누가복음 3:2 주석

Nothing is related concerning our Lord Jesus from his twelfth year to his entrance on his thirtieth year. We often think it would have been a pleasure and advantage to us if we had journals, or at least annuls, of occurrences concerning him; but we have as much as Infinite Wisdom thought fit to communicate to us, and, if we improve not that, neither should we have improved more if we had had it. The great intention of the evangelists was to give us an account of the gospel of Christ, which we are to believe, and by which we hope for salvation: now that began in the ministry and baptism of John, and therefore they hasten to give us an account of that. We could wish, perhaps, that Luke had wholly passed by what was related by Matthew and Mark, and had written only what was new, as he has done in his two first chapters. But it was the will of the Spirit that some things should be established out of the mouth, not only of two, but of three witnesses; and we must not reckon it a needless repetition, nor shall we do so if we renew out meditations upon these things, with suitable affections. In this chapter we have, I. The beginning of John's baptism, and the scope and intention of it (Luk 3:1-6). His exhortation to the multitude (Luk 3:7-9), and the particular instructions he gave to those who desired to be told their duty (Luk 3:10-14). II. The notice he gave them of the approach of the Messiah (Luk 3:15-18), to which is added (though it happened after what follows) the mention of his imprisonment (Luk 3:19-20). III. Christ coming to be baptized of John, and his entrance therein upon the execution of his prophetical office (Luk 3:21, Luk 3:22). IV. His pedigree and genealogy recorded up to Adam (v. 23-38).

Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar,.... Emperor of Rome, and the third of the Caesars; Julius was the first, and Augustus the second, in whose time Christ was born, and this Tiberius the third; he was the son of Livia, the wife of Augustus, but not by him; but was adopted by him, into the empire: his name was Claudius Tiberius Nero, and for his intemperance was called, Caldius Biberius Mero; the whole of his reign was upwards of twenty two years, for he died in the twenty third year of his reign (g); and in the fifteenth of it, John began to preach, Christ was baptized, and began to preach also; so that this year may be truly called, "the acceptable year of the Lord". Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea; under the Emperor Tiberius, in whose reign the Jewish chronologer (h) places him, and the historian (i) also, and make mention of him as sent by him to Jerusalem: he was not the first governor of Judea for the Romans; there were before him Coponius, Marcus Ambivius, Annins Rufus, and Valerius Gratus: and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee; this was Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the great, and brother of Archelaus; the above chronologer (k) calls him also a tetrarch, and places him under Tiberius Caesar: he is sometimes called a king, and so he is by the Ethiopic version here called "king of Galilee"; and in the Arabic version, "prince over the fourth part of Galilee"; besides Galilee, he had also Peraea, or the country beyond Jordan, as Josephus (l) says, and which seems here to be included in Galilee; See Gill on Mat 14:1. And his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea, and of the region of Trachonitis: Pliny (m) makes mention of the nation of the Itureans, as belonging to Coele Syria; perhaps Iturea is the same with Batanea, or Auranitis, or both; since these with Trachon, the same with Trachonitis here, are allotted to Philip by Josephus (n): it seems to take its name from Jetur, one of the sons of Ishmael, Gen 25:15 Trachonitis is mentioned by Pliny (o), as near to Decapolis, and as a region and tetrarchy, as here: Ptolemy (p) speaks of the Trachonite Arabians, on the east of Batanea, or Bashan: the region of Trachona, or Trachonitis, with the Targumists (q), answers to the country of Argob. This Philip, who as before by Josephus, so by Egesippus (r), is said, in agreement with Luke, to be tetrarch of Trachonitis, was brother to Herod Antipas, by the father's, but not by the mother's side. Philip was born of Cleopatra, of Jerusalem, and Herod of Malthace, a Samaritan (s): he died in the twentieth year of Tiberius (t), five years after this: and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene: mention is made of Abila by Pliny (u), as in Coele Syria, from whence this tetrarchy might have its name; and by Ptolemy (w), it is called Abila of Lysanius, from this, or some other governor of it, of that name; and the phrase, "from Abilene to Jerusalem", is to be met with in the Talmud (x), which doubtless designs this same place: who this Lysanias was, is not certain; he was not the son of Herod the great, as Eusebius suggests (y), nor that Lysanias, the son of Ptolemy Minnaeus, whom Josephus (z) speaks of, though very probably he might be a descendant of his: however, when Tiberius Caesar reigned at Rome, and Pontius Pilate governed in Judea, and Herod Antipas in Galilee, and Philip his brother in Iturea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias in Abilene, John the Baptist began to preach and baptize; to fix the area of whose ministry and baptism, all this is said. (g) Suetou. Octav. Aug. c. 62, 63. & Tiberius Nero, c. 21, 49, 73. (h) R. David Ganz par. 2. fol. 15. 1. (i) Joseph. de Bello, Jud. l. 2. c. 9. sect. 2, 3. (k) Par. 1. fol. 25. 2. (l) De Bello Jud. l. 2. c. 6. sect. 5. (m) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 23. (n) Ib. ut supra. (de Bello, Jud. l. 2. c. 9. sect. 2, 3.) (o) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 12. (p) Lib. 5. c. 15. (q) Targum Jon. in Deut. iii. 4. 14. 1 Kings iv. 13. & T. Hiefos. in Deut. iii. 14. & Numb. xxxiv. 15. (r) De Excid. l. 1. c. 46. & 3. 26. (s) Joseph de Bello Jud. l. 1. c. 28. (t) Ib. Antiqu. l. 18. c. 6. (u) Lib. 5. c. 18. (w) Lib. 5. c. 15. (x) T. Bab. Bava Kama, fol. 59. 2. (y) Hist. Eccl l. 1. c. 9. 10. (z) De Belle Jud. l. 1. c. 13. sect. 1.

Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests,.... Some difficulty here arises, how these two could be both high priests; when according to the law of God, and the usages of the Jewish nation, there was to be, and was but one high priest at a time: many things are observed by writers, to solve this difficulty: some go this way; that though according to the divine institution, and the practice of former times, there was but one high priest at a time; yet now, through the corruption of the present age, there were two high priests; or at least, which officiated alternately in the same year: but of such a corruption, no instance can be given, even in those corrupt times; and as Maimonides says (a), there can be but "one high priest" , "in all the world"; and besides, is contrary to their canons, which were then in being, and still remain; one (b) of which runs thus, "they do not appoint two high priests at once". Others suppose, that these two annually performed the office of high priests by turns; that Caiaphas was high priest one year, and Annas another: it is true indeed, that through the corruption of those times, this office became venal, hence it is said in the Talmud (c), "because they gave money for the priesthood, they changed it every twelve months.'' And which is more largely expressed by one of their commentators (d), "because the high priests, who were under the second temple, after Simeon the just, gave money to minister in the high priest's office, and because they were wicked, they did not fill up their years, therefore they changed every year.'' But though it is certain, that there were frequent, and sometimes annual changes in the priesthood, hence it is said of Caiaphas, Joh 11:49 that he was "high priest the same year", yet it does not appear that he and Annas took it yearly by turns: for Caiaphas continued in that office some years, even till after the death of Christ: and besides, had this been the case, as one of them could be but high priest for the year being, both in one year as here, could not with propriety be said to be high priests. Others take another method, and suppose Caiaphas to be properly the high priest, as he certainly was; and Annas so called, because he had been one formerly, the same with Ananus, the son of Seth; who was put into the priesthood by Quirinius, in the room of Joazar, and was deposed by Valerius Gratus, and Ishmael ben Phabi was put into his room: but though there may be instances of persons being called high priests, who had been in that office, after they were removed from it, yet no reason can be given, why Annas should be peculiarly called so, when there were in all probability several alive, who had been in that office as well as he; as Joazar his predecessor, and Ishmael ben Phabi, who succeeded Joazar, and after him Eleazar, the son of Annas, and then Simeon ben Camhith; nor why he should be put in the annals of the high priests, in a year in which he was not one. It seems most likely therefore, that he was the "Sagan" of the priests, of which office mention is frequently made, in the Jewish writings (e); yea, we often read of Chanina, or Chananiah, or Ananias, perhaps the same with this Annas, who is called, , "the Sagan of the priests" (f). This officer was not a deputy high priest, or one that was substituted to officiate occasionally, in the room of the high priest, when any thing hindered him, or rendered him unfit for his office; as on the day of atonement, if the high priest contracted any pollution, they substituted another to minister (g); which was not the "Sagan", but another priest; and even such an one was called an high priest, as appears from the following story (h). "It happened to