was written that they were as whited sepulchres) were rent, that they who were dead in unbelief might come forth; might live with Christ who had risen; might enter the Heavenly Jerusalem, and have their citizenship no longer on earth, but in Heaven; might die with the earthly, to reign with the Heavenly Adam.” Eusebius mentions that at Paxos a voice was heard, “Great Pan is dead,” which he explains of Lucifer, whom Christ destroyed by His own death. Others say that Pan was Christ, being “our God and all,” and that the devils bewailed His death, because they were thereby despoiled of their dominion over the world.

Ver. 52. And the graves were opened, and many bodies of the saints which slept arose. This was immediately on Christ’s death (as S. Matthew implies), to signify that it was wrought by the power of His Passion, and consequently that by the same power death was overcome, and life restored to mankind. So Bede, Theophylact, and S. Jerome, who says, “The graves were opened in token of the future resurrection.” So, too, S. Ambrose (cap. x. on Luke). And S. Hilary says, “Illumining the darkness of death, and lighting up the gloom of the pit, He robbed death of its spoils, in order to [mark? word missing] the resurrection of the dead who are now asleep.” But yet they came not forth from their graves till after Christ’s resurrection (see ver. 53). For S. Paul terms Christ “the first-born from the dead” (Col 1:18), and “the first-fruits of them that rise again” (1Co 15:20). For Christ by His death procured resurrection both for Himself and for us. It was therefore but right that, when He had overcome death, He should be the first to rise as its conqueror, and others after Him. (So Origen, S. Jerome, and Bede.)

They rose, then, that Christ might confirm the truth of His resurrection, by those His companions who announced it; and, again, that in and through them Christ might manifest the power of His Passion; that just as the souls of the Patriarchs were freed by it from the pit, so, mystically, would men’s souls, which were dead in sin, be now quickened by His grace, and themselves rise gloriously at last to a blessed and eternal life.

Did, then, these saints die again after their resurrection, or continue in life and glory? Some think they did die, and are to rise again at the last day, and this from S. Paul’s words, “That they without us should not be made perfect.” (See S. Augustine, Epist. xcix. ad Evodium.) Others suppose, and more correctly, that they died no more, but were raised up to life immortal. Because it was but fitting that Christ should manifest at once in their resurrection the power of His own. It was also meet that happy souls like these should be united only to glorious and immortal bodies. But their happiness would have been but brief, and their misery greater, if they had died again so speedily. It would have been better, indeed, if they had not risen at all. It was also but fitting that they should adorn Christ’s triumphant ascension, as captives redeemed by Him, and the spoils He had won from death; and, lastly, that He should have them with Him in Heaven, and that His human nature, enjoying their presence and society, might never be solitary and void of human consolation. So Origen, S. Jerome, S. Clemens Alex. (Strom. lib. vi.), and others. The words “without us” do not refer to the day of judgment, but to the resurrection of Christ and Christians. (See notes on Heb 11:40.)

But it is not clear who these saints were. Probably those, in the first place, who were specially connected with Christ, either by kindred, or promise, or type and figure, or by faith and hope, or else by chastity and holiness; as Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Melchisedek, David, who wished to be buried in the promised land, and thus be partakers of Christ’s resurrection. Job, also, and Jonah, as types of the resurrection; Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Isaiah, and the other Prophets. Daniel, also, and his three companions (though their bodies are at Rome). Eve, also (some suppose), as well as Adam, though Lorinus considers that the Blessed Virgin was the first woman raised from the grave, as Christ Himself was the first-fruits among men. Those, also, who died but recently; as Zacharias, Simeon, S. John the Baptist (though his head is shown at Rome and Amiens, his finger at Florence). Raymundus also (lib. de Bono Latrone, cap. xiii.) mentions the penitent thief, though S. Augustine (contr. Felician cap. xv.) says, but only by the way, that he was reserved for the future resurrection. There were also many more (especially those mentioned in Heb. 11.) outside Juda, for “many bodies of the saints arose.” For it was indeed quite in harmony with the profuse magnificence of Christ that a crowded procession of the saints who then arose should dignify His resurrection and ascension.

