fissure. The highest of its three principal | portant tributary enters from the east, and fountains on the slopes of Hermon is seven- below this the usual depth varies from two teen hundred feet above the level of the Med- and one half to six feet (Ritter). About half iterranean; the first lake it forms, Hûleh, has way from the Lake of Galilee to the Salt its surface only one hundred and twenty feet (Dead) Sea, the River Jabbok enters from the above the Mediterranean, while the second, east, and smaller streams come in at various the Lake of Galilee, is six hundred and eighty- neighboring points on both sides. It here betwo feet (Conder) below the level, and the comes from eighty to one hundred and fifty third Lake, the Dead Sea, is twelve hundred feet wide, and from five to twelve feet deep and ninety-two feet below the level of the (McClintock and Crooks, "Cyc."). Near the Mediterranean, besides being itself some mouth it widens to some five hundred and thirteen hundred feet deep. The fissure or fifty feet, and the depth diminishes to two or valley varies in width, south of the Lake of three feet (Lynch). The principal fords are Galilee, from two to six miles, and nearer not many (though Conder collected the the Dead Sea it becomes fourteen miles wide names of about forty in all). (1) About (Conder). Winding about in this long, narrow two miles above the mouth (Fish). Several valley is another depressed valley (forty to miles higher up is the traditional place of our one hundred and fifty feet deeper), of several Lord's baptism, nearly opposite Jericho, and hundred yards in width; and within this the somewhat above this is (2) a ford used at some actual bed of the river sinks deeper still. The seasons. At the traditional place the river is, distance in a straight line from its highest in spring (when most travelers visit it), both source to the southern end of the Dead Sea is too deep and too swift for fording. Yet just about one hundred and sixty miles, or exclud- before Easter several thousand Greek and Oriing the Dead Sea, about one hundred and fif- ental pilgrims (in the Middle Ages there were teen miles. But so extremely crooked is the sometimes 100,000) go to this place — men, winding river that Lynch estimates it to be women, and children—and immerse themnear two hundred miles between the Lake of selves as a sacred bath, many of them changing Galilee and its mouth (which is sixty-five miles their garments amid the dense thickets of in a straight line), and though less crooked shrubbery which extend for some distance higher up, its whole length must be at least from the stream; and almost every year, in two hundred and seventy-five miles, not in- the vast fanatical throng, crowding in tocluding the Dead Sea. The width and depth gether, some are drowned. Several miles of course vary at different seasons, as it is above this place is now a ferry-boat (comp. 2 swollen in February and March by the rains, Sam. 19: 18), which is handled with difficulty, and in May, the "time of harvest" (Josh. 3:15), the current being in March excessively strong. by the melting snows of Hermon. Above (3) Ten miles below the mouth of the Jabbok Lake Hûleh it is some forty feet wide, and is is a ford now much used in going from Nabudeep and rapid, but fordable almost every-lus to Es-Salt (Van de Velde). (4) Above the where. Towards the Lake of Galilee it is about sixty feet, and easily forded at several places. For some miles below the lake Lynch found it about seventy-five feet wide, and at points ten feet deep (middle of April), but on one of the numerous rapids only eight inches deep. About five miles below the lake an im Jabbok is the ford of Succoth, where Jacob crossed with his family and flocks (Gen. 32: 10, 22.) (5) Near Beisan is a ford, which Robinson (III., 325) crossed with difficulty, but which, on March 24, 1871, the Modîn of Beisan said would only reach the horses' bellies. In this neighborhood Conder, in April, that the Jordan was a river (like many other explana- documentary evidence in favor of the word, but for the tions he gives), this was quite needless for Matt., and fact that D and some copies of Old Latin omil‘river' contrary to his usage in similar cases. Translators and in Mark 1: 5, as well as here, which indicates that the copyists in foreign countries would, however, think the "Western" text was hostile to the word, and thus acword necessary here, even as and Old Syriac have in-counts for its omission in many copies of Matt. This serted it in John 1: 28. We thus see that Matt. is not likely to have written it and copyists would be likely to insert it. This strong union of intrinsic and transcriptional evidence might even outweigh the very strong The ques word must therefore be accepted as a part of Matthew's 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 7 in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming Ito his baptism, he said unto them, Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to 1 Or, for baptism. We have now (v. 7-12) a specimen of John's teachings given more in detail. 