Simeon ben Camhith (a predecessor of Caiaphas), that he went out to speak with the king, on the evening of the day of atonement, and the spittle was scattered from his mouth, upon his garments, and he was unclean; and his brother Judah went in, and ministered in his stead in the high priesthood; and their mother saw her "two sons", "high priests in one day".'' But the "Sagan" was not an officer pro tempore, or so much under the high priest, and one in his stead, as a ruler and governor over other priests. Maimonides says of him thus (i); "they appoint one priest, who is to the high priest as a second to the king, and he is called "Sagan"; and he is called a ruler: and he stands at the right hand of the high priest continually; and this is an honour to him, and all the priests are under the hand of the Sagan.'' The account given of him in the Talmud (k) is this; "in five things the "Sagan" ministers; the "Sagan" says to him, my lord, high priest, lift up thy right hand (i.e. when he took the lots out of the vessel for the goats, on the day of atonement (l); which should be slain); the "Sagan" is on his right hand, and the father of the sanhedrim on his left (i.e. when he went to the east of the court and the north of the altar (m), where were the two goats, and the vessel in which were the lots); the "Sagan" waved with the veils, or linen clothes; the "Sagan" held him by his right hand, and caused him to ascend (by the steps to the altar); and no man was appointed an high priest, before he was a "Sagan."'' Now these might be as Serojab and Zephaniah, the one chief priest, and the other second priest, Jer 52:24 where the Targum and Jarchi interpret the text, the "Sagan" of the priests. And this being an office of such dignity and authority, supposing Annas in it, though he was not "the" high priest, yet being the head of the other priests, he might be called one, and be joined with Caiaphas, and set before him; not only because he had been an high priest, but because he was his father-in-law: the word of God came to John the son of Zachariah: a priest of the order of "Abia"; and of Elisabeth, a daughter of Aaron, and cousin of Mary, the mother of Jesus; as it had come formerly to the prophets, and particularly to Jeremiah, who was sanctified from the womb, as the Baptist was: he was blessed with a prophetic spirit, and with the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, and with a wonderful revelation of the Messiah, and of the Gospel dispensation; and was abundantly qualified for the work he was called to, and sent to perform: and this befell him in the wilderness; that is, of Judea; where he had been brought up and lived, and from whence and where he came, preaching: he had lived a solitary life, and had not learnt his doctrine from men, but had his mission, ministry, and baptism, from heaven. (a) In Misn. Menachot, c. 13. sect. 10. (b) T. Hieros. Sanhedrin, fol. 29. 1. Maimon. Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 4. sect. 15. (c) T. Bab. Yorma, fol. 8. 2. (d) Bartenora in Misn. Yoma, c 1. sect. 1. (e) Targum in 2 Kings xxiii. 4. & xxv. 18. & in Jer. xx. 1. 3. & xxix. 26, & lii. 24. (f) Misn. Shekalim, c. 6. sect. 1. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 8. 1. Juchasin, fol. 57. 1. (g) Misn. Yoma, c. 1. sect. 1. (h) T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 38. 4. Megilla, fol. 72. 1. Horayot, fol. 47. 4. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 47. 1. Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 2. fol. 180. 3. (i) Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 4. sect. 16. (k) T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 41. 1. (l) Misn. Yoma, c. 4. sect. 1. (m) Ib. c. 3. sect. 9.