Tropologically: This, says S. Jerome, “is a type of believers, who once, like the graves of the dead, have forsaken their sins, and whose hard hearts have been softened to acknowledge their Creator, and who have risen through penitence to a life of grace.”

Went into the Holy City. Jerusalem, so called because of the temple worship, of the many saints who had been there, and of the institution of the Church therein by Christ the King of Saints.

And appeared unto many. To the Apostles, and disciples, and also to the Jews, to persuade them to believe in the resurrection. “That by their resurrection,” says Euthymius, “others might be the more assured, by considering that He who had raised them had much more surely raised Himself.”

Now when the centurion, &c. Baronius and others suppose that this was Longinus, to whose keeping Pilate had consigned Christ. He was converted by the miracles he had seen, and became a witness and preacher of the resurrection. He is said to have retired to Cappadocia, and there to have been martyred by the Jews (see Surius, March 15). Lucius Dexter, a writer of small authority, considers it was C. Oppius, a Spaniard, afterwards the third Bishop of Milan (see Cornelius, Prom. in Acta ad fin.).

Saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God. God enlightened him to acknowledge from what he had seen that Jesus was more than man, and God indeed. He had heard that He had been condemned for calling Himself the King of the Jews. But when he saw that God had borne witness to Him by these many miracles, he acknowledged that He had spoken truly. It was thus God’s will that the Centurion should bear unquestionable witness to Christ (S. Hilary). S. Augustine thinks that he confessed Him to be the Son of God not in a natural, but only in a spiritual sense, as a righteous and holy man (Luk 23:47). But others, more correctly, that he confessed Him to be the Son of God by nature. So S. Jerome, “Consider that the Centurion in the very scandal of the Passion confessed Him to be truly the Son of God, and that Arius proclaims Him a creature;” and adds, “But now the last are first; the Gentile people confess, the Jews in their blindness deny, that their last error may be worse than their first.” And Theophylact, “The order of things is reversed, while the Jews kill, the disciples fly, and a Gentile confesses. Now do the Lord’s words (John xii. 32) receive their fulfilment, for lifted up on the Cross He drew to Himself the robber and the Centurion.” Bede too, “The faith of the Church is very fitly designated by the Centurion, for when the Synagogue is mute, it affirms Him to be the Son of God.” Lastly, S. Bernard (Serm. ii. de Epiph.), “How keen-sighted is faith! It recognises the Son of God when at the breast, when hanging on the Cross. If the thief recognised Him on the Cross, so did the Magi in the stable. The thief proclaims Him King, but the Centurion the Son of God, and man too at the same time.”

Not only the Centurion and the soldiers, but, as S. Luke (Luk 23:48) adds, “All the people . . . smote their breasts,” in token of sorrow, “and returned.” They begin now to put forth the blossoms of repentance, that they may bear fruit at the preaching of S. Peter and the Apostles (Acts ii.).

Here comes in S. John xix. 31, on which see notes in loc.

Ver. 55. And many women were there (beholding) afar off, &c. S. Matthew says this to set forth how much greater faith, constancy, and affection for Jesus these women had than men. “See how things were reversed,” says Euthymius; “the disciples had fled, but the women remained.” For women are commonly more holy than men, and hence the Church prays “for the devout sex of women.” It was also to point out that they, as grave and pious matrons, were reliable witnesses of what had taken place, and moreover that they had carefully provided for His burial. It was also to show that they had been so drawn to Him by His patience and holiness, that they could not be torn away, either by fear, or by the threats of the Jews, from wondering, gazing, and meditating on Him.

Many women. The Blessed Mother was the chief, the others merely her attendants. She “stood by the Cross,” bearing all the pains in her compassion which He endured in His Passion, and with like constancy and fortitude. S. Antoninus says (Theol. par. iv. tit. 15, cap. 41), “The Virgin was so conformed to the Divine Will that, if necessary (as Anselm says), she would herself have offered Him on the Cross; for her obedience was equal to Abraham’s.”

