And it came to pass on the second Sabbath after the first, that He went through the corn-fields. Luke 6:1, 2 The second-first Sabbath M. F. Sadler, M. A. This is a very difficult phrase, and all explanations of it must be conjectural, as there is apparently no Sabbath designated by this name in any Rabbinical writing. One of the two following explanations seems most likely: 1. Either that it was the Sabbath which occurred during the Octave of Pentecost — the greatest Sabbath of the year being the Passover Sabbath ("that Sabbath day was an high day" — John 19:31 ); and the one occurring at the next greatest feast, that of Pentecost, would be the next greatest, or next-first, or "second-first," the Passover Sabbath being the first-first, or by far the greatest. The feast of Tabernacles would be the third. 2. But very many take it to be a Sabbath at the Passover, either the first Sabbath after the second day of that festival, from which the Sabbaths to Pentecost are numbered, or the last day of the feast, which was to be observed as a Sabbath. Whichever of these is the true meaning, it appears to me that St. Luke does not designate this day as the second-first, to mark the date when the transaction occurred, but to mark the peculiar holiness of the day. The disciples were, in their estimation, breaking no ordinary Sabbath, but one of the most sacred of all. ( M. F. Sadler, M. A. )

Benson Commentary Luke 6:1 And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands. Luke 6:1-5 . On the second sabbath after the first — The original expression here, ?? ??????? ???????????? , says Dr. Whitby, “should have been rendered, In the first sabbath after the second day, namely, of unleavened bread; for, after the first day of the passover, (which was a sabbath, Exodus 12:16 ,) ye shall count unto you (said God) seven sabbaths complete, Leviticus 23:15 , reckoning that day for the first of the week, which was therefore called, ????????????? , the first sabbath from this second day of unleavened bread; (the 16th of the month;) the second was called ??????????????? , the second sabbath from that day; and the third, ????????????? , the third sabbath from that second day; and so on, till they came to the seventh sabbath from that day; that is, to the forty-ninth day, which was the day of pentecost. The mention of the seven sabbaths, to be numbered with relation to this second day, answers all that Grotius objects against this exposition. Epiphanius expressly says, Our Lord’s disciples did what is here recorded, ?? ??????? , ?? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? , on the sabbath following the [second] day of unleavened bread. And if pentecost was called the feast of harvest, Exodus 23:16 , (as Bochart, Mr. Mede, Dr. Lightfoot, and the Jews say,) because then their barley and wheat harvest was gathered in, this feast could not be pentecost, as Grotius conjectures, because then the corn must have been gathered in, and therefore could not have been plucked by Christ’s disciples in the field.” There are other expositions of the phrase, but this seems by far the most probable. He went through the corn-fields, &c. This paragraph is largely explained in the notes on Matthew 12:1-8 ; and Mark 2:23-28 . Luke 6:2 And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days? Luke 6:3 And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungred, and they which were with him; Luke 6:4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone? Luke 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. Luke 6:6 And it came to pass also on another sabbath, that he entered into the synagogue and taught: and there was a man whose right hand was withered. Luke 6:6-11 . And on another sabbath he entered into the synagogue — The service of which he and his disciples seem to have generally attended: and there was a man whose right hand was withered — Of the miracle here recorded, see notes on Matthew 12:9-13 ; and Mark 3:1-5 ; where all the circumstances of it are noticed. Luke 6:7 And the scribes and Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the sabbath day; that they might find an accusation against him. Luke 6:8 But he knew their thoughts, and said to the man which had the withered hand, Rise up, and stand forth in the midst. And he arose and stood forth. Luke 6:9 Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it ? Luke 6:10 And looking round about upon them all, he said unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he did so: and his hand was restored whole as the other. Luke 6:11 And they were filled with madness; and communed one with another what they might do to Jesus. Luke 6:12 And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. Luke 6:12-13 . And it came to pass in those days — Namely, of his teaching near the sea of Galilee; that he went out into a mountain to pray — Jesus, seeing the general notice which was taken of his appearance, and the desire which multitudes manifested of being further informed concerning the design of his coming, and the nature of his doctrine, determined to choose a number of persons who should assist and succeed him in his ministerial work. And as the office which he intended to assign them was of great importance, even to the remotest ages, previous to his choice of them, he retired to a mountain in the neighbourhood, and, notwithstanding all the labours of the preceding day, continued all night in prayer to God; so much was his heart enlarged on this momentous occasion. The original phrase, ?? ?? ???????? ??? ???? , is singular and emphatical, being literally, in the prayer of God, implying an extraordinary and sublime devotion. Or, if the word ???????? be taken for the proper name of a place, the clause may be rendered, he continued all night in the oratory, or prayer-place, of God; the Jews having many houses on mountains, and by the sides of rivers, &c., set apart for prayer. These houses, it is well known, were open at the top, and planted round with trees. This is the sense in which Drusius, Prideaux, Whitby, Hammond, and many other good critics, understand the expression. This interpretation does not alter the meaning of the passage, for as Jesus went up to the mountain to pray, we cannot avoid supposing that he spent the greatest part of the night in acts of devotion. And when it was day he called to him his disciples — Mark says, whom he would. And of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles — A name which well expressed the office for which they were designed. These he now fixed upon, that for some time they might be always with him, in order that from his own mouth they might learn the doctrine which they were, in due time, to preach through the world; “that they might see his glory, John 1:14 , the transcendent glory of the virtues which adorned his human life; and that they might be witnesses of all the wonderful works which he should perform, and by which his mission from God was to be clearly demonstrated. The twelve were thus to be qualified for supplying the people with that spiritual food which their teachers neglected to give them; and that both before and after their Master’s death. Accordingly, when they had continued with Jesus as long as was necessary for this end, he sent them out by two and two into Judea, on the important work of preparing the people for his reception, who was the true shepherd. Hence he named them apostles, that is, persons sent out. But the name was more peculiarly applicable to them, and their office was raised to its perfection, after Christ’s ascension, when he sent them out into all the world with the doctrine of the gospel, which he enabled them to preach by inspiration, giving them power at the same time to confirm it by the most astonishing miracles. That this was the nature of the new dignity which Jesus now conferred on the twelve, is evident from John 20:21 , where we find him confirming them in the apostolical office: as my Father hath sent me, so send I you; I send you upon the same errand, and with the same authority: I send you to reveal the will of God for the salvation of men. And I bestow