Joh 11:55, 13:1, Act 5:36, 21:38, 2Cor 12:2 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 55. Jews' passover . , also . Its being called the Jews' Passover shows that John wrote this gospel among people who were not Jews, and to whom it was necessary, therefore to explain their customs. To purify themselves . This purifying consisted in preparing themselves for the proper observation of the Passover, according to the commands of the law. If any were defiled in any manner by contact with the dead or by any other ceremonial uncleanness, they were required to take the prescribed measures for purification, . For want of this, great inconvenience was sometimes experienced. See . Different periods were necessary in order to be cleansed from ceremonial pollution. For example, one who had been polluted by the touch of a dead body, of a sepulchre, or by the bones of the dead, was sprinkled on the third and seventh days, by a clean person, with hyssop dipped in water mixed in the ashes of the red heifer. After washing his body and clothes he was then clean. These persons who went up before the Passover were doubtless those who had in some manner been ceremonially polluted. (q) "the Jews' Passover"

John 11:55

Verse 55. Jews' passover. Mt 26:2, also Mt 26:3-17.

Its being called the Jews' Passover shows that John wrote this gospel among people who were not Jews, and to whom it was necessary, therefore to explain their customs.

To purify themselves. This purifying consisted in preparing themselves for the proper observation of the Passover, according to the commands of the law. If any were defiled in any manner by contact with the dead or by any other ceremonial uncleanness, they were required to take the prescribed measures for purification, Lev 22:1-6. For want of this, great inconvenience was sometimes experienced. See 2Chr 30:17,18. Different periods were necessary in order to be cleansed from ceremonial pollution. For example, one who had been polluted by the touch of a dead body, of a sepulchre, or by the bones of the dead, was sprinkled on the third and seventh days, by a clean person, with hyssop dipped in water mixed in the ashes of the red heifer. After washing his body and clothes he was then clean. These persons who went up before the Passover were doubtless those who had in some manner been ceremonially polluted.

(q) "the Jews' Passover" Jn 2:13, 5:1, 6:4

John 13:1

Verse 1. The feast of the passover. Mt 26:2, Mt 26:17.

His hour was come. The hour appointed in the purpose of God for him to die, Jn 12:27. Having loved his own. Having given to them decisive and constant proofs of his love. This was done by his calling them to follow him; by patiently teaching them; by bearing with their errors and weaknesses; and by making them the heralds of his truth and the heirs of eternal life.

He loved them unto the end. That is, he continued the proofs of his love until he was taken away from them by death. Instances of that love John proceeds immediately to record in his washing their feet and in the institution of the Supper. We may remark that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and for ever. He does not change; he always loves the same traits of character; nor does he withdraw his love from the soul. If his people walk in darkness and wander from him, the fault is theirs, not his. His is the character of a friend that never leaves or forsakes us; a friend that sticketh closer than a brother. Ps 37:28: "The Lord forsaketh not his saints." Isa 49:14-17, Prov 18:24.

(a) "Now before the feast" Mt 26:2 (b) "his hour was come" Jn 17:1,11 (c) "having loved his own" Jer 31:3, Eph 5:2, 1Jn 4:12, Rev 1:5

Acts 5:36

Verse 36. For before these days. The advice of Gamaliel was to suffer these men to go on. The arguments by which he enforced his advice were,

(1.) that there were cases or precedents in point, (Acts 5:36,37;) and,

(2.) that if it should turn out to be of God, it would be a solemn affair to be involved in the consequences of opposing him. How long before those days this transaction occurred cannot now be determined, as it is not certain to what case Gamaliel refers.

Rose up. That is, commenced or excited an insurrection.