Damascene (de Fide, iv. 25) points out the greatness of her pain. “The Virgin suffered at the Passion the pangs she escaped in child-birth.” And S. Anselm (de Excell. Virg. cap. v.), “Whatever suffering was inflicted on martyrs was light, 0 Virgin, compared with thine.” And S. Laur.Justiniani (de Agone Christi, cap. ii.), “The heart of the Virgin was made the brightest mirror of Christ’s Passion;” and cap. xvii., “The Son was crucified in body, the Mother in mind.” And S. Bernard, in Apoc. xii., on the words “a great sign,” says, “A mighty pain, 0 Virgin, pierced thy soul, so that we rightly term thee more than martyr, for in thee the feeling of compassion was far greater than the sense of bodily suffering.”

Baronius (ad An. 34, cap. xi.) describes, from Simeon Metaphrastes, her great self-possession, in helping to take Him down from the Cross, treasuring the nails in her bosom, washing His wounds with her tears, embracing His body in her arms, and saying at last with calm voice, “0 Lord, the mystery ordained for Thee before all ages has come at length.” And on giving the napkin to Joseph, she said, “It will now be thy duty to bury Him honourably in this, to perfume Him with myrrh, and to perform for Him all rightful observances.”

Afar off. S. John says they stood “by the Cross,” meaning thereby opposite to it, though at some distance. For the soldiers who were watching Christ, and the dense crowd, kept them from coming very near. But they came as close as they could to hear and see Him. Adrichomius says about eighteen paces. Some say that they were close at one time, and farther off at another. The Greek adds, “beholding” both the wondrous patience of Jesus, and the prodigies which took place around Him, and pondering over them in their mind with holy meditation.

Ministering unto Him. Supporting Him and His disciples. S. Jerome says, “It was a Jewish custom for women thus to minister to their teachers.”

Among whom (as the chief and leader of the rest) was Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast forth seven devils, who clung to Him from gratitude, and would not be torn from Him.

And Mary the mother of James and Joses. The wife of Cleophas or Alphus. Salmeron considers her the daughter of Cleophas; called from her relationship, Mary the sister of our Lord’s mother, from her husband, Mary (the wife) of Alphus. See above, chap. xiii. 55.

And the mother of Zebedee’s children. Salome. See Mar 15:40.

Ver. 57. But when even was come. Evening was drawing on, but had not yet come, and it was necessary for Him to be buried before the evening, when the Sabbath (on which they had to rest) began.

A certain rich man. For a poor man would not have dared to make such a request, says S. Jerome.

Of Arimatha. Called (1. Sam. i.) Ramathaim-Zophim, afterwards Rania, Aarima, and Memphis (S. Jerome, de locis Hebr.), called Rama from its high position. Joseph was a native of the place, but a citizen of Jerusalem. Arimatha, says S. Jerome, means “lifted up,” as was Joseph here.

Named Joseph. Christ came into the world by Joseph the betrothed husband of the Virgin, and was buried by another Joseph. Joseph means “increased”-that is, by the grace of God. For as the Patriarch Joseph abounded in chastity and affection for his father, so did Joseph the husband of the Virgin excel in chastity; and this Joseph, again, was eminent for his tender love for Christ, his spiritual father, when now dead. S. Mark calls him a noble Counsellor (), in Vulg. decurio, which was the provincial word for Senator. He is supposed to have been a Councillor of Jerusalem, from his having lived and made his burial-place there. Maldonatus supposes he took part in the Council about taking and killing Christ (Matt. xxvi. 4), but that he did not agree with the rest (Luk 23:51). “Whence some think,” says S. Jerome, “that he is spoken of in Ps. i.”

Who also himself was Jesus’ disciple, and thus wished to perform the last offices for his Master.