on you both the gift of tongues and the power of working miracles, that you may be able to preach the doctrine of salvation in every country, and to confirm it as divine, in opposition to all gainsayers.” — Macknight. Of the probable reason why the number of twelve was fixed upon rather than any other, and for a further elucidation of the passage, see the notes on Mark 3:13-17 ; and Matthew 10:1-4 . After their election, the twelve accompanied Jesus constantly, lived with him on one common stock as his family, and never departed from him, unless by his express appointment. Luke 6:13 And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; Luke 6:14 Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Luke 6:14-16 . Simon, whom he also named Peter — Matthew, Mark, and Luke have all given us a catalogue of the names of the apostles; and their exactness in this particular is greatly to be praised. For as the apostleship clothed the person on whom it was conferred with the high authority of directing the religious faith of mankind, it was of no small importance to the world to know who they were to whom that dignity belonged. In these catalogues, Simon is first named, not because he was of greater dignity than the rest, but because he was one of the most early followers of Christ, and the first that was called to a stated attendance upon him, and a person whose remarkable zeal and piety rendered him a kind of leader among the others. These reasons are so evidently sufficient for his being named first, that it is strange any should have attempted to prove from that circumstance, that Christ invested him with authority over his brethren; when we never find any such thing declared by Christ, or claimed by Peter, or owned by any of the other apostles, but rather find many scriptures which appear to look a contrary way; Matthew and Luke mention Andrew next to Peter, as being his brother, and one of Christ’s first disciples. The names of James and John follow, as having been called next, (see Matthew 4:21 ,) and being persons of great eminence for piety and usefulness, and James is placed before John, as being the elder brother. The names of the others seem to be placed nearly, at least, in the order in which they became disciples. Judas Iscariot, however, though, perhaps, not last called, is named last, because he was the traitor. But whatever might be the reason of ranking the apostles in the catalogue in the order in which we find them, we are certain they are not ranged according to their dignity; for, had that been the case, the order of the names would have been exactly the same in all the evangelists, which it is not, Andrew being placed the second in order, as we have observed, by Matthew and Luke, and the fourth by Mark; and Thomas being placed before Matthew by that apostle, and after him by Mark and Luke. To this may be added, on supposition that the apostles are ranked in the catalogues according to their dignity, it would follow, that John and Matthew, whose praise is in all the churches, on account of their writings, were inferior to apostles who are scarce once named, except in the catalogues. With regard to the epithet, or surname, ( Zelotes, the Zealous, ) added by Luke here to the name of Simon; because there was a particular sect or faction, among the Jews, termed the Zealots, who, in later times, under colour of zeal for God, committed all imaginable disorders, some are of opinion, that Simon the apostle had formerly been one of this faction. But as there is no mention made of that sect till a little before the destruction of Jerusalem, (Josephus, Bell., Luke 4:3 ,) we may rather suppose that this epithet was added to his name on account of his uncommon zeal in matters of true piety and religion. Luke 6:15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, Luke 6:16 And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor. Luke 6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people out of all Judaea and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases; Luke 6:17-19 . And he came down with them, &c. — After he had acquainted these twelve persons with his design, and had given them such private instructions as he judged necessary to render their attendance on him subservient to the execution of their important office, he came down from the mountain with them, and stood in the neighbouring plain; where were assembled, not only the rest of his disciples, but a great multitude of people collected from parts at a great distance from each other, namely, not only out of all Judea and Jerusalem, but from the coast of Tyre and Sidon — Many of whom came to hear and be instructed by his discourses, and others to be healed of their diseases: circumstances these which prove beyond contradiction, how universal the persuasion now was, that he was a divinely-commissioned teacher; and that real miracles were wrought by him. And the whole multitude sought to touch him, &c. — In order to multiply the proofs of his mission, and to render them indubitable, he caused virtue to go out from himself, and to heal all, without exception, who came and touched, though it were but his clothes, in expectation of being healed; and that, in some instances, in which Christ did not so much as take any apparent notice of the cases. By this benignity he put the cure in the power of the diseased themselves; and wrought many more miracles than could have been performed in the way of a formal application to him for a cure. Luke 6:18 And they that were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed. Luke 6:19 And the whole multitude sought to touch him: for there went virtue out of him, and healed them all. Luke 6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God. Luke 6:20 . And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples — The multitude that pressed to touch Jesus, in order to be healed, being at length rendered still and quiet, he turned to his disciples, and in their audience, and that of the multitude, repeated, standing on the plain, many remarkable passages of the sermon he had before delivered, sitting on the mount; which for the importance and variety of matter contained in it was, of all his sermons, the most proper to be remembered by the twelve disciples, now that they were constituted apostles, and appointed to preach. “The Evangelist Matthew, having recorded the former sermon in its place, judged it unnecessary to give this repetition of it here. But if the reader is of opinion that the two sermons are the same, because this in Luke comes immediately after the election of the twelve apostles, as that in Matthew comes after the calling of the four disciples, Simon, Andrew, James, and John, let him consider, in the first place, that the calling of the four disciples, which precedes the sermon in Matthew, is without doubt a fact entirely different from the election of the twelve apostles preceding the sermon in Luke, and happened long before it. Besides, the sermon in Luke was preached immediately after the election of the twelve, whereas a large tour through Galilee, which may have taken up some months, intervened between the calling of the four disciples and the sermon in Matthew. And to name no more differences, the sermon recorded by Matthew was delivered on a mountain, in a sitting, posture; whereas, when he pronounced this, which Luke speaks of, he was in a plain, or valley, where he could not sit because of the multitude which surrounded him, but stood with his disciples. But though there was not so much evident disagreement in the facts preceding these two sermons, the reader might easily have allowed that they were pronounced at different times, because he will find other instances of things really different, notwithstanding in their nature they may be alike, and were preceded, and also followed, by like events. For instance, the commission and instructions given to the seventy, were, in substance, the same with the commission and instructions given to the twelve, Matthew 10., and were introduced after the same manner: The harvest is plenteous, &c., Matthew 9:37 . Yet from