7. The Pharisees and Sadducees were the two great parties, at once religious and political, among the Jews at the time of Christ. The date of their origin is unknown, and they no doubt arose gradually. In the centuries immediately following the return from the Captivity there must have been va found twenty-one possible fords within seven miles. About ten miles above Beisan is a Saracenic bridge (the only one now crossing the river), upon the road from Nabulus to Damascus, and above it are said to be several difficult and little-used fords. (6) Not far below the Lake of Galilee is an important ford, which the Jews of our Lord's time must have constantly used in going from Galilee through Perea to Jerusalem. At this, on March 25,rious divisions of public sentiment. Some 1871, the water came nearly to the root of a horse's tail. But in summer the river falls much lower, and must be easily fordable at many points.-The outer and principal part of the Jordan valley is nearly all entirely unproductive without irrigation, justifying the statement of Josephus that the Jordan flows through a desert ("War," 3, 10, 7). But the banks of the river are everywhere fringed with trees (willow, balsam, etc.), amid which the birds sing, and in whose pleasant shade the multitudes could gather to hear the voice of the new prophet. As to the scene of the baptism of Jesus, see on v. 13. The people received this solemn rite confessing their sins. The Scriptures promise forgiveness on condition of confession (Prov. 28: 13; 1 John 1: 9), though of course this is not the meritorious ground of forgiveness. It was required by the Mosaic Law (Lev. 5:5; 16: 21; 26: 40; Num. 5 : 7), and is often recorded as practiced by the penitent (e. g, 2 Chron. 30: 22; Psa. 32: 5; Neh. 9: 2, 3; Dan. 9: 20; Acts 19: 18). The term here used appears to denote an actually spoken confession, and the present participle shows that it was made in immediate connection with the act of baptism. Most probably the confession was not made to the multitude, but simply to John, and was not uniform, but varied according to every man's calling, character, etc., (comp. John's specific exhortations to different classes, Luke 3: 1014). The act of submitting to baptism was itself also (Köhler) a confession of faith, namely, of faith in the good news of the kingdom. (Mark 1: 15; Acts 19: 4.) 1The above was written before the appearance of Edersheim's work, and the view presented finds grati insisted on conforming to all decisions of fying support in his elaborate discussion. (Book iii., the Maccabean struggle, the Pharisees now | true and important doctrines, as that of representing the patriots of that time, and it the separate existence of spirits, and a cerhad included many fierce political cohflicts tain approach to the Christian doctrine of and wars under the successors of John Hyr- the resurrection from the dead (comp. on canus (“Ant.," 13, 15, 5; 18, 16, 5), which left 22: 23); while the Sadducees, in avoiding a bitter and lasting hatred. At the time of traditionalism, went to the opposite extreme Christ, the Sadducees were comparatively few of rationalism, and wholly rejected these docin number, but embraced a large proportion trines, and even the belief in angels (Acts 23: 8), of wealthy and influential men ("Ant.," 18, though this last is so plainly and repeatedly 1, 4), including many members of the Sanhe- taught in Old Testament. The Pharisees, in drin (Acts 5:17), and were more likely to have their fanatical zeal for the law of purificathe sympathy of the Roman rulers. But the tions, and the numerous rules which tradiPharisees were far more numerous, and on tion had added, shrank from all association account of the patriotic record and pious with "sinners," i. e., persons who notoriously reputation of the party, possessed the sym- violated the law (Luke 7: 39), and thought it inpathies and support of the people at large. excusable in Jesus to do otherwise. (9:11; Luke Yet, while political antagonism had caused 15:2.) Thus, when they came from market, bitterness, the chief differences between the where they might possibly have touched some two parties had always been religious. The person or thing that was ceremonially 'unPharisees held to many traditional interpret-clean,' they were wont to perform a comations of Scripture (e. g., 5: 21, 33, 43), some plete purification, immersed themselves,' of them not merely erroneous, but subversive before they would eat. (Mark 7: 4.) This of its great truths, and also to many tradi- scrupulosity in separating themselves probtional rules for the conduct of life, particu-ably led to the name Pharisees, 'separalarly as to externals, some of these likewise ters.' The name Sadducees most likely tending to set aside the teachings of God's meant righteous,' as denoting that they word. (15:2) These they claimed, as most contented themselves with being simply Jews have ever since done, to be of almost righteous men, and did not care for newequal authority with the law; indeed, they fangled beliefs and strait-laced observances.3 were called the "oral law," and held to have Our Saviour less frequently referred to the been given orally to Moses at Mount Sinai, errors of the Sadducees, great as they were, and handed down from him. About two doubtless because the people in general were centuries after Christ many of these tradi- little likely to be misled by them; he does tions were written down, and form what is however caution his disciples against their called the Mishna, or 'second,' i. e., the doctrine (and that of the Phar.) in 16: 11. second law. All these