18:20. “… ye holy apostles and prophets….”
“…The people of the earth, in common phrase, opposed to … the disciples of the wise men, whom they call the holy people; but the former they call the accursed….” [3:325]
18:20. “…God hath avenged you on her….”
There is much said in the Talmud about the slaying of the innocent Zacharias, son of Barachias and how God took vengeance upon them because of it. “…’R. Jochanan said, Eighty thousand priests were killed for the blood of Zacharias…'” [2:303]
It was commonly held by the Jews that the shedding of innocent blood caused the furious wrath of God. But this was a compounded sin: “…They committed seven wickednesses in that day. They killed a priest, a prophet, and a judge: they shed the blood of an innocent man: they polluted the court: and that day was the sabbath day, and the day of Expiation.'” {See my commentary on 18:24.}
Nebuzar-adan is said to have questioned why the blood of the slain Zacharias continued to bubble and was answered: “‘This was a priest, a prophet, and a judge, who foretold to Israel all these evils which we have suffered from you, and we rose up against him, and slew him.’ But I,’ saith he, ‘will appease him.’ He brought the Rabbins, and slew them upon that blood; and yet it was not pacified: he brought the children out of the school, and slew them upon it, and yet it was not quiet: he brought the young priests, and slew them upon it, and yet it was not quiet. So that he slew upon it ninety-four thousand, and yet it was not quiet. He drew near to it himself, and said, ‘O Zacharias, Zacharias! thou hast destroyed the best of thy people’ [that is, they have been killed for your sake]; ‘would you have me destroy all?’ Then it was quiet, and did not bubble any more,’ &c. [2:303]
“The truth of this story we leave to the relators: that which makes to our present purpose we observe: that it was very improbable, nay, next to impossible, that those that heard the words of Christ (concerning Zacharias slain before the Temple and the altar) could understand it of any other but of this, concerning whom and whose blood they had such famous and signal memory: and of any other Zacharias slain in the Temple there was a profound silence. In Josephus indeed, we meet with the mention of one Zacharias, the son of Baruch, (which is the same thing with Barachias,) killed in the Temple, not long before the destruction of it: whom some conjecture to be prophetically marked out here by our Saviour: but this is somewhat hard, when Christ expressly speaks of time past…ye slew; and when, by no art nor arguments, it can be proved that this Zacharias ought to be reckoned into the number of prophets and martyrs.
“There are two things here that stick with interpreters, so that they cannot so freely subscribe to our Zacharias: 1. That he lived and died long before the first Temple was destroyed; when the example would have seemed more home and proper to be taken under the second Temple, and that now near expiring. 2. That he was plainly and notoriously the son of Jehoida; but this is called by Christ ‘the son of Barachias.’
“To which we, after others who have discoursed at large upon this matter, return only thus much:
“I. That Christ plainly intended to bring examples out of the Old Testament; and he brought two, which how much the further off they seemed to be from deriving any guilt to this generation, so much heavier the guilt is if they do derive it. For a Jew would argue, ‘What hath a Jew to do with the blood of Abel, killed almost two thousand years before Abraham the father of the Jews was born? And what hath this generation to do with the blood of Zacharias, which was expiated by cruel plagues and calamities many ages since?’ Nay, saith Christ, this generation hath arrived to that degree [305] of impiety, wickedness, and guilt, that even these remote examples of guilt relate, and are to be applied to it: and while you think that the blood of Abel, and the following martyrs doth nothing concern you, and believe that the blood of Zacharias hath been long ago expiated with a signal punishment; I say unto you, that the blood both of the one and the other, and of all the righteous men killed in the interval of time between them, shall be required of this generation; 1. Because you kill him who is of more value than they all. 2. Because by your wickedness you so much kindle the anger of God, that he is driven to cut off his old church; namely the people that hath been of a long time in covenant with him. For when Christ saith, That on you may come all the righteous blood, &c.; it is not so much to be understood of their personal guilt as to that blood, as of their guilt for the killing of Christ, in whose death, the guilt of the murder of all those his types and members is in some measure included: and it is to be understood of the horrible destruction of that generation, than which no former ages have ever seen any more woful or amazing, nor shall any future, before the funeral of the world itself. As if all the guilt of the blood of righteous men, that had been shed from the beginning of the world, had flowed together upon that generation.” [2:305]
In commentary on Matt. 23:35, Lightfoot shows how that “Zacharias the son of Barachias” is interpreted by the Talmudists from Isaiah 8:2 as being the same as “Zacharias the son of Jeberechiah,” simply using a standard and well known variant of the word ‘Jeberechiah.’