Luke himself it appears they were different, that evangelist having related the mission of the twelve as a distinct fact, Luke 9:1 . So likewise the two miraculous dinners were not only like each other in their natures, but in their circumstances also, for they were introduced by the same discourses, and followed by like events; particularly at the conclusion of both, Jesus passed over the sea of Galilee. Nevertheless, both being found in the same evangelist, no reader can possibly think them the same.” — Macknight. Dr. Whitby and Dr. Doddridge view this subject in exactly the same light. “Hardly any thing,” says the latter, “that I have observed in the common harmonies surprises me more than that so many of them make this discourse to be the very sermon on the mount, recorded at large by Matthew. That was delivered by Christ sitting on a mountain, this standing in a plain; and, which weighs yet much more with me, there is such a difference in the expression, when the parallel passages come to be compared, that it seems evident the evangelists have not related it exactly, if they meant to give us the same. On the other hand, there appears not the least difficulty in supposing that Christ might here repeat a part of what he had delivered some months before to another auditory, and probably at some greater distance than just in the same neighbourhood. For it is plain from other instances, that this is nothing more than what he often had occasion to do. Compare Matthew 9:32-34 with Matthew 12:22 ; Matthew 12:24 ; and Matthew 16:21 with Matthew 17:23 ; and Matthew 20:17-19 .” This, therefore, for the reasons above stated, being evidently a different sermon from that delivered on the mount, and preached to a different auditory, and on a different occasion; and there being here only four of the eight beatitudes mentioned in that sermon, and not one of these being expressed in the same words which are there used; it is not necessary that they should be understood in the same sense. The poor here may either mean the poor in spirit; the hungry, those that hunger after righteousness; and the mourners, those that sorrow after a godly manner to repentance, 2 Corinthians 7:9 ; or the condition added to the last clause, Luke 6:22 , for the Son of man’s sake, may be understood as implied in all the clauses, and that those disciples of Christ only are pronounced blessed, who are exposed to, and patiently suffer, poverty, hunger, grief, or persecution for his sake, that they may obtain that kingdom, and that reward in heaven, which he hath promised to his faithful servants. Indeed our Lord’s words are only addressed to his disciples, Luke 6:20 , he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed, (or rather, happy, as ???????? means,) are ye poor, &c. — As to those who are not the true disciples of Christ, but are ignorant and wicked, or carnal and worldly, however poor, destitute, afflicted, or reproached they may be in this world, they are not happy, but miserable, and in the way to be miserable for ever. We must therefore say, in explanation of this passage, the poor are happy if they be enriched with divine knowledge and grace; for they are entitled to the kingdom of God in all its transcendent and eternal glories. They that hunger now, and are destitute of all the comfortable accommodations of life, are happy if they feel that nobler appetite, by which the pious soul longs after improvements in holiness: for the time is near when they shall be filled with what they long for, and shall be made partakers of the most substantial and valuable blessings. Happy are they who now weep and mourn under a sense of sin, or under that wholesome discipline of affliction, by which God reduces his wandering children, and trains them up to superior virtue; for all their sorrow shall pass away like a dream, and they shall ere long laugh and rejoice in a complete deliverance from it. They whom men hate, separate from their company, and reproach, &c., for the Son of man’s sake, are happy, for that glorious and powerful and gracious Person, on whose account they are thus treated, is abundantly able, and as willing as able, amply to recompense them for all they suffer for his sake. And therefore far from being dismayed and overwhelmed with trouble and distress, at such abuses and assaults, they ought to rejoice and leap for joy, fully assured that their reward in heaven will be in proportion to their sufferings on earth. Besides, such persecuted followers of Christ may comfort themselves with this consideration, that the servants of God, in all ages, have been treated in a similar manner. Luke 6:21 Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh. Luke 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company , and shall reproach you , and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. Luke 6:23 Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets. Luke 6:24 But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. Luke 6:24-25 . But wo, &c. — Here we see that this discourse differs very materially from the sermon on the mount; there our Lord pronounced blessings only, here he denounces curses; or, to speak more properly, he compassionately bewails the condition of persons of a contrary character to that of those pronounced happy in the preceding verses. For, as Grotius justly observes, the expression, ???? ???? , wo unto you, “vox est dolentis, non irâ incensi,” is the expression of one lamenting, [or bewailing the unhappy condition of another,] not of one inflamed with anger. It is like that used by our Lord, Matthew 24:19 , wo to them that are with child, &c ., in those days; an expression which no one can understand otherwise than as a declaration of the unhappiness of women in these circumstances, at such a time of general calamity as is referred to. The parallel passage in Luke 23:29 where we have the same prophecy, makes this evident. As our Lord, therefore, in the former sentences, pronounces the poor, the needy, the mournful, and the persecuted happy, so he here pronounces the rich, the jovial, and the applauded, miserable; the circumstances in which such are placed being peculiarly insnaring, and the danger being great lest they should be so taken up with the transient pleasures of time, as to forget and forfeit everlasting happiness. His words may be thus paraphrased: Miserable are ye rich — If ye have received or sought your consolation or happiness in your riches. Miserable are you that are full — Of meat and drink, and worldly goods, and take up with these things as your portion; for you shall ere long hunger — Shall fall into a state of great indigence and misery, aggravated by all the plenty which you enjoyed and abused. Miserable are you that laugh — That spend your lives in mirth and gayety, or are of a light, trifling spirit; for you shall mourn and weep — You have reason to expect a portion in those doleful regions, where, without intermission and without end, you shall be abandoned to weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth. “Our Lord’s malediction,” [declaration,] says a modern author, “is not inconsistent with the apostle’s precepts, which command Christians always to rejoice. Neither is the mirth against which the wo is here denounced to be understood of that constant cheerfulness of temper, which arises to true Christians from the comfortable and cheerful doctrines with which they are enlightened by the gospel, the assurance they have of reconciliation with God, the hope they have of everlasting life and the pleasure they enjoy in the practice of piety and the other duties of religion. But it is to be understood of that turbulent, carnal mirth, that levity and vanity of spirit, which arises, not from any solid foundation, but from sensual pleasure, or those vain amusements of life by which the giddy and the gay contrive to make away their time; that sort of mirth which dissipates thought, leaves no time for consideration, and gives them an utter aversion to all serious reflections.” Persons who continue to indulge themselves in this sort of mirth through life, shall weep and mourn