Ver. 58. He came to Pilate. “Came boldly, says S. Mark, for though, for fear of the Jews, he was a secret disciple, yet he fearlessly entered on this difficult work; for he was both strengthened by Christ and urged on by the Blessed Virgin (see above, ver. 55). “From this we may see, says Victor of Antioch, “his great resolution and boldness, for he nearly sacrificed his own life for Christ’s sake, by drawing down on himself the suspicions of his Jewish enemies;” and S. Chrysostom, “The boldness of Joseph is highly to be admired, when for love of Christ he incurred peril of death, and exposed himself to general hatred.” S. Luke and S. Mark say, “who also himself waited for the Kingdom of God.” He hoped, i.e., through Christ, for heavenly love, and thus risked danger for His sake.

And begged the body of Jesus. S. Anselm (Dial. de Pass.) says it was revealed to himself by the Blessed Virgin that Joseph gave this reason, among others, for his request, that His mother was dying of grief for her only Son, and that it was unreasonable that the innocent mother should die as well as the Son; but that it would be some consolation to her to bury Him. Grant her, therefore, most afflicted as she is, this favour. It is probable, also, that he alleged the holiness and innocence of Jesus, which Pilate well knew, and that therefore His body ought not to be cast forth with those of criminals into the Valley of Corpses, adjoining Golgotha, but was worthy of honourable burial, which he was ready to provide.

A wild story is here told, on the authority of the Gospel of Nicodemus, that Joseph was in consequence imprisoned by the Chief Priests, and miraculously delivered; and that, when the Chief Priests required the soldiers to produce the body of Jesus, they replied, “Do you produce Joseph, and we will produce Christ” (Greg. Tur. Hist. i. 21), whereupon the soldiers were acquitted of the charge. There is an equally improbable story in Baronius (ad An. 35, cap. 4), that Joseph crossed with S. Mary Magdalene and others in a vessel without oars or sail to Marseilles, and from thence to England, where he preached Christ, and was venerated after his death there as the Apostle of England.

Then (having heard and approved of Joseph’s reasons) Pilate commanded the body to be delivered. That he might thus make Him some kind of satisfaction for having condemned Him to death, and also palliate his own conduct by giving Him an honourable burial, as though he had condemned Him by compulsion.

To be delivered. On Joseph paying a price, says Theophylact. But this is not probable, for the reasons just given, and because S. Mark says, “He gave the body to Joseph,” who had it as a gift, and did not pay for it. It would indeed have been a most sordid and avaricious act for Pilate to have sold it. “To be delivered” means “to be given,” as in the Syriac. But the Evangelist says “to be delivered,” because the body had been already given up to the soldiers for crucifixion. He orders them, therefore, to return it to Joseph. S. Mark adds, “But Pilate marvelled if He were already dead,” because the thieves were not yet dead, and also (says Euthymius) because he expected that Jesus would die slowly being a divine man, far surpassing others in endurance. “But when he knew from the Centurion that He was dead, he gave the body to Joseph” (Mar 15:45).

Ver. 59. And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth. Such a cloth well suited this most pure body. Sindon is a cloth woven of the finest and most delicate flax, so called from Sidon, where it was first made. The Jews used to wrap their dead bodies in it, bound their hands and feet with bandages, and the head with a napkin (Joh 11:44). Thus did Joseph do to Christ (John xix. 40). S. Jerome from this condemns the lavish funerals of the rich, and adds, “But we can take this to signify, in a spiritual sense, that he who receives Jesus in a pure mind wraps him in a clean linen cloth.”

For this reason the body of Christ is in the Mass placed only in a very clean and fine linen cloth. This is called a Corporal, from the body of Christ which it contains within it, as though in a tomb. S. John adds that Nicodemus brought myrrh and aloes to anoint and perfume the body (Joh 19:39). For these kept bodies from putrefying.