[2:307]”…why did He (our Saviour) not rather say, ‘from the blood of Abel to the blood of Uriah the priest?’ that is, from the beginning of the world to the end of the first Temple? I answer,
“1. The killing of Zechariah was more horrible, as he was more high in dignity; and as the place wherein he was killed was more holy.
[2:308]”2. The consent of the whole people was more universal to his death.
“3. He was a more proper and apparent type of Christ.
“4. The requiring of vengeance is mentioned only concerning Abel and Zechariah: ‘Behold, the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me.’ And, ‘Let the Lord look upon it, and require it.’
“5. In this the death of Christ agrees exactly with the death of Zechariah; that although the city and nation of the Jews did not perish till about forty years after the death of Christ, yet they gave themselves their death’s wound in wounding Christ. So it was also in the case of Zechariah: Jerusalem and the people of the Jews stood indeed many years after the death of Zechariah, but from that time began to sink, and draw towards ruin. Consult the story narrowly, and you will plainly find, that all the affairs of the Jews began to decline and grow worse and worse, from that time when ‘blood touched blood,’ (the blood of the sacrificer mingled with the blood of the sacrifice), and when ‘the people became contentious and rebellious against the priest.’…” [2:302-8, commenting on Matt. 23 34-35. See also Lightfoot 3:128].
18:21. “… Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.”
When Jesus said: “The axe is laid to the root of the tree,” the passage from Isaiah 10:33-34 was on His mind. “In the Talmud those words of Isaiah are applied to the destruction of the city; and thence it is argued, that the Messias should be born not much after the time of that destruction, because presently after the threatening of that ruin follows, ‘A Branch shall arise out of the stock of Jesse,’ Isa.xi.1.” [2:79]
18:22-23. “…and the sound of the millstone shall be heard in thee no more; and the light of a lamp shall shine in thee no more; and the voice of bridegroom and bride shall be heard in thee no more….”
Josephus writes: “The emperor commanded them to dig up the whole city and the Temple….’Thus those that digged it up laid all level, that it should never be inhabited, to be a witness to such as should come thither.'” [2:309]
The phrase ‘the sound of mills’ in the Talmud is explained by the Glossers: “The sound of mills in Burni was a sign that there was a circumcision there; as if it had been publicly proclaimed, The infant’s week expires in this place. And the sound of a mill was a sign that spices were ground to be applied to the wound of the circumcision. It was a time of persecution, wherein it was forbidden to circumcise: they feared, therefore, by any public notice to make known that there was to be a circumcision; but they appointed this sign.”
The phrase ‘the light of a lamp…’ is explained: “The light of one candle in the day-time, but many candles burning in the night, gave a sign, as if one had given notice by a public proclamation that a feast of circumcision was there…”
“The Aruch writes thus; ‘In the time of persecution they could not celebrate public matrimony, nor public circumcision; therefore, they did them secretly: wheresoever, therefore, were lighted candles on the lintel of the door, they knew that there was a wedding-feast there; and wheresoever was the sound of mills, there was a circumcision.” [1:183]
18:23. “…for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived…” [See also 9:21],
“…It was very usual to the Jews to attribute some of the more grievous diseases to evil spirits, specially those wherein either the body was distorted, or the mind disturbed and tossed with a phrensy….
“….’Kordicus….is a demon which rules over those that drink too much wine….Kordicus is a disease, generated from the repletion of the vessels of the brain, whereby the understanding is confounded….
“Shibta is an evil spirit, who, taking hold on the necks of infants, dries up and contracts their nerves….” [2:83, 248]
“…It was not seldom that they enjoined themselves fasts, for this end, to have lucky dreams; or to attain the interpretation of some dream; or to turn away the ill import of a dream.”
“….It is a disputable case, whether the Jewish nation were more mad with superstition in matters of religion, or with superstition in curious arts….