eternally, when they are excluded from the joys of heaven, and banished for ever from the presence of God, by the light of whose countenance all the blessed are enlightened, and made transcendently happy. Luke 6:25 Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep. Luke 6:26 Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets. Luke 6:26 . Wo unto you — Miserable are you; when all men speak well of you — Because such universal applause is not to be gained without sinful compliances. “For,” as Dr. Whitby observes, “he that will be pleasing to all must speak things grateful to all, and do what they like; now that cannot be good which is grateful to bad men: thus the false prophets, whom the Jews commended, spake to them smooth things, and prophesied lies, because the people loved to have it so; they prophesied of peace, when war was at hand; they strengthened the hands of evil doers, Jeremiah 23:14 , and daubed the ruinous wall with untempered mortar, Ezekiel 13:10-11 .” Luke 6:27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, Luke 6:27-28 . But I say unto you which hear — You who hear me now, and you who in future ages shall hear my gospel. Hitherto our Lord had spoken only to particular sorts of persons; now he begins speaking to all in general. Love your enemies, &c. — The disposition which my gospel cherishes in its votaries, is that of love and kindness, even to the evil and unthankful; and therefore all who hear the gospel ought to be of this disposition. See on Matthew 5:44 . Luke 6:28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. Luke 6:29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. Luke 6:29 ; Luke 6:31 . To him, &c. — You who hear my gospel ought to be patient under injuries, as well as benevolent toward the unthankful. To him that smiteth thee on thy cheek — that taketh away thy cloak — These seem to be proverbial expressions, to signify an invasion of the tenderest points of honour and property. Offer the other, &c. Forbid not thy coat — That is, rather yield to his repeating the affront, or injury, than gratify resentment in righting yourself, in any method not becoming Christian love. Give to every man — Friend or enemy, what thou canst spare, and he really wants; and of him that taketh away thy goods — By borrowing; ask them not again — If he be insolvent: or, do not exact them if it will distress the person concerned to repay thee: rather lose them, if consistent with other duties, than demand them by a legal process. Dr. Doddridge translates and paraphrases the clause thus: “ From him that taketh away thy possessions, in an injurious manner, do not immediately demand them back in the forms of law, but rather endeavour, by gentle methods, to reduce the offender to reason.” The Greek expression, ??? ???????? ?? ?? , here rendered, taketh away thy goods, properly signifies, taketh them away violently, or by fraud. But, as Dr. Macknight observes, “Whatever sense we put on our Lord’s precept, it must be understood with the limitations which common sense directs us to make; namely, that we give and lend freely to all who ask, or permit them to retain what they have unjustly taken, provided only that it be a thing of small account, which we can easily spare, and the persons who ask or take such things be in real necessity.” And as ye would that men should do unto you, &c. — See note on Matthew 7:12 . Luke 6:30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. Luke 6:31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. Luke 6:32-36 . If ye love them which love you, what thank have ye — What great thanks are due to you on that account? For there are some sentiments of gratitude common even to the worst of men, which incline the most scandalous sinners to love those that love them, and to profess an affectionate regard for those by whom they have been treated with respect and kindness. Here, says Theophylact, “If you only love them that love you, you are only like the sinners and heathen; but if you love those who do evil to you, you are like to God; which therefore will you choose? to be like sinners or like God?” Here we see that our Lord has so little regard for one of the highest instances of natural virtue, namely, the returning love for love, that he does not account it even to deserve thanks. For even sinners, saith he, do the same — Men who do not regard God at all. Therefore he may do this who has not taken one step in Christianity. And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive — And that, perhaps, with considerable advantage to yourselves; what thank have ye? — What favour do you show in that? or, what extraordinary thanks are due to you on that account? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive, ?? ??? , equal favours, in return. But love ye your enemies — Ye who profess to be my disciples. See on Matthew 5:43-45 . Do good and lend, hoping for nothing again — Do good to those from whom you have no expectation of receiving any favour in return; and lend, in cases of great distress, even when you have little reason to expect what is lent to be repaid. Because the Greek expression, ????? ???????????? , has, in no Greek author, the sense here, and in most translations, given to it, namely, hoping for nothing again; many commentators have declared in favour of the signification affixed to it by the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions; neminem desperare facientes, causing no man to despair: the copies from which these translations were made reading ????? ’, with an apostrophe, for ?????? . But, as Dr. Whitby observes, “this is putting a double force upon the words; 1st, reading, without the authority of any MS., ?????? , no man, for ????? , nothing; and, 2d, interpreting ?????????? , to cause to despair; of which sense they give no instance.” The context seems evidently to justify our translation of the clause; for the preceding words are, If ye lend to them, ??? ’ ?? ???????? ????????? , from whom ye hope to receive again, namely, what you lend, or a similar favour, what thank have ye, for sinners also lend to sinners to receive as much again. It then naturally follows, But do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again — That is, lend not you on so mean an account, but even when you do not hope to have that returned which you lend, or to receive at some future time a like favour from the person you lend to. And whereas we are told that the word ???????? bears no such sense, “I hope,” says the doctor, “the credit of Stephanus, who says the word is rightly rendered by the Vulgate, nihil inde sperantes, hoping for nothing thence; and of Casaubon, who says ?????????? is to hope for something from a person or matter; may be sufficient to support the credit of our translation; especially when we read, in the Life of Solon, that he made no law against parricides, ??? ?? ????????? , because he did not expect that such a crime would be committed; and find this like composition of the word ??????? , when it signifies ??? ????? ????? , to receive from any one; and in the word ????????? , which is used for ??? ????? ??????? , to eat of any thing.” It must be acknowledged, however, that the more common and classical meaning of the term is, despero, to despair; and accordingly Dr. Campbell, with many others, renders the clause, not at all, or nowise despairing: observing, among several other arguments in support of this translation, “That what commonly proves the greatest hinderance to our lending, particularly to needy persons, is the dread that we shall never be repaid. It is, I imagine, to prevent the influence of such an over-cautious mistrust, that our Lord here warns us not to shut our hearts against the request of a brother in difficulties. Lend cheerfully, as though he had said, without fearing the loss of what shall be thus bestowed. It often happens that, even contrary to appearances, the loan is thankfully returned by the borrower; but if it should not, remember (and let this silence all your doubts) that God charges himself with what you give from love to him, and love to your neighbour: he is the poor man’s surety.” It may not be improper to add, that several Latin MSS., agreeably to this interpretation, read nihil desperantes, “nothing despairing.” Our Lord enforces the exhortation by adding, and your reward shall be great, probably even in this