Mystically: Euthymius wishes us to be fragrant with these ointments when we receive the body of Christ in our breast, as in a new tomb. “Let us, too,” he says, “when we receive the body of Christ at the altar, anoint it with sweet odours, i.e., by virtuous acts and by contemplation,” &c. Baronius describes from Jewish writers their mode of laying out for burial.

Ver. 60. And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock. S. John adds (Joh 19:41) that it was in a garden. It was “a new tomb,” lest any one else who had there been buried should be supposed (says S. Chrysostom) or pretended (S. Jerome) to have risen again. S. Augustine says,

Mystically: As no one either before or after Him was conceived in the Virgin’s womb, so no one either before or after Him was buried in this tomb.

In the rock. “For had it been built of many stones, and the foundations had fallen in, it might have been said that the body had been stolen away,” says S. Jerome. Bede, on Mark xv., describes fully its shape, “That it was so high that a man could hardly touch the top. Its entrance was on the east. On the north was the place where the Lord lay, raised up above the rest of the floor, and open on the south.” Adrichomius also describes it, and adds “that Joseph gave up his own tomb to Christ, who was thus buried in the grave of a stranger.” “He who had no home of His own when alive (says Theophylact), has no tomb of His own, but is laid in another’s tomb, and being naked is clothed by Joseph.” “He is buried,” says S. Augustine (Serm. cxxxiii. de Temp.), “in the tomb of another, because He died for the salvation of others. Why needed He a tomb of His own, who had not any true cause of death in Himself? Why needed He a tomb on earth, whose seat was for ever in Heaven? What had He to do with a tomb, who for the space of three days rather rested in His bed than lay dead in the grave?”

Anagogically: Christ thus signified that He and His were strangers on earth, and that Heaven was their true country. S. Antony, S. Ephrem, S. Francis, and others preferred to be buried in another’s grave, and not their own, after Christ’s pattern. Here, then, was fulfilled Isaiah’s prophecy (xi. 10), “And His sepulchre shall be glorious.” Hence, too, the custom of pilgrimages to Jerusalem for so many centuries. Hence the erection by S. Helena of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, with its surpassing splendour, enclosing under the same roof the site of the crucifixion, resurrection, &c. Hence the wish of Godfrey of Bouillon, and other kings after him, to he buried on the same spot, and the institution also of an order of knighthood.

Lastly, that tomb was in a garden, because Adam had sinned in a garden. Hence, too, Christ began His Passion in a garden, and completed it by being buried in a garden. And this, too, to atone for the sentence passed on Adam; and, moreover, that He might form and plant a most beautiful garden, flourishing with the blossoms and fruits of all virtues, i.e., His Church. Note here that Christ’s body was laid in the tomb, as on the Cross, with its head and face so turned as to look away from the east, and towards the west. So Bede and Adrichomius.

Observe, Christ, as soon as He expired, descended in His soul to the Limbus Patrum, and made the patriarchs glad by manifesting to them Himself and His Godhead. He freed also the souls in Purgatory, and gave them the first general jubilee. He manifested His Godhead to them also, and made them blessed (see on 1Pe 3:19). The devils also, and ungodly men in hell, He condemned to perpetual punishment, as their Lord, their judge, and their triumphant Victor. The soul of Christ there remained till the third day, when it came forth with the Patriarchs and other saints, resumed its body, and rose in glory. He then made the Patriarchs resume their bodies, and rise together with Him. The order, mode and time when these things took place is mentioned in the beginning of Chap. xxviii. Observe, the Godhead of Christ, the Divine Person of the Word, ever remained hypostatically united both to His body in the tomb and to His soul in the Limbus, for that which it once assumed it never gave up, and will not give up for ever.