But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed.

(de Virg. c. 6.) Who also entered this life at once in the spirit and power of Elias, removed from the society of men, in uninterrupted contemplation of invisible things, that he might not, by becoming accustomed to the false notions forced upon us by our senses, fall into mistakes and errors in the discernment of good men. And to such a height of divine grace was he raised, that more favour was bestowed upon him than the Prophets, for from the beginning even to the end, he ever presented his heart before God pure and free from every natural passion.

The Son of God being about to gather together the Church, commences His work in His servant. And so it is well said, The word of the Lord came to John, that the Church should begin not from man, but from the Word. But Luke, in order to declare that John was a prophet, rightly used these few words, The word of the Lord came to him. He adds nothing else, for they need not their own judgment who are filled with the Word of God. By saying this one thing, he has therefore declared all. But Matthew and Mark desired to show him to be a prophet, by his raiment, his girdle, and his food. Again, the wilderness is the Church itself, for the barren has more children than she who has an husband. The word of the Lord came, that the earth which was before barren might bring forth fruit unto us.

The Son of God, who is to gather the church, first works in a servant. Thus St. Luke fittingly says that the Word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zechariah, in the wilderness, so that the church would not begin from a man but from the Word. For she is a wilderness, because children of depravity outnumber hers, though she has a husband. Then it is said to her, “Sing, O barren one,” and, “Break forth together into singing, you waste places,” because the desert had not yet been cultivated by any work of a flock of people, nor had those trees which could bear fruit displayed the crown of their merits. The one who said, “I am like a green olive tree in the house of the Lord,” had not yet come, nor had that heavenly Vine borne fruit with its shoots of words on the trained branch of its own people. So the Word came that the desolate earth would bring forth fruit for us. The Word came, and the voice followed, for the Word first works within before the voice follows. Hence David too says, “I believed, and then I spoke.”

(in Matt. Hom. 10.) The word of God here mentioned was a commandment, for the son of Zacharias came not of himself, but God moved him.

(Hom. 20. in Ev.) The time at which the forerunner of the Saviour received the word of preaching, is marked by the names of the Roman sovereign and of the princes of Judæa, as it follows: Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judæa, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, &c. For because John came to preach Him who was to redeem some from among the Jews, and many among the Gentiles, therefore the time of his preaching is marked out by making mention of the king of the Gentiles and the rulers of the Jews. But because all nations were to be gathered together in one, one man is described as ruling over the Roman state, as it is said, The reign of Tiberius Cæsar. (ubi sup.) Because the Jews were to be scattered for their crime of treachery, the Jewish kingdom was shut up into parts under several governors. According to that saying, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation. (Luke 11:17.) Because John preached Him who was to be at the same time both King and Priest, Luke the Evangelist has marked the time of that preaching by the mention not only of Kings, but also of Priests. As it follows, Under the High Priests Annas and Caiaphas.

The time when the precursor of our Redeemer received the word of preaching is indicated by mention of the prince of the Roman commonwealth and the kings of Judea, when it is said: "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Iturea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, under the high priests Annas and Caiaphas, the word of the Lord came upon John, the son of Zechariah, in the wilderness." For since he was coming to preach him who would redeem some from Judea and many from the Gentiles, the times of his preaching are indicated by the king of the Gentiles and the rulers of the Jews. Moreover, because the Gentiles were to be gathered in and Judea was to be scattered on account of the guilt of faithlessness, the very description of earthly rule shows that one man is described as having been in charge of the Roman commonwealth, while in the kingdom of Judea very many ruled over a fourth part each. For by the voice of our Redeemer it is said: "Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste." It is clear, therefore, that Judea had come to the end of its kingdom, since it lay subject to so many kings by whom it was divided. It is also fittingly demonstrated not only under which kings but also under which priests this took place; because John the Baptist was preaching him who would be both king and priest at the same time, Luke the Evangelist indicated the times of his preaching through both the kingdom and the priesthood.

Pilate was sent in the twelfth year of Tiberius to take the government of the Jewish nation, and remained there for ten successive years, almost until the death of Tiberius. But Herod, and Philip, and Lysanias, were the sons of that Herod in whose reign our Lord was born. Between these and Herod himself Archelaus their brother reigned ten years. He was accused by the Jews before Augustus, and perished in exile at Vienne. But in order to reduce the Jewish kingdom to greater weakness, August us divided it into Tetrarchies. Both Annas and Caiaphas, when John began his preaching, were the High Priests, but Annas held the office that year, Caiaphas the same year in which our Lord suffered on the cross. Three others had held the office in the intervening time, but these two, as having particular reference to our Lord's Passion, are mentioned by the Evangelist. For at that time of violence and intrigue, the commands of the Law being no longer in force, the honour of the High Priest's office was never given to merit or high birth, but the whole affairs of the Priesthood were managed by the Roman power. For Josephus relates, that Valerius Gratus, when Annas was thrust out of the Priesthood, appointed Ismael High Priest, the son of Baphas; but not long after casting him off, he put in his place Eleazar the son of the High Priest Ananias. After the space of one year, he expelled him also from the office, and delivered the government of the High Priesthood to a certain Simon, son of Caiaphas, who holding it not longer than a year, had Joseph, whose name also was Caiaphas, for his successor; so that the whole time during which our Lord is related to have taught is included in the space of four years.