Expositor's Bible Commentary Luke 6:1 And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands. Luke 6:12 And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. lete_me Luke 18:1-14 Chapter 11 CONCERNING PRAYER. WHEN the Greeks called man ? ???????? , or the "uplooking one," they did but crystallize in a word what is a universal fact, the religious instinct of humanity. Everywhere, and through all times, man has felt, as by a sort of intuition, that earth was no Ultima Thule, with nothing beyond but oceans of vacancy and silence, but that it lay in the over-shadow of other worlds, between which and their own were subtle modes of correspondence. They felt themselves to be in the presence of Powers other and higher than human, who somehow influenced their destiny, whose favour they must win, and whose displeasure they must avert. And so Paganism reared her altars, almost numberless, dedicating them even to the "Unknown God," lest some anonymous deity should be grieved at being omitted from the enumeration. The prevalence of false religions in the world, the garrulous babble of mythology, does but voice the religious instinct of man; it is but another Tower of Babel, by which men hope to find and to scale the heavens which must be somewhere overhead. In the Old Testament, however, we find the clearer revelation. What to the unaided eye of reason and of nature seemed but a wave of golden mist athwart the sky "a meeting of gentile lights without a name" now becomes a wide-reaching and shining realm, peopled with intelligences of divers ranks and orders; while in the centre of all is the city and the throne of the Invisible King, Jehovah, Lord of Sabaoth. In the breath of the new morning the gossamer threads Polytheism had been spinning through the night were swept away, and on the pillars of the New Jerusalem, that celestial city of which their own Salem was a far-off and broken type, they read the inscription, "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord." But while the Old Testament revealed the unity of the Godhead, it emphasized especially His sovereignty, the glories of His holiness, and the thunders of His power. He is the great Creator, arranging His universe, commanding evolutions and revolutions, and giving to each molecule of matter its secret affinities and repulsions. And again He is the Lawgiver, the great Judge, speaking out of the cloudy pillar and the windy tempest, dividing the firmaments of Right and Wrong, whose holiness hates sin with an infinite hatred, and whose justice, with sword of flame, pursues the wrong-doer like an unforgetting Nemesis. It is only natural, therefore, that with such conceptions of God, the heavens should appear distant and somewhat cold. The quiet that was upon the world was the hush of awe, of fear, rather than of love; for while the goodness of God was a familiar and favourite theme, and while the mercy of God, which "endureth for ever," was the refrain, oft repeated, of their loftiest songs, the love of God was a height the Old Dispensation had not explored, and the Fatherhood of God, that new world of perpetual summer, lay all undiscovered, or but dimly apprehended through the mist. The Divine love and the Divine Fatherhood were truths which seemed to be held in reserve for the New Dispensation; and as the light needs the subtle and sympathetic ether before it can reach our outlying world, so the love and the Fatherhood of God are borne in upon us by Him who was Himself the Divine Son and the incarnation of the Divine love. It is just here where the teaching of Jesus concerning prayer begins. He does not seek to explain its philosophy; He does not give hints as to any observance of time or place; but leaving these questions to adjust themselves, He seeks to bring heaven into closer touch with earth. And how can He do this so well as by revealing the Fatherhood of God? When the electric wire linked the New with the Old World the distances were annihilated, the thousand leagues of sea were as if they were not; and when Jesus threw across, between earth and heaven, that word "Father," the wide distances vanished, and even the silences became vocal. In the Psalms, those loftiest utterances of devotion, Religion only once ventured to call God "Father;" and then, as if frightened at her own temerity, she lapses into silence, and never speaks the familiar word again. But how different the language of the Gospels! It is a name that Jesus is never weary of repeating, striking its music upwards of seventy times, as if by the frequent iteration He would lodge the heavenly word deep within the world's heart. This is His first lesson in the science of prayer: He drills them on the Divine Fatherhood, setting them on that word, as it were, to practise the scales; for as he who has practised well the scales has acquired the key to all harmonies, so he who has learned well the "Father" has learned the secret of heaven, the sesame that opens all its doors and unlocks all its treasures. "When ye pray," said Jesus, replying to a disciple who sought instruction in the heavenly language, "say, Father," thus giving us what was His own pass-word to the courts of heaven. It is as if He said, "If you would pray acceptably put yourself in the right position. Seek to realize, and then to claim, your true relationship. Do not look upon God as a distant and cold abstraction, or as some blind force; do not regard Him as being hostile to you or as careless about you. Else your prayer will be some wail of bitterness, a cry coming out of the dark, and losing itself in the dark again. But look upon God as your Father, your living, loving, heavenly Father; and then step up with a holy boldness into the child-place, and all heaven opens before you there." And not only does Jesus thus "show us the Father," but He takes pains to show us that it is a real, and not some fictitious Fatherhood. He tells us that the word means far more in its heavenly than in its earthly use; that the earthly meaning, in fact, is but a shadow of the heavenly. For "if ye then," He says, "being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?" He thus sets us a problem in Divine proportion. He gives us the human fatherhood, with all it implies, as our known quantities, and from these He leaves us to work out the unknown quantity, which is the Divine ability and willingness to give good gifts to men; for the Holy Spirit includes in Himself all spiritual gifts. It is a problem, however, which our earthly figures cannot solve. The nearest that we can approach to the answer is that the Divine Fatherhood is the human fatherhood multiplied by that "how much more" a factor which gives us an infinite series. Again, Jesus teaches that character is an important condition of prayer, and that in this realm heart is more than any art. Words alone do not constitute prayer, for they may be only like the bubbles of the children's play, iridescent but hollow, never climbing the sky, but returning to the earth whence they came. And so when the scribes and Pharisees make "long prayers," striking devotional attitudes, and putting on airs of sanctity, Jesus could not endure them. They were a weariness and abomination to Him; for He read their secret heart, and found it vain and proud. In His parable { Luke 18:11 } He puts the genuine and the counterfeit prayer side by side, drawing the sharp contrast between them. He gives us that of the Pharisee, wordy, inflated, full of the self-eulogizing "I." It is the prayerless prayer, that had no need, and which was simply an incense burned before the clayey image of himself. Then He gives us the few brief words of the publican, the cry of a broken heart, "God be merciful to me, a sinner," a prayer which reached directly the highest heaven, and which came back freighted with the peace of God. "If I regard iniquity in my heart," the