And he rolled (aided by his servants and Nicodemus) a great stone to the door of the sepulchre. That no one might take away the body; or, rather, Divine Wisdom so ordered it, lest the Jews after the resurrection should deny the fact, and maintain that the Apostles, who had stolen the body away, had boldly invented the tale. And for the same reason God willed that His body should be buried by those, as Joseph and Nicodemus, who were worthy of credit, and that it should he sealed up and watched by the Jews, that in this way His death and subsequent resurrection might be clearly known to all. Now the Lord’s body, while still in the grave, gave indeed an indication and prelude (as it were) of His resurrection, by remaining uncorrupt for three days; being in truth a virgin and holy body, fashioned by the Holy Spirit, and as such does it abide for ever.

Ver. 61. And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary. The other Mary, the mother of James and Joses. It appears that Salome, having no further office to do for Jesus, returned home in sorrow, or took home the Blessed Virgin. Simeon Metaphrastes, however, asserts that the Blessed Virgin remained on the spot till the resurrection, as assuredly believing that it would take place on the third day.

Sitting over against the sepulcre. Our Lord, as was fitting, was laid out by men, and not by women, who, while this was taking place, did not venture to enter the sepulchre. But they waited till the men retired, and then went in and saw how he was laid, that they might return very early the next morning, when the Sabbath was over, and anoint His body.

Ver. 62. Now the next day, that followed the day of preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together to Pilate. The day of the preparation was the Friday, so called because they then prepared everything needed for the Sabbath, on which day they had to rest.

But it was the day after, that is, on the Sabbath, that they came together unto Pilate. Theophylact says, “He names not the Sabbath, for there was no Sabbath (or rest) in the Jews’ madness.” They raged, indeed, like madmen against Jesus, to abolish utterly His name and memory. And it increased their rage to see Him so honourably buried, as though it were the prelude to His future resurrection, whether it were actually to occur, or would be a mere invention of the disciples.

Ver. 63. Saying, Sir, we remember that deceiver said, when He was yet alive. “That impostor” (S. Augustine, Hom. xxxvi. inter 1.). “By this name,” he says also (in Psa 43:7), “was the Lord Jesus Christ called, to console His servants when called deceivers.”

After three days I will rise again. Three days not completed, but only begun, i.e., within three days, or the third day after.

Ver. 64. Command therefor, that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest His disciples come and steal Him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead. Wishing before this to prove Him an impostor, they carry out their malice even to the grave. They were greatly afraid that He would rise again, and therefore ask for a guard, either to keep Him from rising, or to seize Him at the moment and put Him to death. For what they add about the disciples stealing Him was a mere pretext, for they knew that they had fled in fear and consternation, and would never think or attempt anything of the kind.

So the last error shall be worse than the first. The first error was the Gospel doctrine that Jesus was the Son of God. The last error was His resurrection, and it would be the worst as confirming the first. For if Jesus had spoken falsely in calling Himself the Son of God, God would not “have raised Him.” But if He is believed to have risen, He will have a multitude of followers; and if this belief once takes root, it will not afterwards be eradicated. Lastly, it would arouse great hatred and ill-will against the Chief Priests and Romans for having killed Him unjustly; and might indeed lead them to avenge His death by war or rebellion. It would therefore have been better not to have killed Him than to allow Him to rise again. For the devil, foreseeing the future of the Church (the numbers, the faith, the holiness of Christ’s followers), endeavoured to crush and choke it in its birth. But “there is no counsel against the Lord” (Pro 21:30).

Ver. 65. Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch (i.e., the soldiers assigned you for His crucifixion; use them now to guard Him in the grave).

Go your way, make it as sure as ye can. Guard Him as ye know how (Vulg.), i.e., in the best way ye know. I leave to your skill and prudence the mode of doing it. I do not wish to interfere any more in this matter. “As if taught by experience,” says S. Chrysostom, “he does not wish to act with them any further.”

Some take the word () imperatively, Take ye, summon ye the guard. But it is more forcible to consider it in the indicative mood, “Ye have,” &c. (So Vulg., Arab., and A. V.)

Ver. 66. So they went their way, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch. They secured the sepulchre in a twofold way-with the guard of soldiers, whom they ordered to keep diligent watch, and by sealing the stone.