During the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zechariah, in the desert. Both indeed, at the beginning of John's prophecy, that is, Annas and Caiaphas were the chief priests; but Annas held the office for that year, while Caiaphas administered it in the year when the Lord ascended the cross, and indeed with three others in between completing the pontificate, but especially with those mentioned by the evangelist who were related to the passion of the Lord. For at that time, legal precepts having ceased through force and ambition, the honor of the pontificate was conferred neither on account of life nor lineage, but by Roman authority it was conferred upon some now, and again upon others. Indeed, Josephus reports in this manner, saying: Valerius Gratus, having removed Annas from the priesthood, appointed Ismael, son of Fabo, as high priest. But soon after rejecting him as well, he substituted Eleazar, son of Ananus, to the high priesthood. After one year, he also removed him from office and bestowed the ministry of the high priesthood upon one Simon, son of Camith. He too fulfilled the office scarcely for the breadth of a year and then received Joseph, whose name was also Caiaphas, as a successor. And thus, the whole time in which our Lord is described as teaching on earth is confined within a span of four years. In this time, the four successions of high priests that Josephus mentions are described, scarcely ministering for individual years. Because John was coming to preach about Him who would redeem some from Judea and many from the Gentiles, the times of his preaching are designated by the king of the nations and the princes of the Jews. Because the Gentiles were to be gathered, and Judea, for its fault of unfaithfulness, was to be scattered, the very account of earthly authority also shows that in the Roman republic one is described as presiding, and in the kingdom of Judea, many ruled by quarters. For our Redeemer's voice says: “Every kingdom divided against itself will be desolate” (Matthew XII). Therefore, it is clear that the kingdom of Judea had come to an end since it was subjected to division under so many kings. It is fittingly demonstrated not only by which kings, but also by which priests the events took place. So that because John the Baptist was to preach about Him who would also be king and priest at the same time, Luke the evangelist designated the times of his preaching by the kingdom and the priesthood.

"The word of God came to John," it is said, so that you would know that he came to bear witness about Christ not as a self-appointed man, but because he was moved by the Spirit of God. By "word" understand either the Holy Spirit or the commandment of God. The word of God came to John "in the wilderness." Since the children of the forsaken church, that is, the church from the Gentiles, were more numerous than the children of "her who has a husband" (Isa. 54:1), that is, the Jewish church, the word and commandment of God fittingly came to John when he was in the wilderness.

Through the whole of the time until his showing himself he was hid in the wilderness, that no suspicion might arise in men's minds, that from his relation to Christ, and from his intercourse with Him from a child, he would testify such things of Him; and hence he said, I knew him not. (John 1:33.)

(Metaphrastes) For the emperor Augustus being dead, from whom the Roman sovereigns obtained the name of "Augustus," Tiberius being his successor in the monarchy, was now in the 15th year of his receiving the reins of government.

The time in which John the Baptist began to preach, Luk 3:1-3. The prophecies which were fulfilled in him, Luk 3:4-6. The matter and success of his preaching, Luk 3:7-9; among the people, Luk 3:10, Luk 3:11; among the publicans, Luk 3:12, Luk 3:13; among the soldiers, Luk 3:14. His testimony concerning Christ, Luk 3:15-18. The reason why Herod put him afterwards in prison, Luk 3:19, Luk 3:20. He baptizes Christ, on whom the Spirit of God descends, Luk 3:21, Luk 3:22. Our Lord's genealogy, vv. 23-38.

Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests - Caiaphas was the son-in-law of Annas or Ananias, and it is supposed that they exercised the high priest's office by turns. It is likely that Annas only was considered as high priest; and that Caiaphas was what the Hebrews termed כהן משנה cohen mishneh, or סגן כהנים sagan cohanim, the high priest's deputy, or ruler of the temple. See the note on Mat 2:4, and on Joh 18:13. The facts which St. Luke mentions here tend much to confirm the truth of the evangelical history. Christianity differs widely from philosophic system; it is founded in the goodness and authority of God; and attested by historic facts. It differs also from popular tradition, which either has had no pure origin, or which is lost in unknown or fabulous antiquity. It differs also from pagan and Mohammedan revelations, which were fabricated in a corner, and had no witnesses. In the above verses we find the persons, the places, and the times marked with the utmost exactness. It was under the first Caesars that the preaching of the Gospel took place; and in their time, the facts on which the whole of Christianity is founded made their appearance: an age the most enlightened, and best known from the multitude of its historic records. It was in Judea, where every thing that professed to come from God was scrutinized with the most exact and unmerciful criticism. In writing the history of Christianity, the evangelists appeal to certain facts which were publicly transacted in such places, under the government and inspection of such and such persons, and in such particular times. A thousand persons could have confronted the falsehood, had it been one! These appeals are made - a challenge is offered to the Roman government, and to the Jewish rulers and people - a new religion has been introduced in such a place, at such a time - this has been accompanied with such and such facts and miracles! Who can disprove this? All are silent. None appears to offer even an objection. The cause of infidelity and irreligion is at stake! If these facts cannot be disproved, the religion of Christ must triumph. None appears because none could appear. Now let it be observed, that the persons of that time, only, could confute these things had they been false; they never attempted it; therefore these facts are absolute and incontrovertible truths: this conclusion is necessary. Shall a man then give up his faith in such attested facts as these, because, more than a thousand years after, an infidel creeps out, and ventures publicly to sneer at what his iniquitous soul hopes is not true! The word of God came unto John - That is, the Holy Spirit that revealed to him this doctrine of salvation. This came upon him in the desert, where he was living in such a state of austerity as gave him full right to preach all the rigours of penitence to others. Thus we find that the first preachers, historians, and followers of the doctrines of the Gospel were men eminent for the austerity of their lives, the simplicity of their manners, and the sanctity of their conduct; they were authorized by God, and filled with the most precious gifts of his Spirit. And what are the apostles which the new philosophy sends us? Philosophers full of themselves, not guided by the love of truth or wisdom, but ever seeking their own glory; in constant hostility among themselves, because of their separate pretensions to particular discoveries, of the honor of which they would almost as soon lose life as be deprived. Who are they? Men of a mortified life and unblamable conversation? No, they are poets and poetasters; composers of romances, novels, intrigues, farces, comedies, etc., full of extravagance and impurity. They are pretended moralists that preach up pleasure and sensual gratification, and dissolve, as far as they can, the sacred and civil ties that unite and support society. They are men whose guilt is heightened by their assuming the sacred name of philosophers, and dignifying their impure system with a name at which Philosophy herself blushes and bleeds.

PREACHING, BAPTISM, AND IMPRISONMENT OF JOHN. (Luke 3:1-20) Here the curtain of the New Testament is, as it were, drawn up, and the greatest of all epochs of the Church commences. Even our Lord's own age (Luk 3:23) is determined by it [BENGEL]. No such elaborate chronological precision is to be found elsewhere in the New Testament, and it comes fitly from him who claims it as the peculiar recommendation of his Gospel, that he had "accurately traced down all things from the first" (Luk 1:3). Here, evidently, commences his proper narrative. Also see on Mat 3:1. the fifteenth year of Tiberius--reckoning from the period when he was admitted, three years before Augustus' death, to a share of the empire [WEBSTER and WILKINSON], about the end of the year of Rome 779, or about four years before the usual reckoning. Pilate . . . governor of Judea--His proper title was Procurator, but with more than the usual powers of that office. After holding it about ten years he was ordered to Rome, to answer to charges brought against him, but ere he arrived Tiberius died (A.D. 35), and soon after Pilate committed suicide. Herod--(See on Mar 6:14). Philip--a different and very superior Philip to the one whose wife Herodias went to live with Herod Antipas. (See Mar 6:17). Iturea--to the northeast of Palestine; so called from Ishmael's son Itur or Jetur (Ch1 1:31), and anciently belonging to the half tribe of Manasseh. Trachonitis--farther to the northeast, between Iturea and Damascus; a rocky district, infested by robbers, and committed by Augustus to Herod the Great to keep in order. Abilene--still more to the northeast, so called from Abila, eighteen miles from Damascus [ROBINSON].

Annas and Caiaphas . . . high priests--the former, though deposed, retained much of his influence, and, probably, as sagan or deputy, exercised much of the power of the high priesthood along with Caiaphas (Joh 18:13; Act 4:6). Both Zadok and Abiathar acted as high priests in David's time (Sa2 15:35), and it seems to have become the fixed practice to have two (Kg2 25:18). (Also see on Mat 3:1.) word of God came unto John--Such formulas, of course, are never used when speaking of Jesus, because the divine nature manifested itself in Him not at certain isolated moments of His life. He was the one everlasting manifestation of the Godhead--THE WORD [OLSHAUSEN].