Psalmist said, "the Lord will not hear me." And it is true. If there be the least unforgiven sin within the soul we spread forth our hands, we make many prayers, in vain; we do but utter "wild, delirious cries" that Heaven will not hear, or at any rate regard. The first cry of true prayer is the cry for mercy, pardon; and until this is spoken, until we step up by faith into the child-position, we do but offer vain oblations. Nay, even in the regenerate heart, if there be a temporary lapse, and unholy tempers brood within, the lips of prayer become paralyzed at once, or they only stammer in incoherent speech. We may with filled hands compass the altar of God, but neither gifts nor prayers can be accepted if there be bitterness and jealousy within, or if our "brother has aught against" us. The wrong must be righted with our brother, or we cannot be right with God. How can we ask for forgiveness if we ourselves cannot forgive? How can we ask for mercy if we are hard and merciless, gripping the throat of each offender, as we demand the uttermost farthing? He who can pray for them who despitefully use him is in the way of the Divine commandment; he has climbed to the dome of the temple, where the whispers of prayer, and even its inarticulate aspirations, are heard in heaven. And so the connection is most close and constant between praying and living, and they pray most and best who at the same time "make their life a prayer." Again, Jesus maps out for us the realm of prayer, showing the wide areas it should cover. St. Luke gives us an abbreviated form of the prayer recorded by St. Matthew, and which we call the "Lord's Prayer." It is a disputed point, though not a material one, whether the two prayers are but varied renderings of one and the same utterance, or whether Jesus gave, on a later occasion, an epitomized form of the prayer He had prescribed before, though from the circumstantial evidence of St. Luke we incline to the latter view. The two forms, however, are identical in sub stance. It is scarcely likely that Jesus intended it to be a rigid formula, to which we should be slavishly bound; for the varied renderings of the two Evangelists show plainly that Heaven does not lay stress upon the ipsissima verba . We must take it rather as a Divine model, laying down the lines on which our prayers should move. It is, in fact, a sort of prayer microcosm, giving a miniature reflection of the whole world of prayer, as a drop of dew will give a reflection of the encircling sky. It gives us what we may call the species of prayer, whose genera branch off into infinite varieties; nor can we readily conceive of any petition, however particular or private, whose root-stem is not found in the few but comprehensive words of the Lord's Prayer. It covers every want of man, just as it befits every place and time. Running through the prayer are two marked divisions, the one general, the other particular and personal; and in the Divine order, contrary to our human wont, the general stands first, and the personal second. Our prayers often move in narrow circles, like the homing birds coming back to this "centered self" of ours, and sometimes we forget to give them the wider sweeps over a redeemed humanity. But Jesus says, "When ye pray, say, Father, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come." It is a temporary erasure of self, as the soul of the worshipper is absorbed in God. In its nearness to the throne it forgets for awhile its own little needs; its low-flying thoughts are caught up into the higher currents of the Divine thought and purpose, moving outwards with them. And this is the first petition, that the name of God may be hallowed throughout the world; that is, that men's conceptions of the Deity may become just and holy, until earth gives back in echo the Trisagion of the seraphim. The second petition is a continuation of the first; for just in proportion as men's conceptions of God are corrected and hallowed will the kingdom of God be set up on earth. The first petition, like that of the Psalmist, is for the sending out of "Thy light and Thy truth;" the second is that humanity may be led to the "holy hill," praising God upon the harp, and finding in God their "exceeding joy." To find God as the Father-King is to step up within the kingdom. The prayer now descends into the lower plane of personal wants, covering (1) our physical, and (2) our spiritual needs. The former are met with one petition, "Give us day by day our daily bread," a sentence confessedly obscure, and which has given rise to much dispute. Some interpret it in a spiritual sense alone, since, as they say, any other interpretation would break in upon the uniformity of the prayer, whose other terms are all spiritual. But if, as we have suggested, the whole prayer must be regarded as an epitome of prayer in general, then it must include some where our physical needs, or a large and important domain of our life is left uncovered. As to the meaning of the singular adjective ????????? we need not say much. That it can scarcely mean "tomorrows" bread is evident from the warning Jesus gives against "taking thought" for the morrow, and we must not allow the prayer to traverse the command. The most natural and likely interpretation is that which the heart of mankind has always given it, as our "daily" bread, or bread sufficient for the day. Jesus thus selects, what is the most common of our physical wants, the bread which comes to us in such purely natural, matter-of-course ways, as the specimen need of our physical life. But when He thus lifts up this common, ever-recurring mercy into the region of prayer He puts a halo of Divineness about it, and by including this He teaches us that there is no want of even our physical life which is excluded from the realm of prayer. If we are invited to speak with God concerning our daily bread, then certainly we need not be silent as to aught else. Our spiritual needs are included in the two petitions, "And forgive us our sins; for we ourselves also forgive everyone that is indebted to us. And bring us not into temptation." The parenthesis does not imply that all debts should be remitted, for payment of these is enjoined as one of the duties of life. The indebtedness spoken of is rather the New Testament indebtedness, the failure of duty or courtesy, the omission of some "ought" of life or some injury or offence. It is that human forgiveness, the opposite of resentment, which grows up under the shadow of the Divine forgiveness. The former of these petitions, then, is for the forgiveness of all past sin, while the latter is for deliverance from present sinning; for when we pray , "Bring us not into temptation," it is a prayer that we may not be tempted "above that we are able," which, amplified, means that in all our temptations we may be victorious, "kept by the power of God." Such, then, is the wide realm of prayer, as indicated by Jesus. He assures us that there is no department of our being, no circumstance of our life, which does not lie within its range; that "The whole round world is every way Bound with gold chains about the feet of God," and that on these golden chains, as on a harp, the touch of prayer may wake sweet music, far-off or near alike. And how much we miss through restraining prayer, reserving it for special occasions, or for the greater crises of life! But if we would only loop up with heaven each successive hour, if we would only run the thread of prayer through the common events and the common tasks, we should find the whole day and the whole life swinging on a higher, calmer level. The common task would cease to be common, and the earthly would be less earthly, if we only threw a bit of heaven upon it, or we opened it out to heaven. If in everything we could but make our requests known unto God that is, if prayer became the habitual act of life we should find that heaven was no longer the land "afar off," but that it was close upon us, with all its proffered ministries. Again, Jesus teaches the importance of earnestness and importunity in prayer. He sketches the picture for it is scarcely a parable