They sealed it with a signet, not Pilate’s, as S. Chrysostom suggests, but with their own, i.e., with the signet of the city of Jerusalem, or of the Sanhedrin, so that the stone could not be moved, nor the body be taken away, without its being detected. So, too, Darius (Dan 6:17). Nicephorus adds that the Jews bored through both the stones of the tomb, and fastened them with an iron band. And thus, by endeavouring to prevent the resurrection of Christ, they did but add to the miracle, and furnished greater evidence for it; which God, as it were, extorted from them. So S. Chrysostom, “An undoubted demonstration is furnished by your own doings. For if the sepulchre were sealed, no room was left for fraud and deceit. But if no fraud had been committed, and the tomb was found empty, it is clear beyond all question that He had risen. Thou seest how, even against their will, they help to demonstrate the truth.” “It was not enough,” says S. Jerome, “for the Chief Priests and Pharisees to have crucified the Lord, unless they took a band of soldiers, sealed the stone, and, as far as they could, opposed His resurrection; so that all they did was for the furtherance of our faith. For the more it is kept back, the more fully is the power of the resurrection displayed.”

Tropologically: Says Barradius, “From this deed of the ungodly let us learn godliness. After we have received Christ into our breast, as into a new tomb, let us take diligent heed that He may remain therein by grace, and never forsake us. Let us post our vigilant guards-that is, our watchful virtues-to drive away sleep and sloth from us; let us gird ourselves with a weapon stronger than iron; let us fortify our breasts with an unconquerable resolve to sin no more.”

* Cornelius adds, “For He did not wish to be born except of a virgin espoused to Joseph.” – Editor. (Back up the the place)

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary

27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou {o} forsaken me?

(o) That is, in this misery: And this crying out is a natural part of his humanity, which, even though it was void of sin, still felt the wrath of God, the wrath which is due to our sins.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Jesus cried out the words of Psa 22:1 because His Father was abandoning Him. It was out of a similar sense of abandonment that David originally wrote the words of this psalm.

". . . the psalm expresses the spiritual desolation of a man who continues to trust and to appeal to God in spite of the fact that his ungodly opponents mock and persecute him with impunity." [Note: France, The Gospel . . ., p. 1076.]

Separation from the Father must have been the worst part of the Cross for Jesus who had never before experienced anything but intimate fellowship with His Father. Jesus became the center of God’s judgment on mankind’s sin (cf. Rom 3:21-26; 2Co 5:21). [Note: See S. Lewis Johnson Jr., "The Death of Christ," Bibliotheca Sacra 125:497 (January-March 1968):10-19.]

"Here Jesus was bearing the sins of the whole world, and even God the Father had to turn away as Jesus bore the curse and identified Himself with the sins of the whole world. When Jesus actually died, He commended Himself back into the Father’s hands." [Note: Walvoord, Matthew: . . ., pp. 234-35.]

The NASB has "Eli, Eli" that transliterates the Hebrew words that mean "My God, my God." The NIV has "Eloi, Eloi," the Aramaic words that mean the same thing. Probably the NIV is correct here. Jesus evidently quoted these words in Aramaic (cf. Mar 15:34). The remaining words "lama sabachthani" are Aramaic. Matthew translated Jesus’ Aramaic words into Greek, or perhaps a later copyist made the change.

By comparing the Gospel accounts we know that Jesus spoke seven times while hanging on the cross. First, He said, "Father, forgive them" (Luk 23:34). Second, He told one of the insurrectionists crucified with Him, "Today you shall be with me in paradise" (Luk 23:43). Third, He told His mother, "Woman, behold your son," and He told John, "Behold, your mother" (Joh 19:26-27). Fourth, He cried, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Mat 27:46; Mar 15:34). Fifth, He said, "I thirst" (Joh 19:28). Sixth, He exclaimed, "It is finished" (Joh 19:30). Seventh, He cried, "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit" (Mat 27:50; Luk 23:46).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)