traditional inter- They appear 'tempting' him in 16: 1, and pretations and rules the Sadducees rejected, 22: 23. But the Pharisees had, with some exacknowledging no authority but the Scrip- ceptions (such as Nicodemus, Gamaliel, tures, and especially the law,' i. e., the Paul), lost the true patriotism and especially five books ascribed to Moses. But the in- the true piety which had gained their party terpretations of the later centuries before so much popular favor, and were striving by Christ, as received among the Pharisees, the most shameful hypocrisy to retain an inhad elicited from the Scriptures various 1 Commentaries upon the Mishna (with supplementary traditions also) were afterwards written, and known as Gemara, 'completion," because they completed the Mishna. The Jerusalem Gemara was written in the fourth century after Christ, and that of Babylon in the fifth century. The Mishna, with one or the other of these, is commonly meant by the term Talmud ('instruction"). 180, if an Egyptian touched a swine, he went to the river and 'dipped himself from it' (bapto), clothes and all (Her. II. 47). 4 fluence which they no longer deserved, and 3 The common Jewish derivation from a supposed founder named Zadok is now almost universally rejected. Geiger's recent theory, that the Sadducees were an aristocratic, priestly class, 'the priests of the seed of Zadok' (Ezek. 43: 19), is adopted by Hausrath and Schürer, by Twisleton in Smith's Dict., Geikie, and Ginsburg in Kitto, but is extremely far-fetched, and does not explain the facts. See in opposition to it, Edersh. Vol. I. p. 322. The best recent treatises are those of Wellhausen and Montet. (See Index.) which they abused to the worst ends; and our Lord rebuked their hypocrisy on various occasions, and unsparingly exposed it in the last public discourse of his ministry, ch. 23. The continued rivalry between Pharisees and Sadducees was the providential means of securing freedom from persecution for several years after the ascension of Christ (Acts, ch. 4-6), and was made useful even at a later time by Paul. (Acts 23: 6.) No writings of Sadducees remain to us, and we know them, besides the few references in New Testament, only from writers who were Pharisees, viz., Josephus and the Talmud, and who may have done them scant justice. They seem to have ceased to exist soon after the destruction of the Jewish State, which was the natural fate of a rationalistic party, having little devout earnestness, and whose standing had been social and political rather than religious. The term 'sect' applied in Eng. Ver. to the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Acts 5: 17; 15: 5; 26:5) does not, according to its present use, correctly render the Greek word nor correctly represent the facts of the case; they were parties, with the peculiarity above mentioned, that they were at the same time religious and political parties. But there was a 'sect,' in our sense, then existing among the Jews, called the Essenes, who had a strictly exclusive organization and worship, and indeed lived in seclusion, much like the monks of later times. They were few in number, having small communities scattered over Palestine, and the largest on the western shore of the Dead Sea. They were probably an offshoot of the Pharisees, whose leading views they shared. Their comparative insignificance, their never attending the temple-worship, and this apparent relation to the Pharisees, will account for the fact that they are never mentioned in N. T., nor in the Talmud, being known to us only through the writings of Philo, Josephus, and Pliny. All attempts to show that some ideas or practices were derived from them by John the Baptist or by Jesus, have proved a failure; but their teachings do throw light on the heresy Paul attacked at Colosse (see an admirable essay in Lightfoot on Colossians). Josephus says ("Ant.," 13: 5,9) that the Essenes were utter fatalists, the Sadducees held to extreme views of free-will, substantially reject ing providence, while the Pharisees occupied a middle ground, recognizing both human freedom and responsibility, and divine control. Come-or, coming-to his baptism, that is, coming to be baptized by him.' The expression many of the Pharisees and Sadducees, with only one article, throws the two parties together as both needing sharp rebuke. (Comp. 16: 6, 11, 12.)—What is here given as addressed to them, really applied, more of less, to the people at large, and was intended to apply to all it fitted, and Luke (3: 7) gives it as addressed to 'the crowds that came forth to be baptized by him.' So in Matthew, the people at large are evidently addressed in what immediately follows, v. 9 ff. Perhaps also Matthew here refers to a particular case, while Luke states a general fact, as his tenses (in the Greek) may imply.