of the man whose hospitality is claimed, late at night, by a passing friend, but who has no provision made for the emergency. He goes over to another friend, and rousing him up at midnight, he asks for the loan of three loaves. And with what result? Does the man answer from within, "Trouble me not: the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee"? No, that would be an impossible answer; for "though he will not rise and give him because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity he will rise and give him as many as he needeth" { Luke 11:8 }. It is the unreasonableness, or at any rate the untimeliness of the request Jesus seems to emphasize. The man himself is thoughtless, improvident in his household management. He disturbs his neighbour, waking up his whole family at midnight for such a trivial matter as the loan of three loaves. But he gains his request, not, either, on the ground of friendship, but through sheer audacity, impudence; for such is the meaning of the word, rather than importunity. The lesson is easily learned, for the suppressed comparison would be, "If man, being evil, will put himself out of the way to serve a friend, even at this untimely hour, filling up by his thoughtfulness his friend's lack of thought, how much more will the heavenly Father give to His child such things as are needful?" We have the same lesson taught in the parable of the Unjust Judge { Luke 18:1 }, that "men ought always to pray, and not to faint." Here, however, the characters are reversed. The suppliant is a poor and a wronged widow, while the person addressed is a hard, selfish, godless man, who boasts of his atheism. She asks, not for a favour, but for her rights that she may have due protection from some extortionate adversary, who somehow has got her in his power; for justice rather than vengeance is her demand. But "he would not for awhile," and all her cries for pity and for help beat upon that callous heart only as the surf upon a rocky shore, to be thrown back upon itself. But after wards he said within himself, "Though I fear not God, nor regard man, yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest she wear me out by her continual coming." And so he is moved to take her part against her adversary, not for any motive of compassion or sense of justice, but through mere selfishness, that he may escape the annoyance of her frequent visits lest her continual coming "worry" me, as the colloquial expression might be rendered. Here the comparison, or contrast rather, is expressed, at any rate in part. It is, "If an unjust and abandoned judge grants a just petition at last, out of base motives, when it is often urged, to a defenseless person for whom he cares nothing, how much more shall a just and merciful God hear the cry and avenge the cause of those whom He loves?"* (*Farrar.) It is a resolute persistence in prayer the parable urges, the continued asking, and seeking, and knocking that Jesus both commended and commanded { Luke 11:9 }, and which has the promise of such certain answers, and not the tantalizing mockeries of stones for bread, or scorpions for fish. Some blessings lie near at hand; we have only to ask, and we receive - receive even while we ask. But other blessings lie farther off, and they can only be ours by a continuance in prayer, by a persistent importunity. Not that our heavenly Father needs any wearying into mercy; but the blessing may not be ripe, or we ourselves may not be fully prepared to receive it. A blessing for which we are unprepared would only be an untimely blessing, and like a December swallow, it would soon die, without nest or brood. And sometimes the long delay is but a test of faith, whetting and sharpening the desire, until our very life seems to depend upon the granting of our prayer. So long as our prayers are among the "maybes" and "mights" there are fears and doubts alternating with our hope and faith. But when the desires are intensified, and our prayers rise into the "must-be's," then the answers are near at hand; for that "must be" is the soul's Mahanaim, where the angels meet us, and God Himself says "I will." Delays in our prayers are by no means denials; they are often but the lengthened summer for the ripening of our blessings, making them larger and more sweet. And now we have only to consider, which we must do briefly, the practice of Jesus, the place of prayer in His own life; and we shall find that in every point it coincides exactly with His teaching. To us of the clouded vision heaven is sometimes a hope more than a reality. It is an unseen goal, luring us across the wilderness, and which one of these days we may possess; but it is not to us as the wide-reaching, encircling sky, throwing its sunshine into each day, and lighting up our nights with its thousand lamps. To Jesus, heaven was more and nearer than it is to us. He had left it behind; and yet He had not left it, for He speaks of Himself, the Son of man, as being now in heaven. And so He was. His feet were upon earth, at home amid its dust; but His heart, His truer life, were all above. And how constant His correspondence, or rather communion, with heaven! At first sight it appears strange to us that Jesus should need the sustenance of prayer, or that He could even adopt its language. But when He became the Son of man He voluntarily assumed the needs of humanity; He "emptied Himself," as the Apostle expresses a great mystery, as if for the time divesting Himself of all Divine prerogatives, choosing to live as man amongst men. And so Jesus prayed. He was wont, even as we are, to refresh a wasted strength by draughts from the celestial springs; and as Antaeus, in his wresting, recovered himself as he touched the ground, so we find Jesus, in the great crises of His life, falling back upon Heaven. St. Luke, in his narrative of the Baptism, inserts one fact the other Synoptists omit that Jesus was in the act of prayer when the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended, in the semblance of a dove, upon Him. It is as if the opened heavens, the descending dove, and the audible voice were but the answer to His prayer. And why not? Standing on the threshold of His mission, would He not naturally ask that a double portion of the Spirit might be His that Heaven might put its manifest seal upon that mission, if not for the confirmation of His own faith, yet for that of His fore runner? At any rate, the fact is plain that it was while He was in the act of prayer that He received that second and higher baptism, even the baptism of the Spirit. A second epoch in that Divine life was when Jesus formally instituted the Apostleship, calling and initiating the Twelve into the closer brotherhood. It was, so to speak, the appointment of a regency, who should exercise authority and rule in the new kingdom, sitting, as Jesus figuratively expresses it { Luke 22:30 }, "on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." It is easy to see what tremendous issues were involved in this appointment; for were these foundation-stones untrue, warped by jealousies and vain ambitions, the whole superstructure would have been weakened, thrown out of the square. And so before the selection is made, a selection demanding such insight and foresight, such a balancing of complementary gifts, Jesus devotes the whole night to prayer, seeking the solitude of the mountain-height, and in the early dawn coming down, with the dews of night upon His garment and with the dews of heaven upon His soul, which, like crystals or lenses of light, made the invisible visible and the distant near. A third crisis in that Divine life was at the Transfiguration, when the summit was reached, the border line between earth and heaven, where, amid celestial greetings and overshadowing clouds of glory, that sinless life would have had its natural transition into heaven. And here again we find the same coincidence of prayer. Both St. Mark and St. Luke state that the "high mountain" was climbed for the express purpose of communion with Heaven; they "went up into the mountain to pray." It is only St. Luke, however, who