“…There were hardly any people in the whole world that more used, or were more fond of, amulets, charms, mutterings, exorcisms, and all kinds of enchantments. We might here produce innumerable examples; a handful shall serve us out of the harvest…’Let not any one go abroad with his amulet on the sabbath day, unless that amulet be prescribed by an approved physician’ (or, ‘unless it be an approved amulet;’….Now these amulets were either little roots hung about the necks of sick persons, or, what was more common, bits of paper with words written on them…whereby they supposed that diseases were either driven away or cured; which they wore all the week, but were forbid to wear on the sabbath, unless with a caution: ‘They do not say a charm over a wound on the sabbath, that also which is said over a mandrake is forbid’ of the sabbath. ‘If any one say, Come and say this versicle over my son, or lay the book’ of the law ‘upon him, to make him sleep; it is forbid:’ that is, on the sabbath, but on other days is usual.
“…’They used to say the psalm of meetings (that is, against unlucky meetings) at Jerusalem.….There is a discourse of many things, which they used to carry about with them, as remedies against certain ailments; and of mutterings over wounds; and there you may see, that while they avoid the enchantments of the Amorites, they have and allow their own. You have…the form of an enchantment against a mad dog. And…the form of an enchantment against the devil of blindness. You have……mutterings and enchantments, even in the name of Jesus….” [2:315-16]
“… Very many Jews that were magicians, exorcists, conjurors, wandered up and down, who boasted that they were endued with the Holy Ghost, taught much and did miracles; and yet called our Lord Jesus anathema. ‘But be ye certain (saith the apostle, {I Cor. 12:3}) that these men neither speak, nor act, nor are acted by the Spirit of God: ‘For no man, speaking by the Spirit of God, calleth Jesus accursed.’ On the other part also, the whole Jewish nation indeed denied that the Holy Ghost was given to the Gentiles. ‘The Holy Ghost (say they) dwells not upon any without the land of Israel.’…
“’But (saith the apostle) when the Gentiles confess Jesus is the Lord, they do not this but by the Holy Ghost.’ And also he instructs Christians, that they be not deceived by the crafty and magical spirits of the Jews; and in like manner he stops the mouth of the Jews, that they should not deny the Holy Spirit to be bestowed upon the Gentile Christians.” [4:252-3]
“But this number of high priests is very much lessened in Vajicra Rabba: ‘Under the first Temple, because they that served therein served in the truth, there were but eighteen high priests, the father, the son, and grandson successively. But under the second Temple, when that honour came to be obtained by money [there are also that say how they murdered one another by charms and witchcrafts], there were fourscore high priests served in that time: fourscore and one, say some; fourscore and two, say others; and there are that say fourscore and four. Amongst these, Simeon the Just sat forty years: but when the place was bought and sold, the years of enjoying it were cut short. The story goes of one that sent his son with two bushels of silver [to purchase the high priest’s office], and the bushels themselves were silver. Another sent his son with two bushels of gold, and the bushels themselves were of gold too.’” [3:416-7]
Davies, [200] Discusses the mystery religions, as found in the Mithras Liturgy and other magical texts of the Hellenistic period and their influence on Paul‘s thought. Davies sees the texts as being too late to have influenced Paul, however, that the texts may have been influenced by earlier ideas and by misconceptions of the Christian idea of the Spirit. [Note 3: “In addition it is legitimate to ask how much of the pneumatology of the magical texts is really not Hellenistic at all but derived from a debased Judaism. For the influence of Judaism on magical literature see W.L. Knox, St Paul and the Church of the Gentiles, note ii, pp. 208ff.]
18:24. “And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.”
Lightfoot shows from the Talmudists that the schools of Hillel and Shammai became such bitter enemies that they slew each other. “Thus as if they were struck with a phrensy from heaven, the doctors of the nation rage one against another; and from their very schools and chairs flow not so much doctrines, as animosities, jarrings, slaughters, and butcheries. To these may be added those fearful outrages, spoils, murders, devastations of robbers, cut-throats, zealots, and amazing cruelties, beyond all example.” [2:190]
The Talmudists taught that the generation in which the Messias came would be the most wicked age. [2:209]