Theudas, This was a name quite common among the Jews. Of this man nothing more is known than is here recorded. Josephus (Antiq. b. xx. chap. v.) mentions one Theudas, in the time of Fadus the procurator of Judea, in the reign of the emperor Claudius, (A.D. 45 or 46,) who persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with him, and follow him to the river Jordan. He told them he was a prophet, and that he would divide the river, and lead them over. Fadus, however, came suddenly upon them, and slew many of them. Theudas was taken alive, and conveyed to Jerusalem, and there beheaded. But this occurred at least ten or fifteen years after this discourse of Gamaliel. Many efforts have been made to reconcile Luke and Josephus, on the supposition that they refer to the same man. Lightfoot supposed that Josephus had made an error in chronology. But there is no reason to suppose that there is reference to the same event; and the fact that Josephus has not recorded the insurrection referred to by Gamaliel, does not militate at all against the account in the Acts. For

(1.) Luke, for anything that appears to the contrary, is quite as credible an historian as Josephus.

(2.) The name Theudas was a common name among the Jews; and there is no improbability that there were two leaders of an insurrection of this name. If it is improbable, the improbability would affect Josephus's credit as much as that of Luke.

(3.) It is altogether improbable that Gamaliel should refer to a case which was not well authenticated; and that Luke should record a speech of this kind unless it was delivered, when it would be so easy to detect the error.

(4.) Josephus has recorded many instances of insurrection and revolt. He has represented the country as in an unsettled state, and by no means professes to give an account of all that occurred. Thus he says, (Antiq. xvii. x. 4,) that there were "at this time ten thousand other disorders in Judea;" and (&8) that "Judea was full of robberies." When this Theudas lived cannot be ascertained; but as Gamaliel mentions him before Judas of Galilee, it is probable that he lived not far from the time that our Saviour was born--at a time when many false prophets appeared, claiming to be the Messiah.

Boasting himself to be somebody. Claiming to be an eminent prophet probably, or the Messiah.

Obeyed him. The word used here is the one commonly used to denote belief. As many as believed on him, or gave credit to his pretensions.

(1) "these days" "In the third year before the account called A. D." (2) "obeyed" "believed"

Acts 21:38

Verse 38. Art not thou that Egyptian. That Egyptian was probably a Jew, who resided in Egypt. Josephus has given an account of this Egyptian, which strikingly accords with the statement here recorded by Luke. See Josephus' Antiq. b. xx. chap. viii. 6, and Jewish War, b. ii. chap. xiii. 5. The account which he gives is, that this Egyptian, whose name he does not mention, came from Egypt to Jerusalem, and said that he was a prophet, and advised the multitude of the common people to go with him to the Mount of Olives. He said further, that he would show them from thence how the walls of Jerusalem would fall down; and he promised them that he would procure for them an entrance through those walls when they were fallen down. Josephus adds, (Jewish War,) that he got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him, "these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount, which was called the Mount of Olives, and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place." But Felix, who was apprized of his movements, marched against him with the Roman soldiers, and discomfited him, and slew four hundred of them, and took two hundred alive. "But the Egyptian escaped himself out of the fight, but did not appear any more." It was natural that the Roman tribune should suppose that Paul was this Egyptian, and that his return had produced this commotion and excitement among the people.

Madest an uproar. Producing a sedition, or a rising among the people. Greek, "That Egyptian, who before these days having risen up."

Into the wilderness. This corresponds remarkably with the account of Josephus. He indeed mentions that he led them to the Mount of Olives, but he expressly says that "he led them round about from the wilderness." This wilderness was the wild and uncultivated mountainous tract of country lying to the east of Jerusalem, and between it and the river Jordan. Mt 3:1. It is also another striking coincidence showing the truth of the narrative, that neither Josephus nor Luke mention the name of this Egyptian, though he was so prominent and acted so distinguished a part.

Four thousand men. There is here a remarkable discrepancy between the chief captain and Josephus. The latter says that there were thirty thousand men. In regard to this the following remarks may be made.

(1.) This cannot be alleged to convict Luke of a false statement, for his record is, that the chief captain made this statement, and it cannot be proved that Luke has put into his mouth words which he did not utter. All that he is responsible for is a correct report of what the Roman tribune said, not for the truth or falsehood of his statement. It is certainly possible that that might have been the common estimate of the number then, and that the account given by Josephus might have been made from more correct information. Or it is possible, certainly, that the statement by Josephus is incorrect.

