Every week, one Greek or Hebrew word changes how you read a familiar passage. Subscribe free →
BibleWord.ai iconBibleWord.ai

Attributed commentary excerpt

John Gill's Exposition on Matthew 26:65

A historical reference excerpt for this verse. Read it alongside the biblical text and other available sources.

Exposition of the Old and New Testament
John Gill (1697–1771) · 18th-century historical commentary
Source: BibleWord.ai's local reference edition of this named work.
Then the high priest rent his clothes, etc.] Both his outer and inner garments. This he did, to show his zeal for the honour and glory of God, his grief and concern at the profanation of his holy name by a false oath, and his abhorrence of, and indignation at the blasphemy he supposed Christ to be guilty of, in asserting himself to be the Son of God. Some have thought, that Caiaphas in this action, transgressed the law, in (<032110>Leviticus 21:10), where it is said, that “the high priest — shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes”: and it is one of the Jews’ negative precepts f1602, that “an high priest is prohibited, µlw[l, “ever” to rend his garments:” and that therefore being transported with passion at the greatness of the supposed crime, could not forbear expressing his detestation of it in this manner, though it was forbidden him: but it does not appear to have been unlawful: as for the law in Leviticus, it only regards the rending of garments at funerals, or in mourning for the dead, as the context shows; and so Jonathan ben Uzziel paraphrases the text, “nor rent his clothes”: yqyna t[çb “in the time of mourning”; and so the Jewish f1603 interpreters, in general, expound it; and besides, this prohibition, according to them, only regards the manner of rending: their rule is this f1604; “an high priest rends below, and a common person above:” the sense of which, according to their commentators, is f1605, “that if anyone dies for whom an high priest is obliged to rend his garments, he must rend below, at the extreme part of his garment, near his feet; and as for what is written, nor rend his clothes; the meaning is, he shall not rend as other men do, above, over against the breast, near the shoulder, as the rest of the people.” Moreover, a priest might not go into the sanctuary, nor perform any part of service with his clothes rent; the canon runs thus f1606, “the judgment, or the law of them that rend their garment, and of those that uncover the head, is one and the same, as it is said, (<031006>Leviticus 10:6), lo! if he is in service, and rends his garments, he is guilty of death by the hands of heaven, though his service is right, and not profaned.” And indeed no man, whether a priest or an Israelite, might go into the temple with his clothes rent; and a priest might not rend his sacerdotal garments, on any account; yet such were not these that Caiaphas now had on; but in case of hearing blasphemy, everyone, be he what he would, was obliged to rend his garments f1607: “Whosoever hears the cursing of the name (of God) is obliged to rend, even at the cursing of the surnames he is obliged to rend; and he that hears it from an Israelite, both he that hears, and he that hears from the mouth of him that hears, he is obliged to rend; but he that hears from the mouth of a Gentile, is not obliged to rend; and Eliakim and Shebna would not have rent, but because Rabshakeh was an apostate.” So when witnesses expressed the blasphemy of such they testified against, the judges were obliged to rise up and rend their garments; concerning which, take the following rule f1608: “a blasphemer is not guilty, unless he expresses the name (of God); says R. Joshua ben Korcha, all the day the witnesses are examined by the surnames; but when the cause is finished, they do not put to death because of the surnames, but they bring every man out, and ask the chief among them, and say to him, say expressly what thou hast heard, and he says it: then…

This public page shows a contextual excerpt from the locally available source text.

How to use this source
This excerpt is attributed to its named commentary. It is included as a historical study resource and should be evaluated in light of Scripture and other relevant evidence.