states that it was "as He was praying" the fashion of His countenance was altered, thus making the vision an answer, or at least a corollary, to the prayer. He is at a point where two ways meet: the one passes into heaven at once, from that high level to which by a sinless life He has attained; the other path sweeps suddenly downward to a valley of agony, a cross of shame, a tomb of death; and after this wide detour the heavenly heights are reached again. Which path will He choose? If He takes the one He passes solitary into heaven; if He takes the other He brings with Him a redeemed humanity. And does not this give us, in a sort of echo, the burden of His prayer? He finds the shadow of the cross thrown over this heaven-lighted summit for when Moses and Elias appear they would not introduce a subject altogether new; they would in their conversation strike in with the theme with which His mind is already preoccupied, that is the decease He should accomplish at Jerusalem and as the chill of that shadow settles upon Him, causing the flesh to shrink and quiver for a while, would He not seek for the strength He needs? Would He not ask, as later, in the garden, that the cup might pass from Him; or if that should not be possible, that His will might not conflict with the Father's will, even for a passing moment? At any rate we may suppose that the vision was, in some way, Heaven's answer to His prayer, giving Him the solace and strengthening that He sought, as the Father's voice attested His Sonship, and celestials came forth to salute the Well-beloved, and to hearten Him on towards His dark goal. Just so was it when Jesus kept His fourth watch in Gethsemane. What Gethsemane was, and what its fearful agony meant, we shall consider in a later chapter. It is enough for our present purpose to see how Jesus consecrated that deep valley, as before He had consecrated the Transfiguration height, to prayer. Leaving the three outside the veil of the darkness, He passes into Gethsemane, as into another Holy of holies, there to offer up for His own and for Himself the sacrifice of prayer; while as our High Priest He sprinkles with His own blood, that blood of the ever lasting covenant, the sacred ground. And what prayer was that! how intensely fervent! That if it were possible the dread cup might pass from Him, but that either way the Father's will might be done! And that prayer was the prelude to victory; for as the first Adam fell by the assertion of self, the clashing of his will with God s, the second Adam conquers by the total surrender of His will to the will of the Father. The agony was lost in the acquiescence. But it was not alone in the great crises of His life that Jesus fell back upon Heaven. Prayer with Him was habitual, the fragrant atmosphere in which He lived, and moved, and spoke. His words glide as by a natural transition into its language, as a bird whose feet have lightly touched the ground suddenly takes to its wings; and again and again we find Him pausing in the weaving of His speech, to throw across the earthward warp the heavenward woof of prayer. It was a necessity of His life; and if the intrusive crowds allowed Him no time for its exercise, He was wont to elude them, to find upon the mountain or in the desert His prayer-chamber beneath the stars. And how frequently we read of His "looking up to heaven" amid the pauses of His daily task! stopping before He breaks the bread, and on the mirror of His upturned glance leading the thoughts and thanks of the multitude to the All-Father, who giveth to all His creatures their meat in due season; or pausing as He works some impromptu miracle, before speaking the omnipotent "Ephphatha," that on His upward look He may signal to the skies! And what a light is turned upon His life and His relation to His disciples by a simple incident that occurs on the night of the betrayal! Reading the sign of the times, in His forecast of the dark tomorrow, He sees the terrible strain that will be put upon Peter's faith, and which He likens to a Satanic sifting. With prescient eye He sees the temporary collapse; how, in the fierce heat of the trial, the "rock" will be thrown into a state of flux; so weak and pliant, it will be all rippled by agitation and unrest, or driven back at the mere breath of a servant-girl. He says mournfully, "Simon, Simon, behold. Satan asked to have you, that he might sift you as wheat: but I made supplication for thee, that thy faith fail not" { Luke 22:31 }. So completely does Jesus identify Himself with His own, making their separate needs His care (for this doubtless was no solitary case); but just as the High Priest carried on his breastplate the twelve tribal names, thus bringing all Israel within the light of Urim and Thummim, so Jesus carries within His heart both the name and the need of each separate disciple, asking for them in prayer what, perhaps, they have failed to ask for themselves. Nor are the prayers of Jesus limited by any such narrow circle; they compassed the world, lighting up all horizons; and even upon the cross, amid the jeers and laughter of the crowd, He forgets His own agonies, as with parched lips He prays for His murderers, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." Thus, more than any son of man, did Jesus "pray without ceasing," "in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving" making request unto God. Shall we not copy His bright example? shall we not, too, live, labour, and endure, as "seeing Him who is invisible"? He who lives a life of prayer will never question its reality. He who sees God in everything, and everything in God, will turn his life into a south land, with upper and nether springs of blessing in ceaseless flow; for the life that lies full heavenward lies in perpetual summer, in the eternal noon. Luke 6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people out of all Judaea and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases; Chapter 16 THE MIRACLES OF HEALING. IT is only natural that our Evangelist should linger with a professional as well as a personal interest over Christ’s connection with human suffering and disease, and that in recounting the miracles of healing He should be peculiarly at home; the theme would be in such thorough accord with his studies and tastes. It is true he does not refer to these miracles as being a fulfillment of prophecy; it is left for St. Matthew, who weaves his Gospel on the unfinished warp of the Old Testament, to recall the words of Isaiah, how "Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases"; yet our physician-Evangelist evidently lingers over the pathological side of his Gospel with an intense interest. St. John passes by the miracles of healing in comparative silence, though he stays to give us two cases which are omitted by the Synoptists-that of the nobleman’s son at Capernaum, and that of the impotent man at Bethesda. But St. John’s Gospel moves in more ethereal spheres, and the touches he chronicles are rather the touches of mind with mind, spirit with spirit, than the physical touches through the coarser medium of the flesh. The Synoptists, however, especially in their earlier chapters, bring the works of Christ into prominence, traveling, too, very much over the same ground, though each introduces some special facts omitted by the rest, while in their record of the same fact each Evangelist throws some additional coloring. Grouping together the miracles of healing-for our space will not allow a separate treatment of each-our thought is first arrested by the variety of forms in which suffering and disease presented themselves to Jesus, the wideness of the ground, physical and psychical, the miracles of healing cover. Our Evangelist mentions fourteen different cases, not, however, as including the whole, or even the greater part, but rather as being typical, representative cases. They are, as it were, the nearer constellations, localized and named; but again and again in his narrative we find whole groups and clusters lying farther back, making a sort of Milky Way of light, whose thickly clustered worlds baffle all o