(2.) If Luke were to be held responsible for the statement of the number, yet it remains to be shown that he is not as correct a historian as Josephus. Why should Josephus be esteemed infallible, and Luke false? Why should the accuracy of Luke be tested by Josephus, rather than the accuracy of Josephus by Luke? Infidels usually assume that Josephus and other profane historians are infallible, and then endeavour to convict the sacred writers of falsehood.

(3.) The narrative of Luke is the more probable of the two. It is more probable that the number was only four thousand, than it was thirty thousand. For Josephus says, that four hundred were killed, and two hundred taken prisoners; and that thus they were dispersed. Now, it is scarcely credible, that an army of thirty thousand desperadoes and cut-throats would be dispersed by so small a slaughter and captivity. But if the number was originally but four thousand, it is entirely credible that the loss of six hundred would discourage and dissipate the remainder.

(4.) It is possible that the chief captain refers only to the organized Sicarii, or murderers that the Egyptian led with him, and Josephus to the multitude that afterwards joined them, the rabble of the discontented and disorderly that joined them on their march. Or,

(5.) there may have been an error in transcribing Josephus. It has been supposed that he originally wrote four thousand, but that ancient copyists, mistaking the δ, delta, four, for λ, lambda, thirty, wrote thirty thousand, instead of four thousand. Whichever of these solutions be adopted is not material.

Which were murderers. σικαριων. Sicara. This is originally a Latin word, and is derived from Sica, a short sword, or sabre, or crooked knife, which could be easily concealed under the garment. Hence it came to denote assassins, and to be applied to banditti, or robbers. It does not mean that they had actually committed murder, but that they were desperadoes and banditti, and were drawn together for purposes of plunder and of blood. This class of people was exceedingly numerous in the wilderness of Judea. Lk 10:30.

(1) "that Egyptian" "This Egyptian arose A.D. 55" Acts 5:36 (++) "before these days" "Formerly" (&) "uproar" "A disturbance" (|) "murderers" "Assassins"

2 Corinthians 12:2

Verse 2. I knew a man in Christ. I was acquainted with a Christian; the phrase, "in Christ," meaning nothing more than that he was united to Christ, or was a Christian. See Rom 16:7. The reason why Paul did not speak of this directly as a vision which he had himself seen, was probably that he was accused of boasting, and he had admitted that it did not become him to glory. But though it did not become him to boast directly, yet he could tell them of a man concerning whom there would be no impropriety evidently in boasting. It is not uncommon, moreover, for a man to speak of himself in the third person. Thus Caesar in his Commentaries uniformly speaks of himself. And so John in his Gospel speaks of himself, Jn 13:23,24, 19:26, 21:20. John did it on account of his modesty, because he would not appear to put himself forward, and because the mention of his own name, as connected with the friendship of the Saviour in the remarkable manner in which he enjoyed it, might have savoured of pride. For a similar reason Paul may have been unwilling to mention his own name here; and he may have abstained from referring to this occurrence elsewhere because it might savour of pride, and might also excite the envy or ill-will of others. Those who have been most favoured with spiritual enjoyments will not be the most ready to proclaim it. They will cherish the remembrance in order to excite gratitude in their own hearts, and support them in trial; they will not blazon it abroad as if they were more the favourites of Heaven than others are. That this refers to Paul himself is evident for the following reasons:

(1) His argument required that he should mention something that had occurred to himself. Anything that had occurred to another would not have been pertinent.

(2.) He applies it directly to himself, (@Co 12:7,) when he says that God took effectual measures that he should not be unduly exalted in view of the abundant revelations bestowed on him.