-We learn from Luke 7: 29 f., that the Pharisees and lawyers who on a certain occasion in Galilee heard the teachings of Jesus concerning John, had not been baptized by John, as the people present and the publicans had been; but this ought not to be relied on as proving that no Pharisees had been baptized by John. Only a portion of them were at all disposed to seek his baptism, and some of these were doubtless repelled by John's stern rebuke and rigorous requirements. (Comp. on 21: 32.) O generation, or, Ye offspring—of vipers, merely a phrase of reproach, describing them as noxious and odious, and perhaps also as insidious. (Comp. 12: 34; 23: 33; Isa. 14: 29; 59: 5; Psa. 58: 4.) Classic writers present similar expressions. The idea that they are meant to be described as children of the devil, the old serpent, seems fanciful. Warned, is stronger than the original, which signifies to show secretly or partially, and thus to intimate, suggest, indicate, or more generally, to make known. To flee from, may either mean 'to escape,' as in 23: 33, or to avoid,' 'shun,' as in 1 Cor. 10: 14. With the former meaning it would be, Who intimated to you that you would escape the coming wrath?' viz., when there was so little reason to believe they would escape; with the latter: 'Who suggested to you to flee from,' etc., the surprise being that any one should take the trouble, with so little pros 1 Tisch. and W H. omit 'his,' but on insufficient grounds. 8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for a repentance: 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abrahami. 10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 8 come? Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of 'repent9 ance: and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto 10 Abraham. And even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees: every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. a Or, answerable to amendment of life.-1 Or, your repentance. pect of any good result. The latter is the more natural sense. The wrath to comeor, coming wrath. It was expected among the Jews (as the book of Enoch shows), that in connection with Messiah's appearance there would be an outburst of God's wrath upon his enemies, i. e., upon the Gentiles. But John, in accordance with the whole tenor of his teaching, describes 'the coming wrath' as threatening all God's enemies, including impenitent Jews; and this was already implied in Mal., ch. 3 and 4. Similarly Paul in 1 Thess. 1: 10. 8. Fruits, fruit (singular), is the correct reading.1 Bring forth, literally, make. The rendering 'bring forth,' common from Tyndale down, mixes the metaphors. Produce,' though not pleasing, would be allowable, and suits exactly in v. 10. Therefore, presents the exhortation as the consequence of what precedes, or is naturally supplied. "As you profess repentance and wish to be baptized, therefore produce fruit worthy of repentance, and thus prove that you really do repent." This exhortation he might naturally address to all (Luke 3:8), while it was especially appropriate to the Pharisees and Sadducees. It is not probable that he required them to go off and prove their repentance before he could baptize them; he only gave them a special charge. 9. A great hindrance to a true repentance on their part, was the idea generally entertained among the Jews, that all the descendants of Abraham must certainly escape wrath, would assuredly be saved (see John 8: 33, 39). John proceeds therefore to correct this error. Think not to say, is an exact imitation of the Greek, and signifies either do not think yourselves at liberty to say,' 'warranted in saying,' (comp. Phil. 3: 4), or more probably, 'do not think you will say,' 'do not propose to yourselves to say (comp. Luke's 'do not begin to say'). To say within yourselves, corresponds to a well-known Hebrew expression, 'to say in his heart' (24: 48; Psa. 4. 4; 10: 6; 14: 1), and is used also in 9: 21; Luke 7: 39, 49; Rev. 18: 7. We have Abraham to-or, for—our father, with emphasis on father,' as shown in Greek by the order of the words. Descended as they were from Abraham, they thought themselves perfectly safe from the Messianic wrath, and in little need of repentance. One Rabbi in a Midrash even says (Wet.), "In the age to come Abraham sits beside the gates of Gehenna, and suffers no circumcised Israelite to go down"; though the Rabbi does make ingenious provision for an exception in the case of those who have sinned excessively. Edersh: "No principle was more fully established in the popular conviction, than that all Israel had part in the world to come, and this specifically because of their connection with Abraham. This appears not only from the New Test., from Philo, and Josephus, but from many Rabbinic passages." I say unto you, calls attention to what he is about to say, as being important. (Comp. on 5: 18). Of, or, out of, as the material (translated 'out of' by Noyes and Davidson). He perhaps pointed to the loose stones lying on the river-bank. The fact that God could with such perfect ease raise up children to Abraham, and so was not dependent on them for the continuation of Abraham's posterity, would suggest that they might readily be set aside from enjoying the blessings promised to Abraham's descendants. So God once threatened to Moses that he would destroy the nation, and raise up a new people from him.-This representation that the Messianic blessings would not necessarily be enjoyed by all Jews as such, accords with that of John 1: 29, that they would not be limited to Jews, but that Messiah 'takes away the sin of the world.' Comp. also Paul's argument in Gal. 3: 7, and Rom. 4: 16. 10. Now also, or, already. Not only is there a coming Messianic wrath, but already 1 Not only is the singular best supported, but we can see how the plural might be introduced in assimilation to Luke 3: 8. |