Page:Lives of the apostles of Jesus Christ (1836).djvu/131



writers, who are quite amusing in the instances which they give of the dialectic differences between the Galileans and the Judeans. Several of the puns which they give, would not be accounted dull even in modern times, and indeed, the Galilean brogue seems to have been as well marked, and to have given occasion for nearly as much wit as that of Ireland. The Galileans, thus marked by dialect as well as by manners, held about the same place in the estimation of the pure Judean race, as the modern Irish do among those of Saxon-English tongue and blood; and we cannot better conceive of the scorn excited in the refined Jews by the idea of a Galilean prophet with his simple disciples, than by imagining the sort of impression that would be made, by a raw Irishman attempting the foundation of a new sect in London or Boston, with a dozen rough and uneducated workmen for his preachers and main supporters.

The bright light of the fire shining on his face, &c.—This incident is taken from Luke xxii. 56, where the expression in the common version is, "a certain maid saw him as he sat by the fire." But in the original Greek this last word is [Greek: phôs], (phos,) which means "light," and not "fire;" and it is translated here in this peculiar manner, because it evidently refers to the light of the fire, from its connection with the preceding verse, where it is said that "Peter sat down among them 'before' the fire which they had kindled;" the word fire in this passage being in the Greek [Greek: pur], (pur,) which is never translated otherwise. But the unusual translation of the word [Greek: phôs], by "fire" in the other verse, though it gives a just idea of Peter's position, makes a common reader lose sight of the prominent reason of his detection, which was, that the "light of the fire" shone on his face.

In speaking of Peter's fall and its attendant circumstances, Lampius (in ev. John xviii. 17,) seems to be most especially scandalized by the means through which Peter's ruin was effected. "Sed ab ancilla Cepham vinci, dedecus ejus auget. Quanta inconstantia! Qui in armatos ordines paulo ante irruperat nunc ad vocem levis mulierculae tremit. Si Adamo probrosum, quod a femina conjuge seductus erat, non minus Petro, quod ab ancilla." That is, "But that Cephas should have been overcome by a girl, increases his disgrace. How great the change! He who, but a little before, had charged an armed host, now trembled at the voice of a silly woman. If it was a shame to Adam, that he had been seduced by his wife, it was no less so to Peter, that he was by a girl."

The cock crew.—By this circumstance, the time of the denial in all its parts is well ascertained. The first cock-crowing after the first denial marked the hour of midnight, and the second cock-crowing announced the first dawn of day. As Lampius says, "Altera haec erat [Greek: alektrophônia], praenuncia lucis, non tantum in terra, sed et in corde Petri, tenebris spississimis obsepto, mox iterum oriturae." "This was the second cock-crowing, the herald of light, soon to rise again, not only on earth, but also in the heart of Peter, now overspread with the thickest darkness."

And thinking thereon, he wept.—This expression is taken from Mark xiv. 72, and accords with our common translation, though very different from many others that have been proposed. The word thus variously rendered, is in the original Greek, [Greek: epibalôn], (epibalon,) and bears a great variety of definitions which can be determined only by its connections, in the passages where it occurs. Campbell says, "There are not many words in scripture which have undergone more interpretations than this term;" and truly the array of totally diverse renderings, each ably supported by many of the most learned Biblical scholars that ever lived, is truly appalling to the investigator. (1.) Those who support the common English translation are Kypke, Wetstein, Campbell and Bloomfield, and others quoted by the latter.—(2.) Another translation which has been ably defended is, "he began to weep." This is the expression in the common German translation, (Martin Luther's,) "." It is also the version of the Vulgate, ("Coepit flere,") the Syriac, Gothic, Persian, and Armenian translations, as Kuinoel and Heinsius observe, who also maintain this rendering.—(3.) Another is, "He proceeded to weep," ("Addens flevit.") which is that of Grotius, LeClerc, Simon, Petavius and others.—(4.) Another is, "covering his head, he wept." This seems to have begun with Theophylact, who has been followed by a great number, among whom Salmasius, Wolf, Suicer, Macknight, and Krebs, are the most prominent.—(5.) Another is, "rushing out, he wept." This is maintained by Beza, Rosenmueller, Schleusner, Bretschneider and Wahl.—(6.) Another is, "Having looked at him," (Jesus,) "he wept." This is the version of Hammond and Palairet.—"Who shall decide when" so many "doctors disagree?" I should feel safest in leaving the reader, as Parkhurst does, to "consider and judge"