About fourteen years ago. On what occasion, or where this occurred, or why he concealed the remarkable fact so long, and why there is no other allusion to it, is unknown; and conjecture is useless. If this epistle was written, as is commonly supposed, about the year 58, then this occurrence must have happened about the year 44. This was several years after his conversion, and of course this does not refer to the trance mentioned in Acts 9:9, at the time when he was converted. Dr. Benson supposes that this vision was made to him when he was praying in the temple after his return to Jerusalem, when he was directed to go from Jerusalem to the Gentiles, (Acts 22:17,) and that it was intended to support him in the trials which he was about to endure. There can be little danger of error in supposing that its object was to support him in those remarkable trials, and that God designed to impart to him such views of heaven and its glory, and of the certainty that he would soon be admitted there, as to support him in his sufferings, and make him willing to bear all that should be laid upon him. God often gives to his people some clear and elevated spiritual comforts before they enter into trials, as well as while in them; he prepares them for them before they come. This vision Paul had kept secret for fourteen years. He had doubtless often thought of it; and the remembrance of that glorious hour was doubtless one of the reasons why he bore trials so patiently, and was willing to endure so much. But before this he had had no occasion to mention it. He had other proofs in abundance that he was called to the work of an apostle; and to mention this would savour of pride and ostentation. It was only when he was compelled to refer to the evidences of his apostolic mission that he refers to it here.

Whether in the body, I cannot tell. That is, I do not pretend to explain it. I do not know how it occurred. With the fact he was acquainted; but how it was brought about he did not know. Whether the body was caught up to heaven; whether the soul was for a time separated from the body; or whether the scene passed before the mind in a vision, so that he seemed to have been caught up to heaven, he does not pretend to know. The evident idea is, that at the time he was in a state of insensibility in regard to surrounding objects, and was unconscious of what was occurring, as if he had been dead. Where Paul confesses his own ignorance of what occurred to himself, it would be vain for us to inquire; and the question how this was done is immaterial. No one can doubt that God had power, if he chose, to transport the body to heaven; or that he had power for a time to separate the soul from the body; or that he had power to represent to the mind so clearly the view of the heavenly world, that he would appear to see it. See Acts 7:56. It is clear only that he lost all consciousness of anything about him at that time, and that he saw only the things in heaven. It may be added here, however, that Paul evidently supposed that his soul might be taken to heaven without the body, and that it might have separate consciousness, and a separate existence. He was not, therefore, a materialist, and he did not believe that the existence and consciousness of the soul was dependent on the body.

God knoweth. With the mode in which it was done, God only could be acquainted. Paul did not attempt to explain that. That was to him of comparatively little consequence, and he did not lose his time in a vain attempt to explain it. How happy would it be if all theologians were as ready to be satisfied with the knowledge of a fact, and to leave the mode of explaining it with God, as this prince of theologians was. Many a man would have busied himself with a vain speculation about the way in which it was done; Paul was contented with the fact that it had occurred.

Such an one caught up. The word which is here used (αρπαζω) means, to seize upon, to snatch away as wolves do their prey, (Jn 10:12;) or to seize with avidity or eagerness, Mt 11:12; or to carry away, to hurry off by force, or involuntarily. See Joh 6:15 Ac 8:39 23:10. In the case before us there is implied the idea that Paul was conveyed by a foreign force; or that he was suddenly seized and snatched up to heaven. The word expresses the suddenness and the rapidity with which it was done. Probably it was instantaneous, so that he appeared, at once to be in heaven. Of the mode in which it was done, Paul has given no explanations; and conjecture would be useless.

To the third heaven. The Jews sometimes speak of seven heavens, and Mohammed has borrowed this idea from the Jews. But the Bible speaks of but three heavens; and among the Jews in the apostolic ages, also, the heavens were divided into three:

(1.) The aerial, including the clouds and the atmosphere, the heavens above us, until we come to the stars.

(2.) The starry heavens--the heavens in which the sun, moon, and stars appear to be situated.

(3.) The heavens beyond the stars. That heaven was supposed to be the residence of God, of angels, and of holy spirits. It was this upper heaven, the dwelling-place of God, to which Paul was taken, and whose wonders he was permitted to behold--this region where God dwelt, where Christ was seated at the right hand of the Father, and where the spirits of the just were assembled. The fanciful opinions of the Jews about seven heavens may be seen detailed in Schoettgen or in Wetstein, by whom the principal passages from the Jewish writings relating to the subject have been collected. As their opinions throw no light on this passage, it is unnecessary to detail them here.

(a) "in Christ" Rom 16:7 (2) "fourteen years ago" "A.D. 46" Acts 22:17